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

Stryder

All this talk of giving out vouchers for benefits is funny:
Jobless: fags and vodka vouchers
Working tax credits: Vouchers for Staples (pens, etc)
Pension benefits: vouchers for Werthers Original
Child maintenance: vouchers for hoodies and cider
Statutory Sick Pay: B&Q vouchers

I think this is way people actually believe money is spent!

I have been unemployed for the 2nd time (previously unemployed around University end dates) for 18 months. I have 4 A levels, 2 degrees and 8 years commercial experience. I have sent applications, CVs and everything I can. The few jobs interviews I get interviews I have to compete with 70 odd others! I am self funding (as I did for my 2nd degree) a diploma at the Open University funded by the last of my savings AND Tesco vouchers.

I am about to try to go self employed with the last of my saving and will get a little help from JSA and Inland Revenue to survive whilst I try to build the business up. If it fails, back to job hunting I guess.

I do not smoke and I drink a little.

£65 is really not a lot to live a life, although it maybe is enough to survive on. Personally I do not like being poor and it really is not a personal choice.

There are many people that make efforts to search for work, and many of us have paid various taxes for many years. There is so many reactionary comments from people its like looking back at Thatchers Britain again.

springheeledjack

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.[/QUOTE]

trouble with this is what about the school leavers who haven't had a chance to contribute into the system yet?

How about a sort of EMA payment where the child gets £5 paid in for every completed weeks attendance, to go towards their benefits should they need them when they leave?

scrabbly

We seem to follow USA a lot - why not bring in their benefit practices?

Once you become unemployed you are only given vouchers but these have to be worked for - if you are fit and able.

There is no long term dole in the States

If you are a "worker" anyway you would not mind - if you are a professional doley it would at least give you training in getting up in the morning! Apparently, you have to be "trained" to pick up litter on the motorways so this would then give them a qualification! That's 2 things they now have going for them that they didn't have before - they might even achieve some pride!

glider3560

Stryder wrote: »

All this talk of giving out vouchers for benefits is funny:

...

I do not smoke and I drink a little.

If you don't smoke or drink, then you shouldn't have any problem spending vouchers instead of cash

adouglasmhor

gems2381 wrote: »

We weren't on about clothing in this instance, it was about disability supplies. Clothing vouchers for highstreet chains would be sufficient for this.

OK my mistake. But in the case I used the co used to have a separate line of carp to fob of on the claimants families. You couldn't have jeans or fashionable(ish) items.

BigMummaF

An awful lot of vacancies ask for people with experience in a particular field, so you can't expect any person to be able to do any job.

An awful lot of employers will only offer temporary contracts which, although it would mean a job for maybe 13 weeks, will only add to the amount of jobs you have held. Another black mark on your CV.

An awful lot of people are in such dire financial straits from waiting for their benefits to be paid after leaving one temporary position after another & have to consider if they can physically afford to accept just 'anything'.

An awful lot of people on this thread talk about 'menial' jobs like cleaning the toilets or litter-picking when in reality, it should be celebrated that someone is doing these tasks. If people were not so quick to judge a person by their appearance, job, possessions et al, then maybe more folk would take those jobs!

I have been slated on these boards before because I dared to say that a bin man is as important as a brain surgeon & rates of pay should reflect that, but I maintain we all need each others strengths to enable us to continue to survive. I personally, could not willingly work with the elderly but thoroughly enjoyed my time as a pre-school supervisor. I wouldn't be very good at cleaning or gardening because of allergies, but would have a bash at book-keeping or receptionist. I'd not do too well stacking shelves--too short --but could do the tills...horses for courses None of that means my personal 'choices' makes any of the others 'less important' just because I can't or won't do them myself & perhaps if more people took that view, we'd all be in a better place.

AnxiousMum

In this poll though - we are asked for a figure that they would be given per week to live on. Taking into account that they are eligible for council tax reduction due to low income, fares to and from interviews, clothing allowances for interviews, and help with their rent, heating allowances in cold weather - the amount we are being asked to say they should receive is for food, utilities and personal expenditure. Given the way the benefit system here works - I would say that £50 would be ample - many working people don't have much more than that to pay their necessities on, many have much more.

I do prefer the Canadian way of benefits - if you have been working (can't remember how long it needs to be for) - and paying your contributions into the social security system by what would be equivalent to PAYE system here, then if you lose your job through no fault of your own, you can claim unemployment benefits - which was 80% of your pay, but capped at (well, back in the '90's it was) about $800 every two weeks. This ensured that people didn't lose their homes, their cars, their families - and this carried on for a year as long as you were looking for work and could show it. It's done by mailing in your cards, not having to go in and feel like scum in a cattle call every week. During that year, you get all kinds of help in retraining, setting up your own business etc. After the year though, the benefits system is more like it is here, very little to live on - but on the plus side, people don't make a life out of being on benefits - it's there for times of emergency.

liswan

lydia858512 wrote: »

I totally agree with all the comments, and like Joe am amazed how they can afford to buy ready made sandwiches and cakes, etc., when they are on benefits and only live minutes from home. They obviously have too much disposable income. I have worked all my life, have had to give up work due to stress and I am offered job seekers allowance of £65.45. As I have a pet shop, which is barely making me a living, I qualify for £52.05 per week working tax credits. It does make me cross when I have paid into the system for nearly 40 years and I end up with so little support when I am trying to remain independent. I should have been a single mother and got everything paid for me and never had to work!!!

Yes life is !!!! not just for you but for loads of people. :mad: So tell me why making thier life worse helps you. Unity is what is called for not division.:beer:

gems2381

adouglasmhor wrote: »

OK my mistake. But in the case I used the co used to have a separate line of carp to fob of on the claimants families. You couldn't have jeans or fashionable(ish) items.

I wouldn't personally have a problem with clothing vouchers which could be used at shops from Primark to Prada, what they want to wear should be their own choice.

liswan

scrabbly wrote: »

We seem to follow USA a lot - why not bring in their benefit practices?
Once you become unemployed you are only given vouchers but these have to be worked for - if you are fit and able.!

Asylum seekers in Glasgow were given these vouchers and while working as a community worker I became aware of incidences of fraud by the shop keepers confusing the asylum seekers for the true value of the token.

Milk tokens are also a voucher system that was abused in the eighties. When I was a parent I became aware of shopkeepers taking them for cigs and alcohol as long as their was money in it for them. So tell me who was the most unscrupulous the unemployed person in poverty using it to buy something they are addicted to and cant afford or a small business person greedily topping up their own income illegally.
Stop blaming the unemployed and blame the managers of this mess The government should be the ones on vouchers maybe it would reduce the price of their bedlinen costs from John Lewis All charged to the taxpayer.:eek:.