To not have issues with the dole as a lifestyle choice

[pinksaltlamp]

It's hardly a life of Riley at 72 quid a week but I think it would allow people some time out to develop themselves creatively. It's probably why the UK has and still does punch card above its weight in the arts, especially music. Some of the greatest musicians of the country have spent significant amounts of time on the role that allowed them to create music. Especially as there is a lack of jobs in this country. Maybe inflation, especially house prices, would be less if people had the security to leave jobs and try other things with a guaranteed safety net.

I do think there is a good argument for the citizen wage. Would allow people time out of work, at a very basic level of existence to educate, train and develop themselves. Let's face it most people hate going in to work for a job they don't like but are scared to make a change as most people are only a few pay packets from being g wiped out. I'm rambling on a bit but I do think something like the citizens wage would benefit the country and individuals long term.

Part of the thinking around the 'citizen wage' is around long term job destruction and the gradual demise of the 'full time' job for everyone except 'key' knowledge workers and those providing specialised personal services eg vets.

It's about imagining a world in which automation has removed not just 'low skill' jobs eg operating a computerised checkout, but also millions of mid-range jobs eg documenting a conveyancing transaction.

I can't get upset about it tbh. I don't envy them and it won't change the fact that there aren't enough jobs anyway. They could be desperate for a job but as it is there are more unemployed people than job vacancies. There would be just as many people claiming anyway.

Yeah, because everyone on the dole is doing it to creatively find themselves. No, they're doing it because they can't or won't work, and the latter would prefer to scrape by on benefits than actually work for a living. Why should I pay for them to choose to do sweet FA except watch TV and smoke?

How about creative types do two jobs for a while or extra shifts so they can save up to fund finding themselves. It's a luxury activity like travelling - entirely optional.

I've,never had to find myself, I've never been scatty enough to lose myself in the first place.

My DS is doing an arts degree, funded by us - minimum everything. Funny how he found himself an "arty" job last summer as unpaid work experience and then stayed on paid (only £100 pw) and has been kept on at uni doing about six hours a week. Probably because he's good at it and a grafter.

DD wants to go to RADA but will do a first degree and then possibly a,PGCE so she can always do supply. She's grade 8 voice and piano - in her own time alongside 11 GCSEs, and now 4 A'Levels. She usually earns between £30-£40 at weekends babysitting and has been offered countless little jobs in little shops part -time.

No, sorry - it takes very little effort to earn £72pw. If folk can't be arsed to earn it themselves it's unreasonable to expect the rest of us to earn it for them.

I am intrigued by the citizen's wage but what I don't understand is why it doesn't fuel inflation. If we had an extra thousand a month then we could afford a bigger house, but only if no one else had an extra thousand otherwise we would be no better off.

Ridiculous idea - I would love to quite work and spend all day in dance classes, theatre workshops and at shows, 'finding myself' ... but I would need hundreds of pounds a week to be able to afford this lifestyle.

Benefits buys you no kind of lifestyle. One of my best friends was on JSA for 2 years. No kids and owned her own house before getting made redundant so she got literally the minimum £72 a week or whatever it is. She had oceans of time on her hands but no money at all to do anything. She was suicidal by the time she finally got a job.

I also don't get citizen's wage and don't see why anybody supports it - if there's that kind of money going spare then why on earth give it to someone like me, who doesn't need it and will be able to save it or spend it on luxuries, rather than give more to people in desperate need?? It's bonkers. And if there's really so much money that they run of people to give it to then they could reverse all the cuts to life saving and enhancing services.
To me it looks like: Give Person A on breadline £25 and person B earning £50K £25 vs give Person A on breadline £50 and person B earning 50K nothing. Why pick the first option?

Says it all for me

I really don't see why honest, hard working people should work to pay for people to 'find themselves'. What a load of bollocks. The welfare state wasn't created to allow able bodied adults to spend their days 'finding themselves', it was created to help people who had fallen on hard times and needed a bit of help and support to get back on their feet. Benefits should never be a 'lifestyle choice', they should be a neccesity. There are so many benefits to working besides getting money, which include independence and pride. People shouldn't be encouraged to fart about being 'creative' instead of getting a job.

The Norwegian system of giving everyone €800 a month would work well for my family. Mainly because we would still bust a gut to provide for ourselves AND find ourselves in our own time.

I have the greatest of sympathy for most people struggling to find work or stay in work for whatever reason. I don't have much time for people who just can't be arsed, but to be fair I've never met any of them, which is odd since according to our Government there are millions of the lazy sods.

And by Norway I do mean Finland.

Please note, posters who have said they are creatives haven't used terms like 'finding themselves'. Creativity is massively important and a huge part of our culture, I just don't think it should be funded through the dole.

LonnyVonny - agreed.

Does anyone object to increased funding for worthwhile courses (including student maintenance) in the form of grants?

I can help you out here with a RL exampleOP as I have 24yr old DS1 doing precisely what you refer to; he is a singer and actor so falls squarely into your 'creative' category.

For the benefit of compare & contrast, I also have 20 yr old DC2 who is quite literally the polar opposite subject wise and earnings wise, about to graduate with the highest possible graduate salary available, & already with multiple job offers; the lowest of which is £36k and the highest of which have all already asked him/her to please advise them if he/her gets a better offer than they have made as they will match it. It's likely their actual starting salary will easily be in excess of £40k.

DC2 intends to immediately divert x% of salary to DC1 as is acutely aware of DC1's circs and that their starting salary is faintly ludicrous and I think that's fucking lovely of them. I also lob DS1 some cash as and when I can, but do I think anyone else should pay for DS1's creative bent and thus chosen career path? No I fucking don't!

More to the point, neither does DS1! He works 2 pretty menial jobs in order to fund his vocal lessons and life in general. Does he need to NOT do those other jobs in order to fully 'realise his potential'? No he doesn't and nor do/did most other people I know with creative careers - they worked their backsides off to support themselves [& FWIW, I agree with all PP's vis 'how many people on the dole are doing it as they are undiscovered talents?' as I know of none ]

Marian Keyes was at her desk doing the accounts job she'd done for years when the fax came through confirming her very first (6 figure) book deal.... She sat there taken aback for a few minutes and then carried on working as it was Payroll and if she didn't, then nobody would have been paid.

My point is this: we all make choices about what we do but it's not up to anyone else who works their own arse off (often in low paying jobs themselves) to be funding those who choose to follow their artistic dreams, and I'm mighty proud of DS1 for knowing that and having a work ethic whilst he pursues his musical/acting career.

HTH...

YY to BeaufortBelle

I assume the OP is having a bit of a wind-up? Unless you are doing hellishly long hours, there is plenty of time to do activities to find yourself while also doing a full time job. 6-9 every night, 7 days a week = 21 hours. Just don't watch TV, don't read books, don't have a social life, don't have kids etc.

We used to give grants to artists etc but I think these have all been cut. I don't think a citizens wage would work in the UK. Too many people would take advantage, it would have to be done properly with loads of research etc. There isn't the money.

You are being very, very unreasonable.

I have a lovely neighbour who started out as a buyer for a big chain, developed a relationship with the clothing manufacturers, spent her evenings banging out some designs (a childhood dream).

Somehow she managed to get her own label up and running by her own hard work, savvy and contacts she'd made through her work (mind you, she is not from a wealthy family).

Meanwhile, my SIL, who is a beautiful, lovely and talented person who happens to be supported by my FIL, has flitted from one creative endeavour to another (1. photography 2. sustainable design 3. chinese medicine 4. fashion design) without ever really making a go of it.

Long story short - hard work is the making of a person, and perhaps even more so if it starts as something that person doesn't really want to do.

but but but...

... of course it's wrong for people to be supported to do nothing forever more.

But that's a straw man, isn't it.

The idea behind the citizen's wage is that it stops being out of work (etc.) from being a total utter disaster. It means that if something grim happens to you, or you need/want to change career, you CAN take time, take stock, retrain/recover - without it being a financial catastrophe.

There's loads of evidence from poorer countries that providing this sort of by-right safety net INCREASES economic activity, investment, education. People don't just laze about.

Also, if you look at the fashion/music creative folk from the 1970s/early 1980s, many of them lived in squats, i.e. they didn't pay rent. People nowadays have to graft incredibly hard simply to have a bed to sleep in and food to eat.

I agree with you.

Inhave been an advocate of this for decades. Everyone tells me it's ridiculous but their arguments are not convincing.

Hang on, which part of Denmark is trialling the citizen's wage? (I live there - need to move cities apparently )

I actually like the idea of the citizen's wage but can't see it happening any time soon.

Right now in Denmark we have quite a right-wing government who are doing their best to break down socialism (and look up to Cameron and his cronies )

I agree with you OP.

I met quite a few people in the late 90s on the dole and they were wonderfully creative musicians and artists. When my dd was young I used to go to art and dance classes during her school hours and there was no pressure to find work back then. It definitely helped shape who I am and to develop myself, and it's good to encourage all citizens to do that.

Never heard such rubbish!!

Why should tax payers pay for losers to sit around "being creative" ???