Work should pay more than not being in work. That's obvious - but raises a lot of questions.
You can ensure this is the case by continually reducing benefits. It cuts the welfare bill, and at some poit even the most mathematically challancged will realise that working is of greater benefit to them sitting on their sofa.
We need a separate system for dealing with disability, because the current system hasn't worked for a couple of decades at least.
What happens if you work but don't work many hours?
You learn to furnish yourself with more than one income stream. What is it with people that they do not grasp the basic concept that you do,not need an employer to earn money?
What happens if you can't work because you have children?
You force both parents to contribute financially towards their children, commensurate to the amount of actual parenting tasks they avoid. If a father does zero actual parenting, but takes them every second weekend, then he should be picking up 90% of the tab. Parents who refuse, or evade, should face graduated penalties, up to and including incarsaration.
What happens if you become ill and can't work?
That is what insurance is for. If you can't be bothered insuring yourself then the state should provide the bare necessities. If you can afford to smoke, pay for SkyTV, go to the pub at the weekend, and take holidays, you are receiving too much benefits. It's a safety net, not a lifestyle choice. No-one should be encouraged to accept welfare as a lifestyle choice.
What happens if you want to work but there is no work? How do you define no work?
There is no such thing as 'no work'. Value always moves through an economy, and value can be exchanged for what one needs. If you cannot be of value to anyone, there's your problem. If you cannot be bothered moving, cannot be bothered walking, cannot be bothered looking, there's your problem.
What happens if your ex has buggered off and doesn't support the children?
Refer to the answer given above. Ultimately jail the little fuckers and force prisoners to work. Pass the revenue on to the state to compensate for crime and support the families of criminals who are not providing for their children due to incarsaration. We do not need to be paying millions to third party subcontractors to work on roads and landfil sites, when we have a captive workforce who need to repay society for the damage they have done to it.
Should there be a basic "income" people have so they do not go hungry, cold and have a roof over their head? What would it be?
Yes. There should be basic free council housing stock. Studio accommodation, free electricity and gas, and welfare stamps to spend at groceries, tied to the persons ID to prevent abuse, black marketteering. These should preclude the possibility of buying cigarettes, alcohol, gift vouchers, mobile phones, satelite TV sevices etc.
If Sky want those on benefits to watch SkyTV they should provide this free of charge and not be permitted to charge for it. Likewise, mobile phone companies, etc. Bus and train travel should be free.
It is a bleak and boring existence, but it provides the basics of what a person or persons need to survive. If they want more, they can work for it.
What role should the State have?
The state need to correctly means test benefits. Punish and exclude the bone idle and the wilfully jobless/homeless.