Jobseeker with Savings

Gavin83

MoDo wrote: »

??????????????
Am I suggesting that?

I am just saying that there are same people, with same wages, same taxes, same NI (for example teachers who started today), but then one can save, one can waste.

I don't know what your suggesting to be honest. You were making the point that teaching isn't means tested so I was addressing that. So, what do you suggest as the solution to this problem your putting forward?

As for the last part of the quote that it their choice, people are free to spend their wages as they wish and that is the way it should remain.

MoDo

Gavin83 wrote: »

I don't know what your suggesting to be honest. You were making the point that teaching isn't means tested so I was addressing that. So, what do you suggest as the solution to this problem your putting forward?

As for the last part of the quote that it their choice, people are free to spend their wages as they wish and that is the way it should remain.

Isn't it clear? I am just suggesting that two jobseekers should have same opportunities and same support when they are looking for a job.

Otherwise I could say that you suggest that people with savings should also pay for doctors, for their children's school, etc because "they have means to do so".

MoDo

Podge52 wrote: »

If you don't have stable employment why would you want a mortgage?

What about saving for a cheap little house in a cheap area that somebody would want to buy for cash someday or with a very little mortgage.

The point is that a person who would have bought a house before they got fired (and have spent all their money on it) can now claim benefits. Even when they bought it with cash (and now have 200k investment in it) and don't have to pay the rent anymore, so they are in a much better financial situation than a jobless and houseless bloke wih 16k in his bank.

Viberduo

I am on benefits and had to furnish my private rented flat myself, the days of support for people on benefits to move house and furnish seem to be mostly long gone, my parents told me when my dad was ill and had to leave work when I was a young child the council paid for removal van and I remember them giving us some second hand beds for me and brother but I had to sleep on a floor for 2 weeks till I got a bed from local second hand furniture place, managed to get a torn sofa from a friend moving house etc.

EDIT: I remember back when I was 20 and worked in a £9 a hour job that I knew was temporarily, even then I was told by JC staff that any savings were counted towards what I can do i.e I was told I had like £600 in bank and was unemployed(savings from last job) I should buy a car and travel to work, or I moved back to parents as was illegally evicted from place(lost job, had to claim benefits but LL evicted me as he didnt want a benefit tenant) I told JC I couldnt make appointments before 9am and if they wanted me in due to having 4 buses a day could they arrange it so I did not have like 3 hours to wait before or after a appointment to get bus home i.e give me a 9am appointment and I can get 9.45am bus back instead of giving me a appointment at 1pm meaning I arrived in town 10.30 and couldnt get bus back to 12.30 was told to "just get a taxi with your savings"

Then it was the smaller things i.e I knew people getting grants for clothes and haircuts and even alarm clocks but I was told I had savings so had to do everything myself.

It was similar for college though, I was given a smaller bursary as I had £600 saved despite that £600 needing to cover first months rent, a deposit, moving costs etc and when I went to uni I had a grand in the bank and again paid about £200 to move, first months rent in advance and deposit then had to wait about a month after I started to get my loan but was rejected for a hardship payment because I had money despite another student getting as many credit cards and student accounts as they can(think it was over 20 grand in debt by time they left uni 3 months later) but they were given 2 grand from uni to pay off their debts!

MoDo

Viberduo wrote: »

EDIT: I remember back when I was 20 and worked in a £9 a hour job that I knew was temporarily, even then I was told by JC staff that any savings were counted towards what I can do i.e I was told I had like £600 in bank and was unemployed(savings from last job) I should buy a car and travel to work, or I moved back to parents as was illegally evicted from place(lost job, had to claim benefits but LL evicted me as he didnt want a benefit tenant) I told JC I couldnt make appointments before 9am and if they wanted me in due to having 4 buses a day could they arrange it so I did not have like 3 hours to wait before or after a appointment to get bus home i.e give me a 9am appointment and I can get 9.45am bus back instead of giving me a appointment at 1pm meaning I arrived in town 10.30 and couldnt get bus back to 12.30 was told to "just get a taxi with your savings"

Then it was the smaller things i.e I knew people getting grants for clothes and haircuts and even alarm clocks but I was told I had savings so had to do everything myself.

It was similar for college though, I was given a smaller bursary as I had £600 saved despite that £600 needing to cover first months rent, a deposit, moving costs etc and when I went to uni I had a grand in the bank and again paid about £200 to move, first months rent in advance and deposit then had to wait about a month after I started to get my loan but was rejected for a hardship payment because I had money despite another student getting as many credit cards and student accounts as they can(think it was over 20 grand in debt by time they left uni 3 months later) but they were given 2 grand from uni to pay off their debts!

And this is the whole point of this thread.

Gavin83

MoDo wrote: »

Isn't it clear? I am just suggesting that two jobseekers should have same opportunities and same support when they are looking for a job.

Otherwise I could say that you suggest that people with savings should also pay for doctors, for their children's school, etc because "they have means to do so".

So based on this proposal where do you suggest the money required comes from? Extra tax?

Maybe other areas should be means tested as well. I guess the stark difference is that you'll have people just above the limit who don't send their children to school or die because they don't visit the doctor. This won't be an issue with JSA as people are essentially forced into it.

As a tax payer I don't really mind paying for people's kids to go to school or for people to receive medical care. I do have an issue with financially supporting people who can support themselves though.

This is an issue that could effect me. If I were to lose my job I likely wouldn't get any JSA. However I still feel this is the right course of action.

MoDo

Gavin83 wrote: »

So based on this proposal where do you suggest the money required comes from? Extra tax?

As a tax payer I don't really mind paying for people's kids to go to school or for people to receive medical care. I do have an issue with financially supporting people who can support themselves though.

As a taxpayer I think it's unfair when my taxes go to chavs' fags and cider or to somebody who's got 200k in his house and claiming JSA, while a houseless bloke who had worked 20 years and had put together 16k gets a huge sh*t from the public money. Where are the taxes and NI of that guy? In fags, cider or someone else's 200k house?

theoretica

MoDo wrote: »

Isn't it clear? I am just suggesting that two jobseekers should have same opportunities and same support when they are looking for a job.

Otherwise I could say that you suggest that people with savings should also pay for doctors, for their children's school, etc because "they have means to do so".

If I were changing the benefits and National Insurance system I would not want to go about it by making small odd changes. Personally I would want 'free at point of use' for things which it is to the Nation's benefit for people to have - like education (and would make university free for students who do well in useful and hard degrees too) and much healthcare. I would probably put childcare and nutrition (ie all meals available in school) in with education.

However, many other benefits I would see even more than they are now as a last stopgap to stop people starving on the streets or turning to crime. I obviously haven't worked on it for the years it would need to make a really workable proposal, but it might include making the money a loan and certainly making it less attractive than downgrading cars or antique furniture while also making it very easy to save or pay personally selected insurances direct from wages.

MoDo

Gavin83 wrote: »

I do have an issue with financially supporting people who can support themselves though.

However I still feel this is the right course of action.

Have you read Viberduo's comment from 5.26pm?

Btw isn't it funny when a Prince of Wales gets a state pension (as it is not means tested) and a few thousands in a bank would stop a middle class person from claiming JSA?

Gavin83

MoDo wrote: »

As a taxpayer I think it's unfair when my taxes go to chavs' fags and cider or to somebody who's got 200k in his house and claiming JSA, while a houseless bloke who had worked 20 years and had put together 16k gets a huge sh*t from the public money. Where are the taxes and NI of that guy? In fags, cider or someone else's 200k house?

Look I have to clear this up because I'm really unclear what angle your taking here. Are you suggesting that the two job seekers in your example should both receive JSA or neither should receive JSA?

I assumed it was the first but now I'm not sure. If your suggesting both should receive it then you still haven't answered my question, where do you suggest the money to support this should come from?

For the record I actually agree with you on several points, the JSA system needs a massive overhaul.