Should UK adopt a more US approach to benefits?

[Niceguy2]

BBC Article

Has the time come to compel people to work for their benefits? Should single parents also be forced to work or should they be exempt?

I think most people realise we cannot continue to support the current system but what system should replace it?

If there are jobs that people on benefits can be 'fOrced' to do, why can they not then receive the going rate for that work, which would doubtless be worth far more than what they received through benefits

also if employers know they can 'hire' people whose wages they do not need to pay, how wil this affect waged employees who do the same work

hav you really thought this through op?

Hm. I wouldn't think that the US system is that great anyway. It is brilliant, obviously, to try and get people back into work, but you have to look at the underlying reasons as to why people aren't working:

• are there any jobs to go to?
• is there a skills mismatch?

and the US isn't a shining light on this issue at the moment. I went to a talk by an economist on Friday, who said that in the US at present:

• 14% of the unemployed, are long term unemployed (that is, out of work for more than 6 months) and this rate has been stable for nearly a year now
• 20% of Americans can't read or write properly and 30% don't have basic skills in Mathematics - effectively 30% of Americans have a third world level of education.

Previously, there was an oversupply of unskilled jobs, which meant that people could have jobs, but these have all gone. And it is highly unlikely that they're going to be replaced anytime soon.

I have cousins in the states and it is incredibly tough should anything go wrong (particularly healthwise). The US system provides way too little. It's not an example to be followed

This has been done before.....

So gov want voluntary work done fir the benefits? How can you be available to look for proper job/do interviews etc

And where IS the childcare for lone parents???

what about childcare. Unless dh (unemployed) is in work we can't afford childcare - is the govt going to give it to us for free?

It's easy enough to say6 'get a job' but with job losses being made everywhere and higher and higher numbers of unemployed where exactly are these jobs coming from?

Basically ideas like this are pushed by those who don't give a fuck about the problems involved (lack of childcare, lack of available jobs etc) and just think all those on benefits are lazy.

"And the largest number of dependents, 2.6 million, claim to be disabled and are living on incapacity benefit.

Steps have been taken to move all of these groups, as well as lone parents, toward employment, yet dependency on benefits remains high.

In contrast, the US welfare reforms of the 1990s succeeded in cutting the number of people claiming welfare by over two-thirds, and in the state of Wisconsin we reduced the number by 80%.

It was tough love - if people did not work, they lost their benefits. "

2.6 million claim to be disabled - nice wway of implying they're all lazy fuckers. I'd rather live ina country where the vunerable such as the disabled were taken care of. We don't exactly give them the life of riley as it is.

"if people did not work they lost their benefits" - what about there being no jobs wtf are you meant to do. Leaving families to starve, homeless etc is not something I want to be part of.

noooooooooooooooooooooooooo

we should not be adopting more US approaches to just about anything

...doesn't usually stop us, though

I laugh at the notion that we have anything to learn from the American welfare system.

Never mind the COST of childcare..... There just isn't ANY childcare

And now we are warned we cannot leave older siblings to look after younger ones!! And 12 weeks if school hols to accommodate as well???

Single parents are already obliged to work.

I seem to recall that the CSA was originally inspired by the American system for collecting child support.

Enough said.

Yes, let's increase the number of people living in poverty who can't afford to feed and clothe their children, that's definitely the way to go

Where are these mythical jobs that allow single mothers to work and pay for childcare? They are few and far between

Great - another benefits thread on MN. Who'd have thought it?

i would volunteer to go into poarliament and work voluntarily!!!

what gets me is that benefits are seen by (some) politicians as a life of luxury yet they couldn't possible live on that amount themselves (see much higher wage plus expenses being seen as necessary to survive ).

What also gets to me is that the economy problems are seen by some as caused by the poor - that element in society which has traditionally held so much power as opposed to the rich, traditionally those who hold power and have the power to influence others e.g. the government.

If there are jobs that need doing, then people should get the going rate for them, not benefits. They should LOSE benefits if they turn proper jobs down repeatedly.

Don't know how you get round the cost of childcare though - like any other job the people doing this as a profession should be paid a proper wage.

This appears To be another thread aimed at bad mouthing those who claim benefits. As has been said in a thousand other threads people are all getting benefits for various reasons. Most legit some not. America has it's own problems. Whole topic getting really boring.

I completely agree with The Armadillo.

I completely agree wiyh the Armadillo too.

What is needed is affordable wrap around childcare for single parents.

Disabled people don't need a punitive welfare system they need enlightened employers. That and a welfare system that differentiates between who really can and can't work, not the wicked system enforced by ATOS.

"If there are jobs that need doing, then people should get the going rate for them, not benefits. They should LOSE benefits if they turn proper jobs down repeatedly"

I agree with that.

I think there is nothing wrong with expecting people to contribute in return for the financial assistance they are given if they are able to work but unable to find a job, iyswim.

I tell you one thing about the american system that I DO like - child support! Try walking away from your financial obligations and see what happens to you! I'd love to see that really followed through in this country.

'I tell you one thing about the american system that I DO like - child support!'

In many states, it's pay up or go to jail.

One thing that's become more prevalent is that people should pay for their children first before the state.

And if that means you can't afford more children with your new partner, tough.

If the Government can find this "work" for people that are claiming benefits, then work must therefore exist.

If there is work to be done then it is a right that people have an expectation to be paid.

The cuts and the big society appear to be a cover for driving down labour costs to big business.

Thousands more hard working responsible people are likley to join the ranks of the unemployed very soon. Fancy bieng offered you old job back for less than half your present wage!

?Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.?

Human rights legislation Article 23.1

So if The condems go ahead a make these huge cuts that are seeing thousands made redundant they are breaking the law, if they force these redundant people to accept work with no provission of favourable conditions, they break the law again.

Do the condems care about the Human rights charter though?

If they can opt out on voting, they can opt out where they like can't they.

unemployment figures for the 3 months up to nov 2010 in the uk were around 2.5 million national statistics online

This doesn't include those (like dh) whose contributions based JSA has run out and so doesn't show in the statistics, or for example those single mothers on income support who the condems are desperate to get back into work, or those claiming disability benefits (another 2.6 million), or those (like a friend of mine) who have been a SAHM for years but are now looking for work.

Yet apparently there are over 2.5million jobs out there available for all these people to have despite both public and private sector making huge job cuts. Of course all provided by employers who don't mind disabled people who have a history of a lot of time off sick, or single mothers who need time off for sick children or during the holidays.

There is of course plenty of childcare available, cheap of course, especially during the holidays. INcluding of course for senior school children (11years +) who are too young to stay at home alone all day but to old for most traditional childcare, also for children with sn so their parents can work.

And what about transport? Especially in rural areas where the condems are cutting bus services and who haven't had trains for decades but not to worry everyone can afford a car, right, when they're not working. And of course your minimum wage job pays plenty enough to cover transportation costs (bus fare to town where most the jobs are £5 per day here - £25 a week and thats only a few miles, we're not particularly rural (outskirts of town)).

BUt of course its easy as long as you pretend all these things don't exist for the majority of people.

Not to worry, Armadillo, someone will soon be along to tell you that everyone should just move to the city-state of London, where the work is.

If they can't afford to live there, then they should live outside it and commute in.

That's the solution to all these problems.

"The cuts and the big society appear to be a cover for driving down labour costs to big business"

why pay minimum wage when you can get away with £65 per week JSA instead, which of course the govt will pay out of the taxes of those not rich enough to avoid them.

But any country where the majority of wages aren't enough to live on without govt help (tax credits etc) something is going wrong.

What gets me is that the government think its perfectly accceptable for the rich to avoid paying taxes and provide methods to do so legitimately, but yet its those who happen to be disabled through no fault of their own or those who have hit bad circumstances again usually throguh no fault of their own that are ripping off the state.

QueenBathsheba I think that's a very biased interpretation of the legislation.

Based on that then the government are failing their duties of protection every time anyone gets made redundant.

You could equally argue the government has no requirement to give people jobseekers but thats not a scenario I'd like to see either.