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

brokeinwales

If I were unemployed id clean toilets, clean cars, work in a bar, a supermarket, McDonalds, whatever it took until something better came along.

If only it were that simple. My OH was made redundant a few months ago from a job in a fairly specialist field, which he spent some time training to do. Due to a current lack of jobs in that field he's been applying for jobs manning the tills in shops, glass collecting in nightclubs, waiting tables etc - roughly one in five applications gets any response at all, and that is always a "no thanks". I don't know whether it's because there are just too many applicants for jobs, or whether they perceive him as over-qualified, not experienced in the right area - who knows? But the point is it's easy to say "swallow your pride and just get any c**p job" - but sometimes even the c**p jobs aren't that forthcoming!

Anyway - I think probably somewhere between the £50 - £75 mark is about right - although this ought to be adjusted if there are children to support, if they have a partner with a high income, or to accomodate for variations in rent. If you look in the paper, the lowest paid full time jobs are usually around the 10000 pa mark, so in order to keep the incentive to work, benefits should never pay more than that. (If they paid £25 000 pa, I'd be quitting my job right now! It'd nearly double my income!)

My gut feeling is that non-working benefit claimants (regardless of whether they are sick or unemployed or whatever) should be expected to live on roughly the same basis as the average student - so they should be provided with around the same amount of money per year as a student loan would give (also taking into account any parental or partner support) to cover basic living costs, which could either be covered by previous NI contributions, or paid back retrospectively. They should also be exempt from things like council tax while unemployed.

Whilst I am theoretically in favour of requiring the long term unemployed to work in some way for their benefits - the danger is that companies / councils will be able to get work done far cheaper by people on benefits, than they can by actually employing someone - which would make the jobs situation worse. I don't know if there is any way around that.

I'd also like to see a bit more of a pro-active approach by the jobcentre - pointing people in the direction of training courses, allowing people to do voluntary wor and work experience without affecting benefits, providing interviews with proper careers advisors on request who can actually help match people's skills with available and possile jobs, rather than admin staff routinely suggesting vacancies in random industries that they know nothing about and that they haven't a hope in hell of getting.

Battleaxe44

I think is should be paid in vouchers and stamps, with the DWP paying for the utilities if applicable.

I would like to see people working for their benefit. I also would like to see the unemployed working in a voluntary capacity with credits being awarded for this work.

When I was between jobs, I took on temp work and loved it. It kept my skills up to date and helped my networking. Little did I believe I would end up a consumer Advocate, even this late in life, with part of my previous studies being crosss credited to my latest formal qualification.

halses

I am appalled at some people's views of unemployed people.
My husband worked for 20 years with no breaks and got made redundant last year.
There is no suitable work for him around here
We get a joint income of £100.95 per week. We have three children and lots of normal bills. Our rent is partially paid by our council and it takes a fornights money to pay the shortfall in the rent. With three young children this leaves us very little to get by on. We have to prioritise the shopping putting what food the children need first and extras such as nappies. This means for a few days a week my husband and i eat very poorly which also means that we are physically and mentally exhausted.
So really we are being starved off benefits but the only problem is that there is still no way out of this vicious circle.

I am horrified that people can say that we are lazy and eat fast food and have flash cars and designer watches. Far from it. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but don't tar us all with the same brush as your comments are derogatory.

Maybe you should try to live your life on this money before you make your opinions and then I am positive your views would change.

jamespir

Battleaxe44 wrote: »

I think is should be paid in vouchers and stamps, with the DWP paying for the utilities if applicable.

I would like to see people working for their benefit. I also would like to see the unemployed working in a voluntary capacity with credits being awarded for this work.

When I was between jobs, I took on temp work and loved it. It kept my skills up to date and helped my networking. Little did I believe I would end up a consumer Advocate, even this late in life, with part of my previous studies being crosss credited to my latest formal qualification.

but how would that work i pay my landlord 40 pounds a month in water
and have a pound meter for the electric if i was to become on jsa and it was vouchers id be up swan creek

also i travel to take my children out whos going to pay for the bus

its great suggetsing it but it does not work

Ginger_Nut

danthemoneysavingman wrote: »

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...

Job seekers is only paid for 6 months and after that there not interested in you as I have been there.

When my 6 months was up I started to ask them what they can do me for maybe I could go back to college and get my GCSEs and all they could say was have you tried learn direct which was just over the road to the job centre.

They just didn't care.:mad:

totmalysh

I voted for £100 a week, even though I am not getting even that. I have been out of work for more than a year and struggling to find something new. Reasons? Over-qualified for low-paid admin jobs and no experience for the jobs with my education (2 undergraduate degrees and studying for masters).
Went to the JC in December last year, and did not qualify for any support, because... I am too smart (i.e. doing postgrad degree).
I am lucky to have my other half supporting me, and that is exactly what is needed to those wanting to go back to work. Others who want benefits in order not to work will find a way, even if not paid a penny.

amy_love

There are some narrow minded self-centered people on this forum and I am ashamed that they are allowed to be a part of our community.

I voted £100, I don;t believe people on benefits should be on a fortune and perhaps the current system is wrong but as one of the richest countries in the world it is our responsibility to try and help everyone, regardless of their situation.

Oh and yes, same-sex couples do count for benefit purposes according to DWP rules just the same as hetero couples. Of course this requires honesty in admitting you are a couple, but so does it really for male-female relationships. So we can lose out just as much as straight people, with the added bonus of homophobia and hostility too.

Fulham_Mark

Karl Marx stated that "those who do not work shall not get food". He would have approved of any work-for-benefits scheme. Even though this sounds very right-wing these days.

This is different from lowering benefits because Marxism would insist that all people contribute to the country rather than using money as an incentive.

There's nothing socialist or liberal about making people do nothing because there aren't enough company jobs out there. It's just cheaper for governments to let this happen.

People then lose skills, feel miserable, miss social interaction and are treated as a "problem" by governent agencies.

Unemployed people get a really tough time whereas other groups who choose to do nothing get away with it.

For instance, we spend thousands of pounds to educate young people with degrees but thousands go off and travel or do low-paid work abroad instead of using their talent and creativity to create wealth and jobs. This is quite selfish where as losing your job is not.

Lots of fairly wealthy women choose not to return to work because they can get by on their husbands wages and tax credits. Young gomen actually earn more than men these days so not returning to work loses bilions of pounds from the economy. It would actually make economic sense to force non-multi-tasking dads to stay at home instead!

There are also millions of people who can retire early on generous pension schemes, and millions in high-paid (and high tax) jobs who "downsize" to have an easier life and pay less tax too.

So if you are one of the 2.5 million unemployed, then remember that there are probably 10million others who have chosen not to contribute to society and never get told that they should be starved back to work!!

adouglasmhor

amy_love wrote: »

There are some narrow minded self-centered people on this forum and I am ashamed that they are allowed to be a part of our community.

I voted £100, I don;t believe people on benefits should be on a fortune and perhaps the current system is wrong but as one of the richest countries in the world it is our responsibility to try and help everyone, regardless of their situation.

Oh and yes, same-sex couples do count for benefit purposes according to DWP rules just the same as hetero couples. Of course this requires honesty in admitting you are a couple, but so does it really for male-female relationships. So we can lose out just as much as straight people, with the added bonus of homophobia and hostility too.

I had my benefit cut because my flat mate (who was a lesbian) and i shared food in the fridge when a snooper came round - this alledgedly made us a couple.

Matari

I don't know why we are even debating this - what kind of country would we be if we thought it was OK to 'starve' people back to work? And to all the people on this forum who agree with this - you have obviously never been unemployed with just benefits to live on because you display a complete lack of understanding of how hard it is. Think on - one day you may be unemployed through no fault of your own - redundancy, illness, disability, mental problems - can you really be sure that it will never happen to you?

Remember this:

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

---

"First they came ..." is a famous statement attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. Wikipedia.