OK, so how would YOU change the welfare system?

[MathsMadMummy]

just wondering following on from various threads lately. sorry it's probably been done before.

I guess it's more a question of how you'd change the culture really, where people feel it's their entitlement to never work etc.

I have no idea what the answer is, please tell me your bright ideas

Ragged, the point is that for many, it seems they beleive that it is the state's obligation to look after thier family and that by dint of doing it themselves, they are donig the state a favour.

I can't get my head around that.

How, exactly, is that statement idiotic moondog?

Rocky said that spending all this money on education wasn't working. I'm simply asking how we can presume to know whether it's having a positive impact or not. Seems a reasonable enough question to ask.

It's completely nonsensical because what you are saying in effect is 'Ooh err. Imagine how bad it would be if we hadn't done all we have done even thoguh we don't know what the outcome of that would be.

The fact is, that all the investment in education has had little effect because all evidence points to the fact that the only truly meaningful variable in effecting education is the calibre of teaching staff and there are thousands of useless teachers out there who will never be removed from the system.

The quality of teaching is obviously vitally important to the outcome for our children. I don't think I've said anything to suggest I believe otherwise.

Things like having enough text books to go around, a classroom not falling down around your ears, properly equipped science labs etc also have a roll to play.

As do the costs of ensuring children with learning difficulties also have an opportunity to benefit from an education, rather than being stuck in a 'special' class, labelled as thick, lazy or naughty.

I have no idea as to whether the improved GCSE results bear any relation to the increase in funding. I'm generally reluctant to dismiss the hard work and achievements of our children by making sweeping statements that that exams are just getting easier.

It's actually rather early in the morning for me, another bad nights sleep. I think I'll come back here later when, hopefully, your patronising tone doesn't bug the shit out of me.

Please do as I enjoy reading your wild unfounded assertions and sniggering.

The IDS universal credit/one benefit would be simpler and better. I hope he can run with it. As long as they can convince people they will not be hugely worse off and indeed liek those on benefits who top up their income without declaring it (there are many) they would not be worse off evne if they are taxed on what they earn.

I never liked tax credits (not that the Governemtn ever saw fit to give them to me anyway) as they brought more people into a benefits and claims situation and they were complicated and at the start rather messed up and they cause delays.

A universal benefit or credit for families on an income below X (or even for all adults which would be my preference whichi f that is too expensive you could claw back even as to 100% on peopple like I am through tax/on the tax return) would be very simple.

Third world comparisons are not wrong. I believe in absolute not relative poveryt. If people have jealousy issues go forth and earn what I do - no one is stopping you or go to church more and learn that the sin of envy is wrong. Be grateful people like I am are prepared to pay so much tax so that all those 100% reliant on benefits can eat.

DUCHESSHuh? Where did I say that I lived in a council house???? I was responding to a comment waaay upthread about how one poster would manage homelessness.

The context was council housing, not privately rented or owned properties, a Cambridge education and you can't keep up with the flow of conversation

The JSA/IS/HB situation is fueled by 2 things - a high cost of living (particulalry around housing) and a disproportionate number of low paid jobs. Jobs are out there, they just don't pay enough to entice people off of benefits. While claimants are given a choice, they will understandably opt for the easy options - to stay on benefits. This is what needs to be addressed.

"While claimants are given a choice, they will understandably opt for the easy options - to stay on benefits."

Not just the easy option, the financially viable one. And yes, you could lower the amount of benefits, but they aren't a huge amount to live on to start off with.

maxpower - the jobs are not 'out there'. that is the problem. While you may see a job advert, you are not aware of just how many people are applying.

"...being paid to be a 'carer' of a member of your own family.
Isn't that what families are supposed to do anyway..."

I am a paid carer for my son who has autism.
I get 53 a week which pays for 35 hours caring. When ds has spent 2 nights on the trot awake that is 48 hours I am caring for him. Even if I didn't get CA how would I be able to work with no sleep for 2 days?

Carers Allowance is a paltry attempt by the government to save thousands each week by letting family members care for disabled family at home. It gives Carers another form of income so they can focus on caring and not struggling to are and work with little or no sleep. Most carers put in double the 35 hours each week and then have to do the normal things such as keep house, cook meals, look after other children. Instead of slating us be thankful that we are actually saving thousands of pounds each week

Carers allowence is supposed to offset the financial disadvantages of being a carer. Being a carer severely affects your ability to earn a decent wage however qualified, hardworking and motivated you are.

It may be the only thing that allows someone to be a carer. Without it the chances are the goverenment would have to find a great deal more money to provide care for its disabled citizens.

'Isnt that what families are supposed to do anyway?' Well why dont we go to an 'orphanage' in Romania and ask the staff there? The majority of the children are not orphans but the are disabled. Perhaps total lack of support for families with disabled members has something to do with this?

Pah.

lifeinlimbo regardless of the number of applicants, if every single job in the country was filled there would be no jobs being advertised. That is not the case therefore you can't say jobs aren't out there. However, I do accept that the 'desirable' jobs are hard won with a lot of competition.

There are virtually no jobs at all in many parts of the country at the moment even at minimum wage. Ask any graduating student. It's not even easy to get jobs in pubs and as cleaners but the market will pick up, it always does and those who think laterally usually manage to get something.

All jobs right now are hard won. When you have so many more job seekers than positions available then it makes no difference that there are jobs available, there are obviously not enough.

Erm, no mamatomany, you are the confused one: the post I answered was NOT about council housing.

In our local job centre a lot of th te jobs are high paid, need experience or loads of qualification type jobs. Me and DP don't have the relevant qualifications or experience so for us they might as well not be there. When you add into it that it is virtually impossible to get on training courses to get that experience, qualification then what jobs are left open

I see that Cameron seems to be supporting IDS evne if there are high upfront costs in a universal credit (one benefit) change. I think benefit claimants would find it simpler too. They should all get on with it.

Many older people want to work but the law forces them out at 65 even if they have 20 healthy years ahead of them. That is something else Cameron must change. It's ageist.

"In our local job centre a lot of th te jobs are high paid, need experience or loads of qualification type jobs."

We need to swap job centres then Deb75 because there is nothing available around here over £20k it's ridiculous when the average house is £120k and rent is £500 a month.

It is easy now to say 'the jobs arent there' it is always the reason why some people say they cannot get a position. It gives SOME people an ideal excuse as to why they dont work...

What about the golden years when there were roles, what about thinking about moving if there arent any jobs where you live. I fear there will be another raft of excuses why SOME people cannot move, but honestly, I really do believe that if you want a job you will get one, it wont be your dream role, it wont necessarily give you child friendly hours (that some seem to think is a right!), it might not pay as well as you are expecting if you have CHOSEN to have 3 or more children. It might require that you work over 37 hours a week unpaid - shock horror, it might require a commute longer than you were expecting, the role might be boring or you might have to fund training for yourself as the company has no budget to give you the training to progress but the jobs are there....

Most people will never get on their bike, to use Norman Tebbitt's famous phrase, unless pushed. They'll remain on their chairs eating chips never far from the remote.... if the chips stop they'll do what it takes to get work. Women and men all over the world do that. The choice for the UK is whether we want a welfare state where many people are kept by the state for life whilst some working people are worse off paying taxes to keep those other people at home or whether we want to make things sufficiently unpleasant for the unwaged that they are forced to go hunting for more chips.

Rocky - That's what I meant a few pages back on this thread when I said what an eyeopener it is, realising the widely differing sense of entitlement people have.

During my adult life I have done several things which I know from MN threads that some people would never consider doing, because they feel it's their right not to do them:

• moved away from my home town because I couldn't afford to buy a house there
• got myself professionally trained at my own expense (when I did a PGCE to train as a teacher, no one got funding, you paid your own way and got into debt)
• worked for several years for no net gain because we had 3 children and high childcare costs.

I have seen threads on each of the above issues, where people feel it's their entitlement to not have to put up with that. And this is in a society where maternity leave (and paternity) are better than ever before, there is enormous financial support for childcare for parents on low incomes, and indeed more extensive childcare provision than ever before.

And no, I wasn't born with any special privileges, I went to a pretty mediocre London comp, I have never inherited money, I have just totally taken it forgranted that as a citizen it's my responsibility to get myself qualified and trained and pay my way. It's no big deal to me - but sometimes it feels like a rarity to find people who think the same way!

Xenia, not most people I disagree there, the government wants stability in the population, they want you to buy a house, be tied down, pay bills, contribute and therefore be committed to working.
But it's a double edged sword, we've carefully researched the area we live, found the schools we're happy with, spent money on the house.
So getting on your bike and leaving it all seems rather pointless and would certainly put me off bothering again if we lost everything I'd buy a caravan and not pay council tax.

But plenty of women leave their chilren with grandparents in the Pillippines or Latvia etc to work in Dubai or London or one half of a couple (just reading about sienna miller's sister who does it ) lives away from the family 3 nights of the week because of work.

Anyway economics as ever will decide everything. If as a nationa we can afford benefits as they are they will pretty much continue as they are. If we can't then people will get less. I suspect it will be the latter but I may be wrong.

Rocky Please give me an answer to this scenario..

You have lost your job, you have been searching for another job, you aren't exactly rolling in cash. How do you move house? Where does the deposit come from? Or the cost of moving?

And here's some more questions.. do you move then search, or search then move.

And I speak as someone who did try to move while on JSA.