to think that there are people who choose to live a life on benefits?

[autumnlights12]

the recent threads about George Osbourne made me wonder..
A high number of posters say that people don't choose to live like that, they stumble into it, hate it, what a miserable existence it is, nobody would ever choose it etc..
but if you have two or three children through choice, whilst at the same time having no job to provide for them, or if you turn down the job at the local factory (as I know someone who did) because it pays £7.50 an hour and a full time job there doesn't give you the same unemployment rights and benefits, isn't that choosing to live a life on benefits? Or being trapped on benefits? I'm not talking about people who can't work, disabled people, ill people, women dumped by feckless ex and left to fend for herself etc.. of course they should be protected.
I was watching 999 What's Your Emergency and I know that area. And I know people like that exist. And it's often a second, third generation who have never worked a day in their life, even during times when work was freely available. In the town I live, we have numerous Eastern European immigrants who all seem to be working, but mostly in low paid work the locals wont do
What say you?

Well I don't actually know her myself. But I've a friend who knows her. I agree she's a fraudster and gives genuine folk a bad name.

'I'm not going to name examples because they are places where I have family. But areas where large numbers of people don't work do exist.

So where large numbers don;t work,a s opposed to where nnobody works as you initial;ly stated?

Blimey, I know that- but doesn't mean everyone there is a skiver: fosr a start they tend to be LA housing which means that there will be a disproportionate number of elderly, disabled, sick and carers there: people who get extra points on housing lists. Then it will absorb those who aren;t working for any reason and is far from representative.

Heck, I live close to the Welsh Valleys; I grew up in Bridgwater, I know that happens. My city all in has a 20% unemployment rate- but there are clear and obvious reasons behind it, even if Cheryl Gillan (thank God she's gone!) can;t see it- you'd need to know how many were in work before everywhere employing anyone much closed.

But I checked all sorts of stats sources and nowhere has only unemployed people. Even the homeless accom I was tied to had a share of working families- well on entry, most were night / shift workers and a combination of B&B hours and neighbours with all kinds of issues put paid to that pretty quickly usually: we had one man who was trying to work 8 - 5 nights and only allowed in the building to sleep 6 - 8pm , that was doomed.

Yes there are people who play the system. But it comes down to are you willing to penalise the genuine- most of whom will be either sick, a carer and / or have paid into the state before a change of circs; or do you focus on eliminating need and deprivation and acknowledge a few will slip through the net.

Most of all though it seems odd to yell for more measures when only 12% of those measures in existence have currently been enacted.

where i work it is mostly 20 hour contracts but they are always offering extra hours as there is not enough staff and they wont take on amy more. It is easier for them just to offer extra hours on an adhoc basis. Most can easily pick up an extra 10 hours a week.
Where i work has an evening shift upto 11pm with 25% extra per hour for working after 8pm. Most people on the 7 to 11 shift are mums or eastern europeans. We get a few students but they dont last long as they dont like working friday and saturday evenings.

I know a few people who choose benefits and have not intention of working . Makes me bloody angry when as a single mum I work full time . I dont think they had the work ethic from their parents so its a vicious circle of they have kids and dont know any different! Wrong Wrong Wrong .

Well, if universal credit will prevent someone from having a third child when they can't afford their first two, then that sounds like a good thing to me. Those are the people that the cuts need to start with.

I work in a very deprived area and can see that, while some of our clients do try to escape the trap there are some who consistently abuse the system and those who have no concept of any other life.

The problem is that a very small percentage of society cost a very big percentage of the budgets. In healthcare it has been suggested that 5% of a patent load will cost 80% of the money and i believe similar is true in law enforcement, social care, etc. It seems that no matter how may resources are put into this group, they will absorb it and still need more.

Of course it's possible to claim benefits for YEARS and be left alone. Of course nods

So explain to me why two carers who are supposed to be exempt from work expectation by virtue of being carers are constantly being harrassed to go to work focused interviews where a head tilting member of DWP staff keeps on about how much better they'd feel in work - despite having had to reschedule the interview three times because of last minute changing care needs getting in the way.

Oh yeah, you can hold down a job if your life is never the same one day to the next. Course you can.

Oh, and who will do the caring whilst we're working?

The state? £3 to £6k a week then. Not £55 a week.

yanbu. There are estates and almost towns full of them. But they are not on the mn radar, so you'll be denied.

It is said that the Thatcher Govt conived in getting men who had been made redundant from old nationalised industries signed on to long term Sickness Benefit to get them off the unemployment register in areas of chronic unemployment.

Sickness Benefit became Incapacity Benefit and now it is called ESA.

Note: This is not the same Disability Living Allowance.

Morebeta, this is true, I think. Also when they closed down all the industries and wanted the country propped up by the city they factored in that many men losing their jobs won't find employment and where happy to have them on benefits.

The city cannot now prop up Britain, we don't have much manufacturing, real jobs that pay a decent wage in many areas. This is the problems we face.

'were' not 'where.

Yes, MB, that did happen. It was v important for her government not to show escalating unemployment, as they'd campaigned on "Labour isn't working". So they dressed up the unemployed as sick. Of course, those same ex-miners, shipbuilders and car makers really are sick now as 30 years of unemployment with no hope of getting back into the swing will make you depressed.

They're reaching retirement age soon. You will have noticed how funding is being cut away from the elderly at an increasing pace.

By the way, unemployment is now the same as it was in 1979 when Thatcher rode to power on "Labour isn't Working".

Compounded by that fact that many working families had manageable rent from the council at one point so it did pay to work. Of course, the housing stock was sold off. Private landlords increased rents and now housing benefit isn't and out of work benefit anymore.

There are lots of MNers who refuse to admit that there's a problem.

And it really is a problem - those who are fraudsters, or have it as a lifestyle choice, make it so much harder for those in genuine need.

'I'm not talking about people who can't work, disabled people, ill people, women dumped by feckless ex and left to fend for herself etc.. of course they should be protected.'

Of course not, dear. Just those 'undeserving ones.

' In the town I live, we have numerous Eastern European immigrants who all seem to be working, but mostly in low paid work the locals wont do'

That's right. None of them ever comes here and claims benefits, commits crimes (plenty of convicted murders in Scottish jails from E. Europe), are low-life drunks/addicts, etc.

Any other stereotypes you've since brought up?

garlic, hello again!

Thatcher's wickedness was not in failing to support dead duck industries - it was failing to have a plan to replace the jobs. It's like Iraq and Afghanistan. I can argue for the wars (reluctantly) but I can't forgive the lack of plans to support these countries once we'd gone in and wanted to get out.

Funnily enough the best bit of Cameron's speech today was when he said we are fucked unless we plan for the new realities of globalisation. He's so right - but, as a Tory, he will instinctively be reluctant to use government funds to do so. He's right that governments are crap investors but can we really trust the market to do the job? I profoundly hope so.

The Eastern Europeans who work in my area are mostly working long hours for at least minimum wages, employers love them. Some will save as much as they can, send money home to often children they have left behind and go back home nicely set up. Some are fed up with working in hospitality, so are going to college, and eying up higher positions, after all they are well educated. Some are realising that once they stay a certain amount of time they can start a family here, ask for housing and claim benefits. I do wonder who will be doing the low paid jobs in a few years time.

Totally agree. I know a woman like this who has a daughter in my DD's class. I have known her for nearly 10 years and she has literally not worked a day in her life even though her DD is at school.

She has no partner, just saying this to give background.She has a two bedroom flat in the nicest part of our town in one of the most desirable streets (that most people could never hope to afford to live on), has her bills paid and wanders around living a life of leisure, whenever I see her she is sitting in cafes smoking and sipping coffee! She told me once that she wouldn't get out of bed for less than £25K a year. And that she 'chose' to stay at home before her daughter went to school as it was so important for a child to have a parent at home.

Her daughter, now 14, is a rude, aggressive, entitled, unpleasant bully who has no friends - she probably would have been anyway, but I doubt having such an irresponsible mother has helped.

I firmly believe someone like her should either have to get a job during school hours, or do voluntary community work. She contributes absolutely nothing to society.

I agree with every word of your post, grovel, and was ranting that very thing at the radio earlier!

Tressy did a neat summary of what went wrong with Thatcher's half-baked plan, I think. Why the fuck she went out of her way to rob workers of their power (unions) only to hand even greater unregulated power to the City, I don't know. Maybe the union guys should have dazzled her in sharp suits.

I think the vast majority of households would feel super rick on 150k per annum, single or joint income. It's absolutely vulgar to suggest otherwise and shows a real lack of self awareness.

super rick :o I meant rich obviously!

peaches - has her bills paid and wanders around living a life of leisure, whenever I see her she is sitting in cafes smoking and sipping coffee

Who pays her bills?

So she's getting £71 a week JSA plus £20.30 child benefit. Out of that, she has to pay her gas & electricity, supermarket, clothing, transport, school trips, holidays, presents and everything.

They must be incredibly cheap coffees