in thinking that the Government cannot possibly ensure people are better off working than on benefits unless they increase wages massively?

[TheJollyPirate]

TBH I cannot see how the Govt are going th achieve their aim to make sure "nobody is better off financially on benefits than in work".

I work part-time as I have a son with a disability. I take home £849 and get Tax credit of £190 plus Child benefit of course - Working Tax credit adds another £50 - all in all just over £1100. I am just over the limit for housing benefit and all other help although if DLA is approved for my son that may change a bit.

One of my families gets housing benefit of £700 a month plus tax credit, plus income support, plus child benefit. On paper at least they out-strip me and unless wages drastically improve (oh - was that a recession I just saw over there) then nothing much CAN change. The Govt are talking big but cannot deliver no matter what they say.

I will stay worse off financially than the family I work with who will remain unemployed because wages are NEVER going to amount to enough for them to get work and maintain their home. Not their fault and I am more fortunate in other ways but financially - nah - they are doing a bit better than me (but probably only just).

I am watching the Govt but not holding my breath on this one.

Or do you know different?

If so - explain because I am being a bit thick about it.

expatinscotland "There's no society around that can afford for people to leave work and put their feet up for 20+ years. " - but this is what's happening with those who are too lazy to get a job. Older people have worked, raised kids & not all are in the same health as a younger person. Also let the older people help with childcare if their grandkids are local (this is a fulltime job of course).

I would love to work in mcdonalds.... but our nearest one is 120 miles away

I would like to see some figures on how many have never worked, and how many WANT to work...........rather than asuming that the majority of claimants are on benefits for 20yrs+

Me too toccatafudge - I just think it's wrong to get those in their 60s to continue to work whilst younger people feel their entitled to do nothing. Of course not everyone is in this situation.

actually I don't think there's anyting wrong with getting those that are still fit and healthy in their 60's (and there's plenty of them - we've got loads at our church alone!) to continue working either.

OTT but my great great aunt continued working in the hotel industry until she was 91

I think retirement age is already raised to 67 isn't it?

I go on my pension calculator every so often and try to work out when I'll actually be able to stop! I've 'overpaid' for quite a while so reckon I should be ok before then. Not that I dislike my job - it's great (well, most of the time!) but I want the option of winding down by 60 ish. I do think state pensions are on their way out though, and people will have more pressure on to make their own provision. Can't see any other way tbh.

no - not OTT, I'm meant OT

well I know of people in their 70's who are more than capable of working as well.

Herbietea

'Sparkle, I don't think anyone is talking about the benefits paid to the sick and disabled, their carers, the pensioners or the tax credits which are paid to the low earners so that they can infact go to work.

The people who should be targeted are the able bodied, working age people who would rather sit on their backsides all day than get a job'

IMO, the govt wont save enough money from this particualr group of people, since they are in a tiny minority, to warrant the extra workload of deciphering who can't work and who wont work.

It's a no brainer.

'Of course not everyone is in this situation.'

No not everyone is in that situation but in some areas a large percentage are in that situation. They have either never worked or have a kid and never work again.It is extremely commmon in some places and thats where the problem lies because some places it is because there is no jobs but some places (such as my area) there is jobs, especially no/low qualification type jobs especially care work (due to people moving to the sea to retire, fast food chains, shops, admin).

My stepdad hires people as part of his job and hardly anyone from the job centre bothers turning up either for the interview or if they get the job they just walk out/quit after a couple of days. Hes had a person walk out after 2 hours, people turning up drunk in the clothes from the night before . I seriously dont know what some people are thinking. This is happening at a time of the recession when you think they would be grateful for any work.

I have worked in numerous low paid jobs over the last 12 years and have seen the problems they have at retaining and recruiting people from the job centre. The Polish will come and be grateful for the chance to work, they will work hard and be prompt. I can see why immigrants are chosen over British workers in a lot of instances as the British wasters are ruining it for genuine British job hunters.

I think it is 67 but I don't know many 67 year olds who are still in teaching. God knows how I am going to earn a living once schools no longer want to employ me.

For older people imho it should be a choice. If you enjjoy your job & pay then why not keep working but if you see other responsibilities like grandkids then you could choose to leave your job & be a sahgp.

I would love to be able to be a sahg but I can't afford for dp to be a sahp so I can't see how we will afford to be sahg either.

katycarr - teaching pensions are damn good though compared to most. Are you fully paid up? Because if so, you should be ok.

sunshine - yes it happens with farm jobs.Fruit picking/veg is a job that few locals would take so temp non local workers are taken on. There's work in places that should be done by the inemployed who live there.

why is more terrible to expect a fit healthy 65 year old to work than to cut benefits to sick and disabled? Getting the workshy into work will not deal with the problem.

expatinscotland

'There's no society around that can afford for people to leave work and put their feet up for 20+ years'

Totally agree.

.

Oh all of this is a side issue regarding the deficit.

The welfare burden is big, but the government deals with far bigger sums of money.

Didn't the fact that the gov could call on, almost immediately, the amount of hard cash to pay the bail out indicate anything??

it's been explained further up the thread why seasonal/temporary work is incredibly risky work to take if you're on benefits.

I would never temp unless there was a pretty good chance of it being permanent at the end, and seasonal work........with the wait for benefist when it finishes - no I couldn't do it.

Care work - I'll never go into that again, and the thought of people taking care work because "it's a job" is a horrid thought. I worked with a couple of those types of people........and the "care" they gave was shocking, not to mention most of them didn't turn up to the training, some of the carers

All carers should now have NVQ in Care, or be working towards it (minimum) but it frequently doesn't happen.

In some respects I'm quite glad that my parents and I are rarely in contact any more, it means I don't have to think about the "care" that my mum will recieve when she eventually has to go into a home.....

And none of the older, and very fit and able people I know are sahgp - they're just living it up.

And it is not only the money the government would save by not paying benefits to these people, they would also pay tax & NI and thereby contribute

In what jobs, Mingg?

We're in a recession, in case you hadn't noticed.

most people I know on a low wage get back more in tax credits, plus a little housing benefit and council tax beneft than they pay in NI and tax.

Oh gee really? Thanks for letting me know