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

Oh and when you've travelled 300 miles for an interview at your own expense because the job centre only pay for the cheapest form of transport - a coach in this case which would have meant you leaving at 4am for an interview at 3pm, hardly fresh as a daisy when you arrive - and they take one look at your CV and say I see you don't live on patch, that is then the reason given for not taking you to 2nd interview despite you being qualified and them being aware you'll need to relocate before dragging you down for an interview, it gets quite depressing.

Oh yeah, I forgot that mamatomany, , how do I forget it again?

So, mama, what are you going to do - give up... I occasionally have have had to get up at 4am to attend a customer appointment. A client wants to meet me in Newcastle at 10.00 and I live 100's of miles away. Do I complain or just accept that sometimes I need to do these things?

And, no I feel terrible, as though I have been up all night but I just get on with it. Of course if one wants to stay on benefits then make excuses (I dont mean you necessarily mama) and tell everyone you cannot find a role. It doesnt suit where you live, it is too expensive to move, I am not moving unless someone else pays for it etc. It is clear that more rural areas will have less opportunities, I would move than look.

Rocky with the "too expensive" thing you are missing the point. Whether something is cheap or not if you do not have the money then you can't. All the want in the world doesn't fix that.

This money thing - surely it was what you choose to spend your money on. All of us on here have presumably broadband, computers, access to electricity and more. People on this thread claim they have no money for job interviews, travelling etc. That is what I am querying.

I didnt even realise that the Job Centre paid for you to attend interviews. When ever I have applied for a role I have had to pay my own expenses. My sister who is on JSA is paying her own expenses when she attends interviews. Are we saying that you can claim travelling costs back?

I agree that if you are settled in an area with children in school, you've lost your job and have no savings, then yes, it isn't simple.
BUT why in the area I live are there polish immigrants working in local shops and cafes, and also advertising their services as cleaners, while two streets away people who COULD do those jobs are sitting on the dole? And if anyone answers, because they're worried about losing out if they come off benefits, or not earning sufficient money to get by, well, that proves the point precisely doesn't it? We have created a system where some uk citizens have no motivation to work, while eastern Europeans will travel across several countries for a job. Total madness. The one good thing is that change is definitely on the way.

When I was on JSA the only "luxury" I had was my car. Which I needed for job interviews. There was definitely no spare cash to move.

The point is Rocky it isn't in your control, it's used as either a filter to decide between equal candidates or the employers don't believe that you will relocate anyway and I can see their point.
I'm in HR as it happens and many a time we've sent out offers to people we've bent over backwards to accommodate but when it comes to the crunch they cannot leave their comfort zone.
And these are people with degree's, often masters so not bill bloggs who has never travelled physically or intellectually beyond the end of his nose.

And no you cannot claim back expenses, you need to provide evidence in advance as to where the interview is and hope they can sort everything out in the timeframes given, if not you either pay for it yourself or you miss the interview I guess.
As for what I'm going to do, I've set up my own business but again without support and thank goodness there is some, it just would never get off the ground.

Well I have never been able to afford a car while not working , and even took mine off the road while on maternity leave to save money. I wouldn't class a car as absolutely essential. You'd be better off paying taxi fares for interviews rather than taxing and insuring a car all year.

Yes violethill but the reason they are motivated is because their standard of living in their home countries is so very low, is that what you want us all pulled down to the lowest level rather than aspiring for a higher one ?
That is what is happening now in cities where doctors, dentists, schools are full to bursting, the standards are dropping.

The very better life that they have travelled all this way for will be a fantasy very much like the American dream.

Violet Trust me, where I was living at the time running a car was cheaper than public transport. I looked into it. (£30 taxi return to the nearest town) and relying on buses alone would have reduced the area in which I could have gone for interviews.

No, I don't think peoples standard of living should be pulled down. I think uk citizens should be doing these jobs ! Give me one good reason why not!

I've no suggestions of my own that haven't already been covered but I am sure there is a state in America that after 18 months of you being unemployed you no longer receive CASH for you to spend as you wish.

You get vouchers, food ones that are ONLY for food, no alcohol, no fags, food.

You get vouchers to pay for gas and electricity and a bus pass IIRC.

That way, if you want a life then you work for it. Otherwise you are just surviving on the money the government provides.

The reason is lower standards of living that's it, they will work for less money than benefits pay because they don't expect to eat three meals a day, they don't expect their own bedrooms even as adults, they don't buy new clothes and they don't visit the dentist every 6 months.
We had chefs in the restaurant I ran long ago who worked 100 hours a week, min wage, 8 of them shared a house, you had to promise them they wouldn't lose wages so it was ok to go to hospital when they'd hurt themselves at work.
Is that the standard of living you want for your children ? As you say they do it so why shouldn't each and every one of us ?
Difference is of course they are saving and going back home with their piles of cash, this is our lives forever.

You cant call all parents on benefits lazy! They're raising children, hows that lazy?

mamatomany - I don't think anyone is saying that they want people's standard of living to be awful! (Though having said that, I spent years not being able to visit a dentist regularly, and that was while working as a TEACHER, whereas if I'd been on benefits I'd have got my treatment free, so there's an irony in what you say).

The simple fact is - the welfare state in its current form is unsustainable. Change is on its way.

If you are on benefits then you should recieve food/cloth/electricity/gas vouchers and nothing else. The food you recieve should be nutritious and healthy and you should be shown how to cook it if you don't already have the skills to do that. Having worked in Social Services for years, the best fittest people are the ones who went through rationing regardless of class.

Some not all,(but quite a large proportion in the most deprived areas) the generation that came after are disabled because they eat too much, smoke too much, drink too much and don't work because it's easier to stay at home and watch TV than to get out and do a proper job. (Pitbulls and yobs scaring people to stay in also have to go). This lifestyle causes obesity, cancer, heart disease, incontinence, backpain and depression etc. etc. etc.

We do need to change this section of societies cultural values. Governments have patronised and pitied these people for too long and it does no one any good at all.

A lot of us have to get up at 4am sometimes for work things or even earlier. Those are not the best days but it's part of how life is.

Part of the issue is hope. When we worked at a loss - ie salary was less than childcare for one of our salaries we knew if we worked very hard in due course we would earn more. If you know you'dll never move from bottom rung cleaner to manager of the cleaning team, that you'll always be bottom of the pile on the minimum wage then the incentive is not there. If you believe you could indeed work your way up to managing the carers at the care home rather than just doing the caring then you migth well get up at 4am, move to London, etc etc because you have the hope you'd one day run the team and know that getting off benefits was that first step to that path you've envisaged for yourself.

I agree with that Xenia. It's about a mindset as much as anything. And I also think it's about having a positive mindset, and being prepared to take some risks and move out of one's comfort zone, as well as just 'hoping' that things might get better. eg we also worked at a loss for several years, and now reap the benefits because we've both reached senior positions, but at the time we were starting out in our teaching careers, there was no guarantee that we would end up in senior management. We could have worked just as hard, and put all those hours in, working at a loss and still been on mainscale teaching salaries. We've had to create opportunities, take on new jobs which are demanding and challenging at times when it would have been easier to 'stick with the devil you know' rather than take a bit of a leap of faith.

I think one of the saddest things about our culture of dependency is that we're raising a generation where some young people are scared of taking any real risks or putting themselves on the line. They see life as two stark options - either get rich quick and get instant fame by going on X factor or the like, or drifting through life doing as little as possible and contributing as little as possible. Ok, that's a bit black and white, and there are many youngsters out there who aren't like that, but I do think the intractable minority who are the real issue here are stuck in a very deep rut.

I find it strange that one (or many) single mums are able to go out to work everyday to support their families, whilst others deem it impossible to go to work because they have children to look after?

Do you know the Government pay child care costs for single parents to go to work?

Yes of course you did - but it is much easier to stay at home and claim benefits isn't it??

"Those are not the best days but it's part of how life is."

If it's a job interview where you are competing against 10 other equally qualified people it needs to be the best day though doesn't it, especially if you've spent weeks preparing and haven't another interview in sight.
The trouble is you are now targeting the unemployed as if they have spent the last 10 years on the dole and they haven't, if somebody is claiming JSA that's an entirely different kettle of fish than income support which is likely to be a long term benefit and is what they call a gateway benefit, free prescriptions, dental care etc.
The unemployed who have worked and contributed get 6 months of £65 a week and that is it. If there isn't a reason to move them onto income support ie caring for children then they get nothing.

I think the point Xenia was making is that being up at 4 am is just part and parcel of life sometimes, and it isn't great, but you just have to get on with it.

Many people have to get up and do a stressful days work after a broken night with babies, we'd all prefer it not to be like that but it's life.

Yes people do go to work not at their best, once they have the job, whole different scenario than the day you are trying to get the job and competing against somebody who may live around the corner and is fresh and not fatigued from travelling is the point i'm making.
Why you've picked up on that from the post about the fact that employers do not believe that you'll relocate though i don't know.

But you said yourself that many people aren't willing to leave their comfort zone! That's how it's relevant. In an ideal world none of us would have to go to work after a broken night, and none of us would ever have to get up at 4 and travel across country for an interview - however, that's the reality! I have often appointed people who live outside the local area - at least it shows commitment and that they're serious about the job! In fact I've frequently found that people with a bit of get up and go are the ones who'll put themselves out a bit rather than the ones who live down the road but can't be arsed.

The people I am talking about not leaving their comfort zones were professionals already in jobs being offered better jobs and they still weren't prepared to leave the areas where their mother is on hand for baby-sitting or they know all the neighbors.
If they wouldn't go then you can totally understand why young Herbert from the north doesn't want to venture down to London to see if the streets are paved with gold.

The citizens wage is the answer, give everyone enough money to live, nobody then needs to steal or indeed work your bollox off, if you chose to do either then you live with the bad or good consequences.
Right now I've solved that one what's next religion or the oil crisis