To ask why JSA is virtually half State Pension per week

[Oilnwater]

I'm probably clueless and totally missing something which is why I'm on here asking for help in understanding ......
Currently a single person aged over 25 would get £73.10 per week JSA. A single person basic pension is £129.20.
Why the huge disparity? Who comes up
With the figures? Is there a formula?
It just strikes me as odd that both single people would in theory be facing the same housing / petrol / fuel (the winter fuel allowance isn't much) food, normal everyday costs. Why the huge difference?

lauriefairycake, we are talking about JSA and pensions. Didn't see much enthusiasm for Labour to make a significant increase in their period in office between 1997-2010.

"why is JSA for under 25 year olds even lower? How can the Government get away with it? It's age discrimination is it not?"

Excellent questions.

There's also some bizarre rule in the benefit system whereby single people under 35 are expected to live in shared accommodation (ie room in shared house) and single people aged 35+ are allowed a one bedroom place of their own.

It's all rather arbitrary really. It does make me wonder about how these decisions were once made.

Tax credits are not JSA though a person with children can be in receipt of both ,I think JSA has always been low regardless of whose been in power , Tax credits are dependent on circumstances and how much a person /s earn

Presumably jsa is the bare minimum while a pension is meant to provide a decent long term living situation. In the same way you (hopefully still) get an allowance if you're disabled and unable to work. People who are older and potentially less physically capable may also incur additional costs with transport etc.

Though the system may be flawed , it is still better than many other parts of the world. We have people who deserve more than what they are getting and you can cross the road to find the non deserving scrounger who enjoys being on the fiddle and has not ever held down a job in their life....... ...Not working is difficult but it has to be or why would anyone bother to get a job ? .....Make childcare free for all and we will then see who would work :-)

Because jobseekers should pay less than working. A minimum wage job should provide a higher income than jobseekers allowance so it is financially better to work.

Also you can qualify for jobseekers as long as you have paid 6 months of National Insurance before your claim. To get the basic state pension you need around 30+ years of National Insurance and have therefore paid a lot more into the system.

"a pension is meant to provide a decent long term living situation. In the same way you (hopefully still) get an allowance if you're disabled and unable to work."

Not in the same way, no.
The state pension is current £168.60 a week.
People who are unable to work due to disability or illness get a maximum of £111.65 a week, but for many it's just £73.10 or £57.90 for under 25s (same as JSA).

Not the same at all.

Retired people who get pensions can also still work

Because lazy fuckwits like my DB need to be forced into work somehow. He should not see unemployment as a job option and he should pull his weight. Pay him more and he will never work again. And no, am not NC, he does not have SEN, etc etc. He is dodging the fucking system and needs to be doing his bit.

Should have known this thread would bring out the charmers!

OAP - deserving poor. Unemployed - undeserving poor. Simple.

"you can qualify for jobseekers as long as you have paid 6 months of National Insurance before your claim."

Not true. You have to pay national insurance for 2 years before you can claim contributory JSA (now called new-style JSA) for a maximum of 6 months.

Most people will pay a lot more in national insurance than they get back while claiming JSA.

However, you could also get income-based JSA (now replaced by Universal Credit) regardless of national insurance contributions. Both means tested.

For some reason in this country it's seen as perfectly ok to discriminate against the young. Minimum wage for under 25s is also less- it's perfectly legal to pay someone less for the same work if one person is 24 and the other 26.

I can see the argument as to why JSA should be less than a pension, but people on ESA/income support should get the same as a pensioner.

I suspect that none of these figures are calculated with reference to the actual cost of living, though.

JSA ought to also be calculated to take into account the extra costs associated with job hunting e.g. travel to/from interviews, internet connection, having a working contact number and so on.

Pensioners have paid in all their lives JSA is a benefit pension is an entitlement.

In any life situation there are always the fiddlers that try and play or take advantage of a system but they are the exception not the rule and it's unfair to others to be treated poorly due to the exception.
A pensioner is unlikely to be actively supporting children. A single person could well be a non-resident parent and need to provide for a child or children. Also you could argue a pensioner gets free prescriptions, free TV license, free bus pass, winter fuel allowance etc which if were translated into a monetary welly value would raise their weekly amount even more. It really is a stark difference almost double!

Pension is called a benefit
-the introduction of the new State Pension from 6 April 2016 is also classified as a “benefit” under Section 1(1) of the Pensions Act 2014.

You have to have made at least 35 years NIC to get full state pension and I think at least 10 to get any at all.

Therefore not quite a benefit in the same sense at all.

So is a basic class of Nat Ins contribution paid to cover JSA Claimants while claiming? Or paid on behalf of carers or those on disability?

UC is £254 a month for someone under the age of 25, our busfare for a day ticket is almost a fiver, tell me how with the job hunting criteria of meetings and job interviews and courses that someone is able to live on a little more than £3 a day.

The fact that Carers Allowance is lower than any of the aforementioned is the biggest scandal of all.

That and the fact that my 19 year old does exactly the same job as her 26 year old colleague but for £2.06 an hour less. As PP said, nowhere else are you allowed to be discriminated against like that.

"So is a basic class of Nat Ins contribution paid to cover JSA Claimants while claiming? Or paid on behalf of carers or those on disability?"

People claiming benefits (most kinds) get national insurance credits which count towards their state pension. Thankfully.

The problem is when people don't claim anything (because they're living off savings for example) and end up with big gaps in their NI record.

Spot on posts from AnotherEmma.

Plenty of pensioners have not 'paid in all their lives' and there's no such thing as the paradigm of a pot of money, it's not a bank.

Agree with PPs about different NMW amounts.

State pension is a benefit, I'm not sure why this simple truth causes apoplexy for a large part of the population.

You pay your stamp when you're working, it gets you entitlement to a variety of benefits paid by the state - both in work, out of work, and after you retire from work.