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.

Well I dont know Shirley. 9/10 for sheer Draconian vitriol I'd say.

Yes usual, totally free.

It's hardworkingtaxpayersmoney doncha know

MrsHoarder - yes - if i hadnt got a job myself, i would need do something different. & jobs i have done & learnt from, were unskilled. i now have a very good income. i dont see the unskilled ones as less valuable to me than than any other.

Don't forget that everybody pays tax, no matter how much they earn. It all goes in one pot, income tax and all;
Vat
Duty
Then there is business tax etc

So sorry OP, you are not solely responsible for paying the benefits bill.

Part of me thinks that maybe all this will be OK, because it's clear now that the poor will just keep getting hit over and over until...vive la revolution!

or until they realise that whatever the rights & wrongs, pulling yourself up is the way as you are the only person you can rely upon.

Yes, I'd agree with 3/10, Shirley, for exactly those reasons. Plus the casting around for new themes whenever the pot cooled.

Actually I am confused.

As a soon to be benefit claimant I understand that this will come from taxpayers.

Without benefits I and my son would not have a roof over our heads, be able to buy food, pay any electricity bills etc.

So we would then presumably grow sick and eventually die "thus decreasing the surplus population" - oops - actually that's Charles Dickens isn't it?

I am assuming that even the most hard faced would baulk at this.

So the point of this thread is ...er....what exactly?

If you don't want people to die through lack of shelter, heat, food then benefits have to exist . In this country we are relatively wealthy and as such we support those who need it.

Are people saying this support should stop?

I hope you pay for your medical treatment then tilly minto. If not don't worry because soon we will ALL have to rely on ourselves and ourselves only. Not such a nice philosophy when it's services you and yours use...

It is interesting that no one has answered OPs question - ie what gives people in this country the right to expect such a high standard of living when there are people staving?

It is also interesting that those arguing that the fact that our country has a huge deficit means that we cannot afford to sustain this artificially high standard for all are giving rational arguments; whilst those arguing that we can have free money for all have resorted to throwing insults.

So is anyone arguing for the entitlement-culture going to try to justify it or are you all going to continue to name call?

Does anyone have a reason why people in this country should feel entitled to computer access, choice in supermarkets etc, in addition to basic health care, food and accomodation, whilst people in other countries are so much worse off?

There are actually people starving in this country.

Whatever Tilly. Pulling yourself up is all well and good.

I refer to my earlier post. Even if every one of those 463,000 vacancies were filled tomorrow that STILL leaves over two million unemployed.

I hope you pay for your medical treatment then tilly minto. Yes & i am happy to for the NHS.
Are people saying this support (benefits) should stop? No, change
we will ALL have to rely on ourselves and ourselves only. mainly - yes. if we are well, & not carers, we are grown ups & thats how it goes.
Not such a nice philosophy when it's services you and yours use... not interested in personla debate.

I don't think we should have a standard of living that is unsustainable and uses more than our fair share of the world's resources.

But clearly the people using the most resources are not the poor! It is utterly absurd that the OP should be on such a high income when she works in education and so is directly or indirectly paid for by the state. It is absurd she is using us so much petrol, when energy is scarce, to do a two hour commute for a job that unlike farming, medicine, some engineering and child rearing isn't even essential work.

The wealthy need to have less money and consume fewer resources.

Yes, people who can should work, but that can be voluntary work and done for the benefit of the whole community. It is a bit odd to raise it on MN, when we do all have at least one essential job - raising children.

That was in answer to Soggy14.

doh - why does someone else have to create the job? they dont. i could be a cleaner, gardener, i could get qualified for childcare etc etc etc

Are people saying this support should stop no - I'm not - but I do think that it should be a lot more basic than it is. I also think that it is morally wrong for anyone not to take a job simply because it would be just as well off on benefits. I think that every individual should try to minimise their reliance on state hand outs.

I do not understand why anyone feels that they have more right to a handout than someone else, irrespective of country of origin.

DP does cardon accounting so know i consume much lessthan the average person in the UK. flying is the worst thing. it is cheap.

Seriously Tilly that's just mad. Are you seriously suggesting that those 2 million people set up their own cleaning/gardening businesses? I am jaw agape.

You do understand that not everyone in the country is capable of running their own business? Who is going to fund the start up? Who is going to employ these businesses?

i could be a cleaner - good point - why are cleaners so hard to find? Any fit person on benefits with no respionsibilities except children at school could easily work as a cleaner during school hours. They could charge the minimum wage and so claim less in benefits.

Why don't they?

recruitment agents are usually just glorified secretaries, lets face it

RTM, I think the point is that on this thread, the OP is asking us to compare our situation to people worldwide, not to the UK average.

She is arguing that people on benefits should have a reduction in their standard of living so that people in Africa have more. Her solution is to move people into hostels (despite the fact that hostel accommodation is the most expensive form of housing) and give them food stamps. I am simply arguing that wealthier people should be paid less and their surplus income could then be given to poorer people.

not that there is anything wrong with being a secretary obviously

Are you seriously suggesting that those 2 million people set up their own cleaning/gardening businesses?

no - it is part of hte solution

fund the start up it hardly costs that much to become a cleaner. Most places provide the equipment,

Are you suggesting that everyone fit and on benefits has tried advertising themselves locally as a cleaner? Or dog walker? etc etc.