I’ve always felt that unemployment benefit should be quite lean and limited in duration, while sickness/disability benefit (for those too disabled or ill to work) should actually be quite generous. If someone is genuinely unable to work, we should be looking after them proper.
Which then raises the question of incentivising people to be ‘sick’. Personally I’m of the view that this can be prevented with a decent long-term strategy. Most people want to be self-sufficient. Most people want to have the money to have nice things and feel a sense of pride when they’ve been able to acquire something or achieve something through their own efforts. Give them half a chance and support to do that and they will.
When we have people who don’t, if you look a bit harder you’ll find the same patterns recurring time and time again, often the result of a disadvantaged childhood. Many lack desirable employability skills because they didn’t achieve many qualifications while at school and have poor coping mechanisms when under pressure. It is vanishingly rare that those who ‘play the system’ (and yes, of course they exist) are perfect employees who just woke up one day saying “nah, can’t be bothered anymore”. For these people, long-term unemployment or sickness is an end result.
If we really want to fix this problem, we have to take a preventative approach. We need a massive investment in education, early years support and social care. Which I don’t see happening.
For those already in this situation a few things that might help would be investment in mental health services, community support groups (communities in general to be fair), free adult education, an investment in public transport to make it easier for those too poor to learn to drive and own a car to get to work (outside of the main cities this is a major problem). I don’t see any of this happening either.
So we’re left with the situation where we fail to support people to get work or stay in work, and then punish them for not being in work.