Rant - Life on the dole must be luxury!

baza52

marleyboy wrote: »

I think that annoys me the most, theres people around me who have never worked, apart from the fortnightly journey to sign on, yet they have a far more extravagant lifestyle than my working my fingers to the bone all my life has ever achieved. I just cannot fathom how they can do it. They can even afford luxurious holidays abroad each Year.

I have only ever been abroad once in my life, that was about 10 Years ago, I simply cannot afford a holiday each Year in the Uk, let alone abroad, after the outgoings from my wages, there's simply not enough left for life's little luxuries.

I could gripe, but to me its the pleasure of getting my wage and knowing I have earned it that keeps me going.

Ok, if you were to take your housing costs (mortgage or rent) and council tax from your take home pay each week do you honestly think you would have less to live on than someone on benefits?

timmmers

Haha. You're lucky that you haven't met a few guys I know. Alcoholics and (ex)druggies who had me puzzled by their ability to be in the pub ALL day..not work, not look for work. They get much more than JSA..because of their "problem". They will NEVER work legit again.

I also know a few guys struggling like mad, down the jobcentre daily, thousands of applications over years and not a scrap of work...but even those guys are wary of signing off to go self employed on temporary basis because it's not just JSA they lose, but housing benefits etc, which could mean problems with their accomodation. A company with no reputation may not even pay them at all...what do they do then?

The dole is horrible, don't be making the folk who want off it feel any worse than they do because a few idiots didn't want to work for you.

t

BLT_2

villabadger wrote: »

Ah - Mr (or Mrs) Know-it-all returns! Do you make it your mission to try to provoke an arguement in every post you make? I'm sure Morgan-Ree is capable responding themselves without such a bitter person acting as their spokesperson.

Anyway, in answer to your questions.... I have got the guys I need and have talked things through with the job centre plus people - thanks for your concern!

It appears you are the only one allowed to rant, anytime anyone disagrees with your views you consider them bitter and twisted.

I would suggest you put your tradesman to work then sign up for a weeks course in 'getting over yourself" - you are aware that yours isn't the only opinion that matters I assume?

jimbms

baza52 wrote: »

Ok, if you were to take your housing costs (mortgage or rent) and council tax from your take home pay each week do you honestly think you would have less to live on than someone on benefits?

Many families who are working often do live on less, you also need to take into account fares/travel to work, clothing for work, increased cost of lunches, child care if needed, the fact that if the work is physical a larger amount of food is needed, then add on that prescriptions and dental care then has to be paid for as well as many other things free on benifits one example being if you want to improve your skills you have to pay full wack for courses whereas those on benifits get them free on highly subsidised, if you need to go to hospital for rgular treatment you have to pay fares and you can't claim them back, if it gets very cold in winter nobody gives you a bonus to help with heating costs, if your kids coats are wearing out for winter you can't go and ask for grant to buy them new ones, the list goes on and on, but on the otherhand these people working for minimum wage have the pleasure of knowing they have some dignity and that people like myself will give them a higher priority when they apply to me for a better job than someone who is doing nothing.

ariarnia

jimbms wrote: »

but on the otherhand these people working for minimum wage have the pleasure of knowing they have some dignity and that people like myself will give them a higher priority when they apply to me for a better job than someone who is doing nothing.

You are within your rights to do that, but remember the people who are unemployed who are applying to you don't have that since of dignity, don't have anything to be proud of, and have to live with that failure daily. Those that are applying to you are trying to give themselves some basic dignity and self worth and come off benefits.
I’ve taken a min wage job to get off benefits and it was really hard to find anything.
It’s only a 6 month contract as it’s all I could get, and I’ve taken a cut from benefits.

My take home is 9,207.29 per annum (MW 35 hours a week no pension cont. As I can’t afford it).

On benefits jsa (25+), LHA at £65 per week, and council tax benefit paid in full total 9,700 ish per annum.

That doesn’t take into account the additional costs as pointed out by another poster – commute to work, more expensive work clothes (office environment), not being able to get to the shops at reduction times. Lots of little things that mean my expenses are more.

I wanted to come off JSA, but because I was made redundant I couldn’t go right from job to job (little notice at work and loosing my work linked housing meaning I also had to relocate several hundred miles to a family home) and I was faced with the same attitude of people in work are more employable than people out of work even though I’d only just been out of work. How am I less employable a month after employment than still in employment?
I think it’s only fair to look at the individual circs. Rather than make sweeping judgements, many people are out of work for no fault of their own, and statements like the above just make everything so much harder and more depressing.

Corpsebride86

ariarnia wrote: »

You are within your rights to do that, but remember the people who are unemployed who are applying to you don't have that since of dignity, don't have anything to be proud of, and have to live with that failure daily. Those that are applying to you are trying to give themselves some basic dignity and self worth and come off benefits.
I’ve taken a min wage job to get off benefits and it was really hard to find anything.
It’s only a 6 month contract as it’s all I could get, and I’ve taken a cut from benefits. My take home is 9,207.29 per annum (MW 35 hours a week no pension cont. As I can’t afford it).
On benefits jsa (25+), LHA at £65 per week, and council tax benefit paid in full total 9,700 ish per annum.
That doesn’t take into account the additional costs as pointed out by another poster – commute to work, more expensive work clothes (office environment), not being able to get to the shops at reduction times. Lots of little things that mean my expenses are more.
I wanted to come off JSA, but because I was made redundant I couldn’t go right from job to job (little notice at work and loosing my work linked housing meaning I also had to relocate several hundred miles to a family home) and I was faced with the same attitude of people in work are more employable than people out of work even though I’d only just been out of work. How am I less employable a month after employment than still in employment?
I think it’s only fair to look at the individual circs. Rather than make sweeping judgements, many people are out of work for no fault of their own, and statements like the above just make everything so much harder and more depressing.

Here Here!

It just shows discrimination and ignorance them that say i will give working a better chance! it should be a level playing field for all!

discrimination is against the law!

Maybe the members of the board who like to tar all JSA claimants with the same brush regardless of circumstances should go onto JSA and see what life is like in the REAL world! applying for hundreds of jobs and getting nothing back not even an email or a call to say you were unsucessful!

try living on £60 per week! and then start spouting once they know what it is actually like!

And heres a thought for you all! new predictions that the tory lib dem tw@s didnt want people knowing show that 1.3million will become jobless as a result of their "fair" budget!

only a matter of time before some of those members of the board who like to tar all jsa claimants with the "lazy" "worthless" "scrounger" brush become one themselves and will see what life is really like on JSA

jimbms

ariarnia wrote: »

You are within your rights to do that, but remember the people who are unemployed who are applying to you don't have that since of dignity, don't have anything to be proud of, and have to live with that failure daily. Those that are applying to you are trying to give themselves some basic dignity and self worth and come off benefits.
I’ve taken a min wage job to get off benefits and it was really hard to find anything.
It’s only a 6 month contract as it’s all I could get, and I’ve taken a cut from benefits. My take home is 9,207.29 per annum (MW 35 hours a week no pension cont. As I can’t afford it).
On benefits jsa (25+), LHA at £65 per week, and council tax benefit paid in full total 9,700 ish per annum.
That doesn’t take into account the additional costs as pointed out by another poster – commute to work, more expensive work clothes (office environment), not being able to get to the shops at reduction times. Lots of little things that mean my expenses are more.
I wanted to come off JSA, but because I was made redundant I couldn’t go right from job to job (little notice at work and loosing my work linked housing meaning I also had to relocate several hundred miles to a family home) and I was faced with the same attitude of people in work are more employable than people out of work even though I’d only just been out of work. How am I less employable a month after employment than still in employment?
I think it’s only fair to look at the individual circs. Rather than make sweeping judgements, many people are out of work for no fault of their own, and statements like the above just make everything so much harder and more depressing.

Yes it is my right and I will contine to exercise that right and as you have said you took a minimum wage job to get off benifits, a person who does that to me is a more worthwhile employee that someone who refuses work because they think they are better than that, I also do take into consideration the length of time out of work, I don't consider a person avoiding work until they have been on benifitsfor a few weeks (remember here unemployment is only 1.2% so there is no excuses) therefore the person I want to employ is one who shows the strongest inclination to work and trust me nobody here is payed less than twice the minimum wage in return I expect a strong work ethic and before anyone spouts up about hours there is a policy that prevents people working more than 2 extra hours per month without pay, I pay for 37hrs and I expect 37hrs no more no less, any extra gets paid as such any less gets deducted. Also unless the work dictates it be done in the office up to 60% can be done from home.

jimbms

Corpsebride86 wrote: »

Here Here!

It just shows discrimination and ignorance them that say i will give working a better chance! it should be a level playing field for all!

discrimination is against the law!

Maybe the members of the board who like to tar all JSA claimants with the same brush regardless of circumstances should go onto JSA and see what life is like in the REAL world! applying for hundreds of jobs and getting nothing back not even an email or a call to say you were unsucessful!

try living on £60 per week! and then start spouting once they know what it is actually like!

And heres a thought for you all! new predictions that the tory lib dem tw@s didnt want people knowing show that 1.3million will become jobless as a result of their "fair" budget!

only a matter of time before some of those members of the board who like to tar all jsa claimants with the "lazy" "worthless" "scrounger" brush become one themselves and will see what life is really like on JSA

Read my reply first I never said all, also as I am not in the UK that 1.3 million is not too relevant but I do think it is a bit low I expect a lot more than that, I am afraid you cannot blame the new government afterall it is not them who spent all the money over the past decade, like always happens a new government picks up the pieces of the old mistakes. Fortunately I am at an age and in a position I will never have to rely on or need JSA but I do wish luck to the genuine ones on it who deserve a chance, as you see from my above posting my gripe is with the ones who make no effort not the ones who apply for everything going.

Corpsebride86

jimbms wrote: »

Read my reply first I never said all, also as I am not in the UK that 1.3 million is not too relevant but I do think it is a bit low I expect a lot more than that, I am afraid you cannot blame the new government afterall it is not them who spent all the money over the past decade, like always happens a new government picks up the pieces of the old mistakes. Fortunately I am at an age and in a position I will never have to rely on or need JSA but I do wish luck to the genuine ones on it who deserve a chance, as you see from my above posting my gripe is with the ones who make no effort not the ones who apply for everything going.

Try reading my reply

I ment it should be a level playing field for ALL I.E the unemployed AND the employed!

and yes we can! blame the new government, unemployment figures had begun declining, labour stimulated growth!

Labour didnt cause the economic downturn! they happen all over the world and at any time it wasnt labour that caused it!

and LO and behold the condems get in, start with their "fair" budget which who will be affected more hmm gee let me think ................ the poorer lower income and working class! not the toffs! its the same old with the tories take from the poorer, spread out for the richer!

like i said unemployment had begun to decline! and growth had begun! now the condems are in 1.3 million destined for unemployment so it will rise!

just like years ago when thatcher was in and she shut the mines! ppl have short memories but the tories caused unemployment then and will do this time and who will be worst affected the lower income working class!:mad:

jimbms

Corpsebride86 wrote: »

Try reading my reply

I ment it should be a level playing field for ALL I.E the unemployed AND the employed!

and yes we can! blame the new government, unemployment figures had begun declining, labour stimulated growth!

Labour didnt cause the economic downturn! they happen all over the world and at any time it wasnt labour that caused it!

and LO and behold the condems get in, start with their "fair" budget which who will be affected more hmm gee let me think ................ the poorer lower income and working class! not the toffs! its the same old with the tories take from the poorer, spread out for the richer!
like i said unemployment had begun to decline! and growth had begun! now the condems are in 1.3 million destined for unemployment so it will rise!

just like years ago when thatcher was in and she shut the mines! ppl have short memories but the tories caused unemployment then and will do this time and who will be worst affected the lower income working class!:mad:

First part you can't have a level playing field, if two people turn up for a job one of them is either working on a minimum wage and has demonstrated they have done all they can over a period to find work and the other either couldnt be bothered to look for work until what they wanted came along or refused to try for anything they deemed below themselves, who would you want to employ?
On the second point I won't waste my breath, obviously because I am from a working class family but have worked hard to get to a position where I am now financialy ok for life and can employ people I am one of the toffs who is the problem. It is that kind of attude by labour governments why I have always declined to open up in the UK, a government who taxes at such a high rate is doing nothing to encourage companies to develop or employ additional workers, at least here tax is minimal for all parties and nobody gets any benifits until you have lived here 5 years and a company cannot take on a non Manx if a Manx worker (classed as someone who has paid tax and been a resident 5years) is available, supprise supprise there is a 1.2% unemployment of those 80% are long term due to disability etc, there are more vacancies in the job centre than unemployed. It seems it is your system there that is at fault not individual political parties.