To ask for a view on this ? If someone gets benefits and are not a carer / single parent etc .. then they should contribute to society in order to receive benefits ?

[Ooola]

I think in society we should all support orhers.
The taxpayers contribute by paying taxes .
Vulnerable people such as disabled , carers etc should be supported by others .
Those who can’t find work and get benefits .. should be required to give something back for the money they get ...not be forced to work for a big co operation but to contribute . Things like park maintenance , listening services , support to the struggling public services . There could be matching service so that they could chose to gain experience or use the skills they have to benefit others .
Any police checks , as are required in other jobs , would be funded . Does this sound fair ? If we all give what we can then it may be of benefit to all , including the claimant who could use this to build c v , etc . Surely it’s win win in principle ? If someone gets benefits say at a level of 10 k , 13 k , 20 k
.. it feels fair that they give something for that especially as it is comparable to someone working and getting minimum wage ?
Clearly time would need to be given off for job interviews etc .

Easy. They’ll have Brighthouse Sofas.

And a flat screen telly

How old are you OP?

Surely op instead of saying people should work for benefits, you're saying that the state shouldn't provide any benefits except for disability, carers etc, but should state fund jobs for every person who isn't disabled, a carer etc out of the current benefit budget?
Those eho therefore don't want to work can starve and live on tbe streets, they've made their choice?

**Ooola

Stressedout10 The benefit cap is set at 20 k . People get paid it.**

Yes but that includes child tax credit and housing benefit. So it's household benefit not the individual.

All these people agreeing with the poster obviously have no real knowledge of the current benefits system. They haven't sat through an assessment with someone to have their benefit declined based on the absolute lies written about their assessment. Well that's OK they say appeal, yep and wait the 12 months minimum it is in my area. Just because you are on job seekers does not mean you are fit for work.

Plus their are a miniscule amount of people who have not worked and then claimed benefits so would have paid NI and tax. Even if no income tax had been paid that's not the only form of taxation.

The vote balance looks interesting . However , the people who are posting , in the main disagree .. but some folk must agree .. according to the votes .. but are not posting .

Am saying if there is work to be done in the community Such as neglected land , isolated elderly These things could be met . The benefits are being paid anyway so why not get communal
Benefit from that money ?

I don't even know where to start with this so I'm just going to try my best to be articulate rather than simply resorting to "are you fucking kidding me?"

Firstly, caring roles such as visiting/helping isolate elderly people, providing a listening service, supporting people in need, etc. are fucking hard. Caring is hard. You need way more patience than you'd ever have thought possible and the only people working in caring roles should be those who genuinely want to be there, who care about their charges, who are suited to the role, and who are suitably paid for it. Vulnerable people should not be cared for by people who are not being paid for it and who have shown no willingness or vocation for caring. It is a recipe for disaster. People in need of care deserve actual bloody care, not Karen from the Jobcentre who is only there because she doesn't want to get sanctioned.

Secondly, if there is work to be done in the community to the extent that there is enough work for enforced labour then there is enough work for actual jobs to exist and they should be created so that people can be properly employed in them with real wages, holidays, the opportunity for career and pay progression, training, employment rights, and so on. I don't want my local park to be maintained by benefits slaves in high vis jackets who are taking leaves so their family can eat, that's not the society I want to live in.

Ooola

Presumably, anyone who is dense enough to support effective slave labour, and the reduction of employable roles as a way of combating unemployment, is also too dense to articulate a sentence.

Most people on benefits either still work or did previously, but have lost their job, got ill etc. The idea that are vast swathes of people that have never ever contributed is a nasty urban myth spread by Tory like people for whom profit is the only concern. Of course there are people who never worked, but for the most part that is down to where they live and the opportunities or lack of them that they have.

What I really want to say ( I’m prepared to be flamed) is that I simply do not understand the many folk ( yes I’ve encountered them ) who simply think that they can have as many children as they want and feel that the state must provide whilst not contributing anything to the state whatsoever.

Except under current rules they can only have 2 children and get any help for them so after that they are on their own - can't imagine anyone is deliberately planning that

Give an amount of time and effort that is manageable / contribute to society . In return you get support from society

How much volunteering do you do, OP?

I'm going to post this on here, as you obviously took my comment on the other thread and just ran... And came up with this bulshit.

20k benefit cap. My rent is 13k a year. If my partner left and I lost my job, or got ill I WOULD NOT be able to survive. Would you?

We do need excellent no-strings-attached benefits for those who can't work.

However there is a real problem where the difference in money between a low wage full time job and some full time benefits is minimal (or even reversed due to loss of subsidies) so there is no incentive to work. It's hard to increase wages so people can live on them without also needing to increase benefits to the same amount.

The only way I can think is that for those who haven't recovered from using benefits as a temporary safety net (e.g. 1year) and excluding those with medical need etc should have a more efficient use of funds. E.g. Housing in halls of residence type buildings where all heating, water, furniture, laundry room, canteen style meals etc can be provided with economy of scale. Then a smaller individual fund for some chosen extras. This would ensure children always receive what they need. Reduce stress and debt and food banks. The material provision between working and not working would be similar but more choices if contributing through work.

So @Ooola I’ve paid about £5500 a year in NI for the last 10 years, and about £3700 a year for the 10 years before that.

NI doesn’t only go on the benefit bill of course, but I’m interested to know whether in your little policy I need to “give something back” or if I’d be counted as in credit.

That’s about 25 years worth of £72 a week unemployment benefit.

What do you think? Have I given back enough already?

This threads creepy. Like a Tory feeling out some workhouse idea.

Today 22:10 Venger
About your first paragraph .
Of course , re caring .. listening .. I agree . Which is why I said that as one option , but that there should be many options .. listening is skilled and all those things you said .
However , unemployed people can have empathy , skills , and indeed experience . This is why I said there should be both police checks and a matching service .
For example if I was unemployed I could do that as I have many years at post grad level of work in a linked field .
But I would be terrible at something else .
Surely someone using their skills fir a few hours a week for benefits can only benefit all .
Surely you don’t think unemployed people lack a skill base, empathy , legal backgrounds , child protection backgrounds , they will be a multi skilled group .. unless they are being stereotyped as something else ??
Many skilled and able people are unemployed .

I think the idea is that anyone who isn’t on benefits for a good reason is supposed to be looking for a job. It might be worth while offering skills programs where you get the normal job seekers allowance but spend time working for the council in order to build your CV instead of making applications/attending interviews though.

doublehelix

So.... a 21st century workhouse?

Children being shipped out of their homes and away from their schools to live in them?
Compassionate of you!

Yes like the ducking workhouse! I despair of what is happening in this country, I really do!

Venger
Quite a bit actually .

@Ellisandra if you’re going to be like that then add up all the tax/ni (in case you don’t believe that it’s a tax) you have paid and then add up all of the state funds you’ve used (your share of defence, schools, NHS, roads etc etc).

Ooola, but people are PAID to do these jobs currently.

Still waiting for an answer to my questions.

PrincessMargaret I understand
But there are gaps that could be filled . If people get benefits then I am simply saying a few hours a week to fill those gaps is likely to help society and claimants ( and the benefit money is already being paid ) .

Ooola

I’m yet to see you address why these roles couldn’t be made into jobs and reduce unemployment?

What makes you think this hasn't already been tried? Young people used to have to work for their benefits and all that happened was that older people got sacked, because employers could get labour for £30 a week.