Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To ask what/who the dole should be for?

138 replies

Lollipop30 · 16/04/2018 11:27

Just been having this discussion with my brothers and Dad and we obviously disagree totally! By dole I mean any government help excludind child benefit.
So I’m interested to know who you think it should be for and why?

OP posts:
Scarlet1234 · 18/04/2018 08:42

Oh sorry that last post should have included with the exception of those too unwell to work i.e. Those who are unable to do any work should not have to do any voluntary stuff.

Dangerousmonkey · 18/04/2018 08:47

A lot of MN are happy to exclude CB then show appalling understanding of the genuine need for support some people have. CB is now restricted. It hasn't always existed. I give it 5 years before politicians start treating families receiving it as scroungers. Some of these MN ers may be compelled to change their tune

EC22 · 18/04/2018 08:53

Should be used like any other money.

The80sweregreat · 18/04/2018 09:06

I never thought of Child benefits as any thing more than the government just helping families - was brought in after the war years to encourage people to start having families as the birth rates were so low, so was a bit of an incentive. Thats how i saw it.

coffeeforone · 18/04/2018 09:07

I think it’s normal for everyone not to agree on this!

There is a fairly complex system in place which a lot of thought has gone into. I think the benefits should be for anyone who qualifies under the current system.

Although I think a Universal Basic Income system would be much better for society and it would avoid a lot of these type of disagreements.

Hypermice · 18/04/2018 09:13

I actually think you shouldnt have to take any job immediately. After a point, yes, but let’s give people a bit of a buffer to get back into work which is relevant to them and beneficial to the country via the tax take. A minimum wage role is still needing state top up and so may not be financially beneficial to the state coffers at all - give that person a few months to get a decent job paying well and they’re more likely to be a net contributor.

The80sweregreat · 18/04/2018 09:20

hyper, thats the trouble these days, its just take any job just to get people off the 'books' so to speak. i wished that the government had a bit of common sense over the whole thing and realised this is human beings your dealing with and what they do does affect the bigger picture and give people breathing space instead of hounding and sanctioning. Just a bit of empathy, but i know i'm asking a lot and it will never happen.

LeilaBriggs · 18/04/2018 09:26

I think only people who are absolutely unable to work should get it, like those who are very ill.

However, my reasoning is different from most people with this view. I just think being on benefits is a terrible life. It’s bad for your health and self-esteem. Everybody who is able should have a job.

I don’t give a flying fuck about the welfare bill, my concern is purely for the mental health of people without jobs.

That said, I am also interested in this experiment where everyone gets ‘the dole’, meaning that vulnerable people like lone parents can get this safety net but also work to provide a better life for them and their families.

The80sweregreat · 18/04/2018 09:39

leila, the trouble is who do you put in the category as ' very ill' - as we've already seen on this thread, it is very complex and not quite as cut and dried as that. anyone's life can turn on a sixpence and its good that there is some kind of safety net available, but if the government can tell people ' your not ill enough' where does it all end then? back to the ' work house' days?
what is your definition ? its probably a lot different to someone elses. People with mental health might not look ' very ill' but a lot can't work because of it..

I'm not being goady but its not as straight forwards as that. its a shame that the ones that do cheat the system then make a lot harder for ones that dont' and are genuine and need the money to live. Thats where we start getting this mindset that all people on benefits are scroungers when they are not and a lot of them are working and claiming too, which is a whole other debate about how much employers pay and so on.

bigmouthstrikesagain · 19/04/2018 07:44

The "mindset" about benefit scroungers is only beneficial to the politicians who want to cut back benefits. They can use the imagery of the scrounger counterpoint it against the "hard-working" and amnesia sets in about the real causes of economic problems and the widening gap between rich and poor. Economic inequality is damaging to society but apparently it is more important that we are tough on potential scrubbers than face the facts and make decisions based on long-term improvement rather than the next election. Sad

bigmouthstrikesagain · 19/04/2018 07:44

Scrubbers = scroungers

Feodora · 19/04/2018 18:11

OP, you argue people should have to seek any work ASAP and then look for more suitable work whilst working. I don’t think there should be an open ended time limit but I would want people to be given some time to seek employment in their field before having to take any job. Also most people want to work and not live on £74.00 a week (not including HB here) which contrary to your claims is not enough to meet the basics of food, hygiene products, utilities and travel, internet and phone required for securing interviews.

Feodora · 19/04/2018 18:13

@bigmouthstrikesagain, agree!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread