Is it acceptable to choose not to work?

[jinglesticks]

I have a friend who made a decision to never work and live off benefits instead. His father worked all his life, retired and died that year. As a result he became very angry with the work ethic in our society and decided life was too precious to waste working until you die. He now lives on unemployment benefit. He has to live very simply. He doesn't go out much, brews his own beer and plays the guitar all day. All this will presumably change under the new Universal Credits system. What do you think? Should one be able to make this kind of choice, or is it wrong to live off the taxes of others.

Incidentally, I wouldn't change places with him. Not for moral reasons. I'd much rather work in a job I love and feel that I earn the money I spend.

Do you give money to charity?

The NHS is for all who need it, would you really let someone die in the name of money?

I give lots of money to various charities thanks, and I give a huge amount of time and money to the two that are closest to my heart.

No, of course I wouldn't want someone to die in the name of money, but I don't want people to choose to freeload either. Somebody who consciously chooses to opt out of society and contribute nothing, does not really have the right to expect anything which is paid for by other people. That would include healthcare.

There are people that pay their taxes that cannot access all the healthcare they need, so why should someone who makes an active descision not to pay tax recieve healthcare for nothing just because NICE has decided that if will pay for certain treatments but not others?

I don't understand why anyone would not want to work, and in my opinion it's not a healthy approach to life. But from reading your post it sounds as if your friend is grieving and traumatised by his father's death and is reacting in a way that won't do himself (or anyone else much good.) It sounds like he's blaming 'work' for his father's death, rather than that he's just lazy.

'Sloth' is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, isn't it? Aversion/suspicion/condemnation of people who don't do anything is pretty deep-rooted on that basis. The 'idle rich' included. As a species human beings do best in social groups and communities i.e. looking after weaker members but otherwise expecting everyone to pitch in best they can. To answer the original question, our guitar-playing home-brewer won't be able to make the same choices in future.

people have all ways been frightened of losing everything if they get a job and ending up on the street. thats not saying living in a high rise with 60 quid a week is better then working it's saying the wages are not even enough to continue a hand to mouth existence, which is just plan wrong and needs sorting out.

That's supposed to be one of the things the reforms help - hope they really do in practice.

Personally I strongly believe in the Citizens' Income - a payment to everyone to live on regardless of their circumstances. I think it would be good to allow everyone the choice not to work; most people probably would prefer to work because they prefer have extra luxuries and have the social status of being employed and a CI would make more sense for tax and benefit purposes.

I've had the option of not working at various stages in my life and it gave me an enormous sense of freedom. It's often said that the unemployed just rot at home but there were huge opportunities open to me - to read, visit museums and galleries, paint, do DIY and craft activities, walking, taking photos and volunteer work. I wouldn't blame anyone for opting to do that instead of being a wage slave.

Sloth and not working for money are two totally different things.

Too many damn people in this world are in my view evil, greedy, selfish capitalist pigs.

Those are the roots of evil, those are sins, a man who sits there happy with his lot not complaining, greatful for a society in which he is allowed the freedom to live life how he wants, without hurting other people or being greedy in anyway is fine by me.

And I'm proud to live in a country that still allows equality, that still allows people the freedom to live life as they wish, money is the root of all evil, society took a tumble in the days of the doomsday book when the land was carved up between landowners and people not allowed the freedoms to live how they like, can't even shoot a deer for supper in Richmond now because they belong to the queen.

Don't blame the man who wants out the system blame the system that says he can't find an empty plot of land to build on without paying a wealthy land owner for it etc.

Christ, wake up Ryoko.

I could think of nothing worse than sitting home all day.

Fine if you are funiding yourself.
Do what you like thenb.

I chose not to work for 5 years. It was lovely. I wasn't in the least bit bored. Did all sorts of things I miss now I'm working FT again. I suppose it does seem unfair that I got the choice to do it because DH earned enough to keep us, but actually I'm not sure it is about fairness at all. For most of us, our choices are limited by our resources. If you start thinking it's unfair that you don't have the options that someone with more resources than you has, then you are setting yourself up for discontent. Especially if you expect the gap to be narrowed by other people rather than your own efforts,

Arf. Right, if everyone on mn takes one of the Queen's deer - what shall we eat tomorrow? [rolleyes]

AP we could move on to eating the Queen's swans

mind you I couldn't eat a whole deer in one day

LOL KM

I'd prefer the horses

I can't help but feel HMS (Her Majesty's Swans) would be somewhat chewy - but HMC (Her Majesty's Corgis)? [lickslips] Succulent meat falling off the bone. What do you suppose dog would taste like? I think something like mutton. Who's first then?

"people not allowed the freedoms to live how they like"

I think you would be a bit disappointed if you went back in time. Quite a bit of work involved in hunting and preparing your own food.

I can't think of anything more depressing than sitting around all day doing nothing. I think it's a fast route to mental illness.

If a person is unemployed through lack of jobs, then if they are not working it is fair enough.
Also, I also have sympathy for someone who doesn't work through crippling lack of self-esteem/mental illness.
Do I have any sympathy for someone who HAS self-esteem and job opportunities yet STILL doesn't work? No I do not.
I find it very strange. If your mate wants to go and opt out of society and find a plot of land to grow his own food and asks nothing of society back then his option may be a valid one, but the truth is he would be working tending the land etc in this way so I doubt it would appeal to him.
Living in a commune means that others expect you to chip in doing something so it would not be an easy option.

MollyRoger. You say that you are not very intelligent. Were you told that when you were at school? Please don't believe it. It sounds like you have come to believe this negative, self fulfilling verdict.

Swan tastes fishy, and is not very nice.

I think it is exactly this lifestyle choice that the Coalition are going to end. Does your friend think he will have to change his lifestyle in the near future??

"Personally I strongly believe in the Citizens' Income - a payment to everyone to live on regardless of their circumstances."

I've never seen this convincingly explained.....

As a quick guide each tax payer would have to pay enough tax to fund 1.5 people on the Citizens Income. The average salary is now meant to be around £25k, so how much would the Universal Credit be? £10k? That's not much and yet to fund it the average salary earner would have to pay £15k in tax, a vote winning 60% tax rate.

And that's just to cover benefits, which take up about 1/3 of Government Spending. So you need a 60% tax rate to support 1/3 of Government spending. What would you need to support the other 2/3?

Let's call that extra 0.5 person that every tax payer has to support that Government spending on benefits. So per tax payer the Government spends £5k on benefits, so make that £10k on other things.

So now that average earner on £25k has to pay £15k to fund the universal benefit and £10k to fund other Government spending, £25k in total. Welcome to the land of 100% tax rates.

Sure that earner will then get £10k back from the Government, but then they've lost a whopping 60% of their income and they're no better off than someone who just says "stuff this work lark, I'm living on the Universal Credit". Is that fair?

It just doesn't work.

And we're told a story that the system would be simpler, that it would save money in admin costs. But then you dig around and actually the proposals include extra money for pensioners, extra money for the disabled and ill and extra money for children.

So it's not simple at all, it's almost as complex as what we have now.

As said, it just doesn't work.