The jobless are no shirking scroungers – you try living on £65.45 a week

liswan

Jomo wrote: »

If you say so :cool:

It is funny how others managed to 'find a job' isn't it? !

well that's the nature of finite resources the more thier consumed the less thier is available. Its the same with jobs. Added to that employment opportunities dont necessary coincide with unemployment blackspots. Do a google search and that will answer your stupid question

Oh and I do have a job a stupid low paid exploitative job where I need the tax system to top it up. But what a want is a real job that pays the wage I was promised at university when I took out huge loans to fund a qualification to ensure future employment..:mad:

Entertainer

I've lived on less than £52 a week and the fact is you can afford the basics with this. Food, utilities, a few replacement clothes as they wear out. What you can't afford is any impulse buys, everything has to be budgeted for. In that respect the article is hyperbolic in suggesting that this healthy 23 year old is being made "ill by cheap food in the winters." Let alone one with a 2:1 from Oxford who has got myriad more skills/ employment possibilities than say an unskilled, less able jobseeker.

The thinking behind this subsistence level of JSA is to make it strict enough to encourage people back into work because it can be used as a base income with the temptation there for people to do some work on the black economy to top up benefits. This is even more the case with the state's finances in desperate shape.

Jomo

robpw2 wrote: »

- there is no-one who wishes to employ me,.

Are you completely 100% sure of that?

robpw2

kabayiri wrote: »

One thing I hope we can all agree on.

The current system is broken. If it was fine we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I'd start by scrapping this rule about additional income. If someone on JSA can earn additional money by working 10 hours a week in Burger King, good on them.

At this point in time I couldn't give a monkeys about the arguments that it isn't fair, and it creates an unlevel playing field.

It gets people into earning money through piecemeal activity; having multiple sources of income. This might become a lot more important once some of 'job for life' roles disappear.

i think this is fair but the employers need sorting too - there is still a lot of discrimination out there

abaxas

kabayiri wrote: »

One thing I hope we can all agree on.

The current system is broken. If it was fine we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I'd start by scrapping this rule about additional income. If someone on JSA can earn additional money by working 10 hours a week in Burger King, good on them.

At this point in time I couldn't give a monkeys about the arguments that it isn't fair, and it creates an unlevel playing field.

It gets people into earning money through piecemeal activity; having multiple sources of income. This might become a lot more important once some of 'job for life' roles disappear.

Dont forget to add in deliberate catalogue fraud. How else can you pay for Amber-Lee's xmas?

Jomo

liswan wrote: »

Oh and I do have a job a stupid low paid exploitative job where I need the tax system to top it up. But what a want is a real job that pays the wage I was promised at university when I took out huge loans to fund a qualification to ensure future employment..:mad:

Yes this is a big problem, false information given to students by universities or career advisers.

kabayiri

Yeah but there's always going to be fraud.

It's just the nature of the fraud will change !

A government system designed to combat fraud is one destined to be outwitted / become outdated..

Are we to pretend people officially not working aren't doing jobs cash in hand? Of course not. I can think of 3 people off the top of my head doing exactly this. Better to bring this work out into the open.

custardy

tabskitten wrote: »

promise you I could find you a job, do you like cleaning? Bar work? Kitchen porter? Gardening?

Or are you holding out for a management postition?!

find a job or get them a job?
finding an ad isnt the same thing

robpw2

Jomo wrote: »

Are you completely 100% sure of that?

well i seem to get responses but when they find out i have back problems and sciatica and walk with a stick -they either just ignore me or use the line our insurance wont cover you
some jobs i have applied for they tell me im too over qualified

i know you probably think im just using this as an excuse but if you could spend a day in my life you would see how cruel life can be
still i live in hope someone nice will take a chance

Jomo

kabayiri wrote: »

Yeah but there's always going to be fraud.

It's just the nature of the fraud will change !

A government system designed to combat fraud is one destined to be outwitted / become outdated..

Are we to pretend people officially not working aren't doing jobs cash in hand? Of course not. I can think of 3 people off the top of my head doing exactly this. Better to bring this work out into the open.

I agree...we should all be contributing to the system by paying tax!