'Should we starve the jobless back to work?' poll discussion

Former_MSE_Lawrence

Poll between 26 April - 4 May 2010:

Should we starve the jobless back to work?

Lord Jones, former head of business institute the CBI (and for a while an independent Labour minister), recently said we should ‘starve the jobless back to work’ by making benefits not pay in a discussion about the young unemployed.

Yet others say that’s both against human rights, and if there aren’t the jobs we'll simply see more crime if benefits are cut.

What would you say is roughly the right benefit to give an able single person seeking work? We'll assume rent is £50/week to reduce regional variance.

(Vote based on the overall level of benefit for all payments including rent/mortgage and living)

A. Nothing. 12% (2282 votes)
B. £25/week (£1,250/year). 7% (1365 votes)
C. £50/week (£2,500/year). 12% (2263 votes)
D. £75/week (£3,750/year). 26% (4892 votes)
E. £100/week (£5,000/year). 28% (5237 votes)
F. £150/week (£7,500/year). 10% (1903 votes)
G. £200/week (£10,000/year). 3% (506 votes)
H. £300/week (£15,000/year). 1% (145 votes)
I. The same as average full-time earnings - c. £25,000/year. 1% (243 votes)

Voting has now closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below. Thanks

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

jamespir

no i dont i think its wrong and unfair

mlz1413

Benefits are supposed to be so that no one should have to beg or steal to live - but they should not allow or be, a way of life.

My personal opinion is most benefits should be by vouchers so that the money is spend on rent, utilities, food, clothes etc and NOT cigarettes, alcohol, take away food etc.

minerva_windsong

I voted for £100/week, as that covers rent, food, utilities etc - what I would consider the basics - thereby allowing people to survive but at the same time encouraging them to work.

JugglingJoe

I reckon that at some point in receiving benefits, people should go on a course for basic money handling. I work with unemployed people. I see some who apply for 1 or 2 jobs a month, because they have lots of benefit payment; where as I see some single mothers who struggle. At lunch I have sandwiches, value soup etc to save money. My customers all buy KFC, and convenience food from the local shop...All of them! Either they are not struggling (and they should be motivated to some extent), or they are very naive about money saving and budgeting, and so need a course to help them.

I managed to live as a student a few years ago on far less than the average in this poll...it kind of feels a bit unfair that I had to live on barebones and I have to pay it back through the studentloancompany and others feel that it is their right to live a life with some luxuries, and not pay it back.

For those that voted £25,000 - Can I get a few thousand more too so that I get the average pay? (I live in London too). Also, what incentive should I get to stay in this job, if I could get it all by living on benefits?

moleable

JugglingJoe wrote: »

I reckon that at some point in receiving benefits, people should go on a course for basic money handling. I work with unemployed people. I see some who apply for 1 or 2 jobs a month, because they have lots of benefit payment; where as I see some single mothers who struggle. At lunch I have sandwiches, value soup etc to save money. My customers all buy KFC, and convenience food from the local shop...All of them! Either they are not struggling (and they should be motivated to some extent), or they are very naive about money saving and budgeting, and so need a course to help them.

I managed to live as a student a few years ago on far less than the average in this poll...it kind of feels a bit unfair that I had to live on barebones and I have to pay it back through the studentloancompany and others feel that it is their right to live a life with some luxuries, and not pay it back.

For those that voted £25,000 - Can I get a few thousand more too so that I get the average pay? (I live in London too). Also, what incentive should I get to stay in this job, if I could get it all by living on benefits?

You sure feel hard done by to me but the real thing that matters is that a person needs a income to live on and at the end of the day the majority of people wan't work, so where is it? It just does not exist whatever the facts and figures tell you. No work no income so untill some goverment sorts out this bloody mess were in the unemployed should at least be taken care of.

danthemoneysavingman

Anyone think benefits should only be paid for a certain amount of time? Not sure what the repercussions of this would be, just food for thought...

luke666

In other european countries like Spain, Germany you have to work for a peroid of time before you are eligible to claim any benefits. These only last for a short duration to tide the claimant over til they can find employment.

This method of paying benefits only once a contribution has be made into the system , could in my opinion work very well to motivate people back into work.

glider3560

mlz1413 wrote: »

My personal opinion is most benefits should be by vouchers so that the money is spend on rent, utilities, food, clothes etc and NOT cigarettes, alcohol, take away food etc.

I agree. The vouchers should only be redeemable on a limited range of products (i.e. essentials). The vouchers should also have a weekly expiry, so they can't be carried over and any unused money returned to the public purse. If larger purchases need to be made, they should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

I voted for £5000 (£100/week). My basis for this is that as a student, I am given £3500 of loan and £1200 of grant. This comes to £4700 and has to cover everything plus £3500 of this has to be repaid eventually. If I want more money, I have to work. I believe the same should apply to benefits.

lewt

I think there should be reductions on JSA as time goes on. If people are not finding work then imo they are not looking hard enough.

The is nothing unfair about motivating people with lack of money to get back to work

C_Mababejive

I have a lot of time for Digby Jones. He is a solid,non nonsense,successful businessman. I can therefore do no more than agree with his comments though of course,i doubt he meant them literally whereas I do. The trouble is...who will employ the unemployable and those who have no will to work? Answer>no one..my answer>workhouses.