Why are people on benefits allowed to live in London?!

ukcarper

The problem is there is a housing shortage it London full stop.

PasturesNew

If the Govt was moved out of London, to a cheaper area, it'd change things.

After all - London's on a flood plain. It seems madness to have the Govt somewhere that's at increasingly high risk of flooding.

Why can't the Govt move to somewhere like Birmingham or Bristol - good transport links.

Kenny4315

ILW wrote: »

Got some news for you, employers couldn't give a toss how hard you worked at university, they are interested in what you are worth to them and the two are not necessarily connected.

Not really true, if you get a first from say Oxford or Cambridge it certainly will open lots of doors, which is often the main problem in the first place. No matter how good you are at the actual job, if you don't get to the start you can't win the race.

FTBFun

PasturesNew wrote: »

If the Govt was moved out of London, to a cheaper area, it'd change things.

After all - London's on a flood plain. It seems madness to have the Govt somewhere that's at increasingly high risk of flooding.

Why can't the Govt move to somewhere like Birmingham or Bristol - good transport links.

Because neither are the capital?

olly300

The reason people get benefits in London are:
1. The majority of people don't intend to be long term unemployed and use the system as intended - a stop gap. Are you seriously saying that if you were made unemployed tomorrow due to your employer going into administration that you should be immediately made homeless?
2. They are working - the working poor are needed in London to be road sweepers, cleaners, hotel workers etc

careinthecommunity

olly300 wrote: »

The reason people get benefits in London are:
1. The majority of people don't intend to be long term unemployed and use the system as intended - a stop gap. Are you seriously saying that if you were made unemployed tomorrow due to your employer going into administration that you should be immediately made homeless?
2. They are working - the working poor are needed in London to be road sweepers, cleaners, hotel workers etc

on point 2, i think JimB made a good point, why should low paid workers have to be subsidised to live in london, it doesnt matter where in world you live you will always have menial jobs (dont want to offend anyone there) which will pay menial wages, so why should the rest of the UK fund this type of work just to work in the capital.

ILW

Kenny4315 wrote: »

Not really true, if you get a first from say Oxford or Cambridge it certainly will open lots of doors, which is often the main problem in the first place. No matter how good you are at the actual job, if you don't get to the start you can't win the race.

True, but the vast majority of graduates over the last decade or so do not get an Oxbridge first.

olly300

careinthecommunity wrote: »

on point 2, i think JimB made a good point, why should low paid workers have to be subsidised to live in london, it doesnt matter where in world you live you will always have menial jobs (dont want to offend anyone there) which will pay menial wages, so why should the rest of the UK fund this type of work just to work in the capital.

So people should sit on a bus for 2 hours one way just to clean the streets?

We aren't India or South Africa.

careinthecommunity

olly300 wrote: »

So people should sit on a bus for 2 hours one way just to clean the streets?

We aren't India or South Africa.

definetly not, but the UK is capitalist, so why should we have to subsidise low paid workers who wish/need to work in the capital?

ILW

olly300 wrote: »

So people should sit on a bus for 2 hours one way just to clean the streets?

We aren't India or South Africa.

If there was not the high level of benefits subsidising low wages, employers would have to increase pay in high cost areas just to get people to do the work.