Confused re attitude to benefits and work experience

[catontheroof]

Your thoughts please - why has it become so politically incorrect to suggest that fit adults in this country should be expected to work for a living?

I believe that we need a safety net but cannot understand why people should not have to take jobs that they are qualified for if those jobs exist. I also cannot understand why people "deserve" tax credits etc.

If large chunks of our population do not work then our GDP is low. The only way that we can afford to have so many on benefits with a relatively high standard of living is by importing goods from other countries where the workers live and work in atrocious conditions.

Why do we think that it is right and proper that people in this country sit around being paid not to work whilst tens of thousands all over the world work in sweat shops to provide them with a lifestyle?

If our fit population all worked then we'd increase GDP and have money to help people in other countries where there is real poverty.

caton who do you propose has money to pay for a cleaner that that many could make a living that way. The average earnings in this town is well below the national average.

I don't think many of you have any idea. My care package has been reduced from 12 hours, which helped me work full time, to 3 hours p/w on ridiculous time whereby i cannot do drop off or pick up. I had to give up my job full time , and i paid more in tax and council tax than i got back from the council for enabling my severely disabled child to do stuff whilst i was at work. Plus I paid for the other children s childcare.

If I end up dead, which i might do with such little care, as i still have to work but around my family, it will cost the taxpayer millions. My dd's care would cost in excess of 2k p/w PLUS about 100k p/y in school fees. I think you are all a bit thick or mad or just plain ignorant tbh. Yes people care for their loved ones, but they still need to work themselves, unless you believe everything the daily mail tells you

Like Agincourt I am a carer - we work bloody hard for our £53 a week!

It depends what it is consumption of - RTM. Most people would be happy to live in warmer houses of a higher standard that reduced their energy consumption. Many parents would be happy to reduce their transport costs and consumption of fuel if more jobs were local or could be done from home.

I am drifting a bit from the point of this thread.

no, No, No Cat.
Your'e one of the lucky/fortunate ones.
But life can be shit, and you maybe one day one of the unfortunate ones.
It just takes a slight change in fate/life and you'll be in the same position I was in.
Remember Karma can kick you in the arse sometimes

clothes - but a green/global thread would be interesting....

carers are underpaid

and in a bizzarre turn of events, I used to work in the fashion industry

My friend works for a food bank which gives out free food and she does see some people in a sorry state. some people have lost their jobs etc and this is in an affluent area. they can't run their car as petrol has become so expensive, they look so miserable.

I do think though that the last government did a silly things by not limiting the amount of people who could come and work in the UK from the EU which France and germany did. This has meant we have some very competent, hard working people arrive but they are making it harder for the people already here to have opportunities and get a job. this obviously puts a strain on housing as well and makes it more scarce/expensive.

Housing used to be more reasonable in the 80's/90's and more people could afford to buy a property or find social housing if not.

also I think some people on benefits do play the system and work on the black economy or pretend they are single when they have a partner in residence hence not being badly off. I am not suggesting anyone on this board does this

The government apparently doesn't agree with you, Tilly, about all work being beneficial.

It's just closed 36 factories which exist to give disabled people very meaningful work.

Supposedly some of the money will instead be given to other employers for adjustments when they employ disabled people, but in practice the disabled person has to get the job in the first place. In the current climate I'd be astonished if 20% get work.

I have an idea, whenever anyone is made redundant they should be made to walk the street with a sandwich board announcing the fact. Proper, decent human beings can then be invited to pelt them with rubbish. That will teach them for being so selfish.

I take you back to relative poverty though Cat and the fact that people in THIS country have poorer otcomes in terms of health than those who are better off.

I think we have a basic standard of living in this country which those starving in the Third World could only ever dream of but stopping the benefits (or making them more basic) is not going to improve the health of anyone starving somewhere else in the world. All it will do is increase the numbers of people with poor health outcomes in the UK (have you guessed my training is in public health yet )?

I am about to become reliant on benefits for the first time eve to be frank I am panicking. Yes my rent and council tax will be paid but I still need to eat, heat the home, use electricity for cooking, get my son to school which requires petrol (using public transport is not an option due to my son's autism). All this requires money, and I am more grateful than I can say that I live in the UK where people are supported. Thankfully I do not anticipate being out of work for long.

If it's relevant then I am worse off financially out of work than in work - have gone through the figures with a benefits advisor - there is a strange comfort in that.

I think we have become used to certain things as a society such as phones, internet access etc, not only this but society as a whole expects people to have those things - all my son's homework is now online at a time when libraries are cutting back. Do I say "okay no homework", ditch the internet and wait for the library to open or do I accept that this is something I need to find the money for?

Given that my son can struggle in public places where there are lots of people around then obviously my answer is "I need to find the money" and give thanks for DLA.

Anyway, I could just ramble on but DS is off and active so am going to get hoim dorted.

Have just caught up on this thread again and it really does defy logic.

Cat, you bang on about relative poverty but why do you think this country's poor should suffer to redress this. You, in your wisdom, have decided that you are happy with the level of tax you pay but would like that tax to be spent on the third world who feel less entitled. Why should they be entitled to our tax payers money (over and above the International Aid that they already receive).

We have, despite government's best efforts, one of the greatest health services in the world. Very few people die of curable diseases and receive amazing emergency treatment. And yet you feel that, for hard working people such as yourself, you are entitled to better and do pay your own insurance premiums for an upgrade. Not that it will help you if you get cancer, or have a road accident, or need a transplant. No that will be paid for by the tax payer, and far more than you've ever paid through your hard work.

But people do die in third world countries of preventable diseases. You make excuses that one person can't do much and it's only by taking benefits from the poor than can make a difference. Do you have any idea how many malaria vaccines your private healthcare premiums could pay for. Do you have any idea how many individual lives you could have saved if you didn't feel entitled to your own room and a tv on hospital?

For what it's worth, I don't want my tax revenue spent on wars in the Middle East and the chuffing Olympics so why don't you pay for that bit, and I'll cover the kids' free school meals.

And Tilly, your job vacancy example is irrelevant. Because you can't find anyone qualified to fill it so, for the purposes of this argument, it doesn't exist.

If a man or woman in a hostel on food stamps came to your door and begged them for the job, would you give it to them? No. How is removing their benefits going to make them qualified? It's not. The only thing that makes people qualified is education and training, which I would argue we fail miserably at. So what do we do? We take away education grants and cut training funding. Yes, because that will help.

Take away kids Internet so they can't do their homework. Close libraries so kids don't have anywhere else to go to access a computer or books. Make them cold and hungry so they'll be better able to learn. Make them move every couple of weeks depending on where there's a hostel place.

I'm not denying that this country is fucked but for very different ones than the ones you cite.

The VAST MAJORITY of people "on benefits" are WORKING. Many of them are WORKING FULL TIME.
In actual fact, I beleive that it suits government just fine to have a system where wages have frozen for most people to the degree that they must rely on tax credits to top their income up to a level where they can afford the basics of food, shelter, heating, travel to work and school clothes.

50 years ago a family could live on their wages. They can't now. And it's not because they want luxuries they don't need.
It suits those in charge because when times are hard, it is much easier to get those members of the electorate who think along the lines of OP to support cutting tax credits than it would be to get them to support lowering wages for the poor.
This way, the working poor are totally at the mercy of the whims of the people handing out the top ups.

And as for handouts-don't make me laugh! The ones getting the biggest handouts are the banks!

Also, when peoples incomes are reduced to the point where they are literally only able to eat, and sit wrapped in sleeping bags for fear of putting the heat on, how is this going to help an already strangled economy?
People on low wages and tax credits spend money too.

Currently, as a working person with 2 part time jobs and looking for more work, my son and I have the princely sum of £70 a week for food, clothes and travel.
You'll forgive me if I don't dance a fucking jig in thanks to thehardworkingtaxpayer.
Especially as I am one of them.

Serial i heard that on the news. i was surprised that disabilty groups were not united in condemning it.

LadyB no, No, No Cat. Your'e one of the lucky/fortunate ones.... Yes and no. i understand that inconceivable things happen (e.g. a child dying painfully) but there is always an assumption that if you are doing well you have led a charmed life. in my family:

1. my uncle died in childhood
2. my dad was paralysed then died when he did not want to be alive so refused medical treatment
3. my partner has some deformed bones which means he would definitely have died as he grew & he rib cage grew inwards & crushed his heart & lungs. he is ok now.

the thing is there isnt any money to be made from teaching the average person, who is well & not a carer, to be independant. instead we are told buy this {stupid thing we dont need wont make us happy}. we are encouraged to buy things on credit making personal finances less robust when the inevitable hard times come.

shotinfoot i am interviewing - at the moment. how is someone creating jobs not relevant to a discussion about employment? you just dont like what i have to say!

This winter DS and I have skimped on the heating because I dread a big bill.....and that's while I was IN work

DP & i keep the heating down because of global warming. i dont think it is a hardship if you are well & not elderly as you can wear more clothes (i appreciate i dont know your circumstances).

i guess we see it as a positive thing to do. you see it as a negative.

I'm not saying that you're not relevant Tilly, on the contrary. I'm merely saying that the skills shortage you see is not caused by people refusing to be on benefits. You are being failed by an economy which is not training people in the skills where there are jobs, just as those who can't find work have been failed. But making those people live in hostels is not the answer.

It actually proves the point that the people on benefits cannot simply just rick up a secure a vacant job.

Sorry, that should have read 'people on benefits refusing to work'

I've only read the first few posts and already read that the OP considers it is not "morally defensible" for a family to choose to have one parent look after the children. How dare you OP? Frankly I don't give a flying fig - they are our children and it is our decision, no one else's. If others want to run around like headless chickens working their arses off to pay for childcare and hardly ever see their children that's their lookout. If they are doing it to afford a bigger house that is their decision. We choose to have a small house and a single car for the sake of a better home life. If your priorities lie elsewhere then don't bleat that you're subsidising one of us to be at home. Utter utter crap.

And no we are not claiming tax credits to allow this to happen, before you ask. But if we were, so what? My taxes are paying for the childcare of many two earner families. It's swings and roundabouts and a personal choice.

shotin - i partly agree with you about where we are but how did we get here - what did we do when the times were good?

1. many new jobs went to migrants (no problem with migrants per se, part of my family is indian) but if some people are travelling to another country to get work, and others wont move within their home country, the OP's initial point about people not working (not the hostels) becomes relevant.

1. students taking degrees in subjects not relevant to the jobs that needed filling. again meaning many high paid jobs going to migrants. why did we think we could run up a deficit & train people in e.g. photography degrees?

1. we undervalued education. parents and children

IMO we have lost the plot about work, education & excellence. i do want people with serious health problems to be cared for & their carers valued but the rest of us need to plan our life and finances for robust indenpendence.

'By definition anyone online can afford to be online - that seems like a pretty high standard of living to me compared to that experienced by millions of people worldwide.'

Bollocks.

I am online. I can't afford it. my UNCLE pays for it so that my 14yo DD can submit her homewor online. I STILL couldn't afford it even though it was affecting my DD's education.

Am I ashamed of claiming benefits? NO. I didn't ASK to be diagnosed with epilepsy and be medically retired from my very well-paid career, when I was a HRT tax payer, on the basis that due to my epilepsy, I am never allowed on a building site again, and therefore was unable to complete 90% of my job.

I didn't ask to be made redundant from my low-paid retail job.

I can't be arsed to rehash my arguments against Work-for-welfare schemes yet again, read some of the threads on it in the Politics section and the In the News section for a full debrief on why people think it's wrong.

I'll sum it up: The reason why I won't do work-for welfare is because why should someone ELSE raise THEIR standard of living off the back of MY hard work when I have NO standard of living at all? Subsistance is no way of life, and YES it is sad that that is how it is in other countries, but have you never heard of the saying 'Charity begins at home'?

NFW am I working ft and sending myself into an early grave for some fucking FOOD coupons and a house - that is basically the definition of indentured slavery. See here

And I'm not about to devalue my labour to work for just £1.92/hr (what you 'earn' from JSA when you are on a work-for-welfare scheme) when the NMW is £6.08/hr. £1.92 pays for just 19 minutes of work from me. And that's that. NMW is £6.08/hr.

A FULL-TIME employee on NMW of £6.08/hr earns just £11,856pa BEFORE tax. YOU try covering food, clothing, travel to work, rent, council tax, gas, electric, food and water out of that. It's NOT going to happen.

Tax Credits are a BUSINESS SUBSIDY that allows employers to pay their employees LESS than a LIVING WAGE FOR THE UK (which WILL be different to what a living wage is in any other country, it's individual to each country).

It does NOT mean that the person in work is feckless, or workshy - it means their employers refuse to pay them ENOUGH TO COVER THE BASIC COSTS OF LIVING IN THE UK.

Tilly, I agree with you whole heartedly. That is exactly where our economy has gone wrong and I think it is criminal that it has been allowed to happen.

But it was government policy that caused those things, not the laziness or stupidity of the people at the bottom. And yet they are the ones that are being blamed for it.

We allowed the under 25s in this country to run up £30k+ debts of real money (!) when everybody knew that there was no demand for the skills that they were learning (if you can call some of them skills) and now we label them as uneducated and useless.

Blimey Tilly, there IS a difference between CHOOSING to keep the heating down for the sake of global warming and being scared of turning it on in case you get a big bill.

And I do see that as a negative but next time me and DS are freezing our bits off I'll take a leaf out of your book remember I am saving the planet

We are end terrace and without heating it is bloody bitter in the winter.

cod- yeah keep on seeing it as a bad thing. that will really help you out.