What will it take for the Government to enact welfare reform?

[Schlossadler]

What has to break, before the Government is finally willing to enact welfare reform?

capitalism is not a system that provides full time employment for the entire population - it never has done and likely never will do

To the contrary, capitalism relies on the existence of a proportion of unemployed work-capable adults to cope with fluctuating demands for workers. Marx called it the "industrial reserve army". Think about it: all those Christmas temp jobs to fill for just eight weeks, then throw the workers back onto the dole. The existence of unemployed people also applies a downward pressure on wages and conditions by making it easy to replace workers who don't accept a poor deal.

In other words, under capitalism, unemployment is a feature, not a bug.

A benefit system that doesn't provide for these people indefinitely is tantamount to murder.

Its also lower then a lot of other European countries the media just like to make out its such a big problem as they know their posts will get a lot of interactions which gives them more money

Reads like an earnest year 7 debating student

So you want UC claimant's to get £500 a week (£2k a month) is that including their housing benefit and council tax benefit? Taking them to be a higher earner than someone on National minimum wage.
I personally feel no monies should be given on benefits. It should be a voucher system, one for gas and electric, one for water, and one for food, a small clothing voucher and monthly bus pass should also be included to allow for claimant's travel to interviews etc. I firmly believe many people can't budget properly, put 'luxery items' before essentials and that's why there is a reliance on food banks. Take away cash so non essesiantials can't be purchased and provided vouchers for essentials only. If they want smart phones, nail dones, branded clothing then they go out and get a job

How original - an ad hominem attack, whilst being shit out of answers.

Noted.

Yep, yours works also.

Equally, the tax payer retains the right to ‘strike’.

By means of retirement, migration, cutting hours, mitigating liabilities (think Rayner, except the legal method) - in short, doing everything they can to reduce the government’s tax revenue.

Whether you would choose it or not, welfare reform is going to happen - but I think you already know this.

You’ll be late for school if you get caught up in posting on this thread

Yes, and I and many others are in the exact same situation as you. But, as a country we have to make cuts, we cannot afford to simply keep borrowing. What do you suggest?
And for those who mentioned addiction, I agree, it’s a massive issue. But dealing with that addiction doesn’t go far enough, we need to address the root cause of why people turn to substance abuse in the first place.

But getting people working really isn’t as simple as cutting benefits - there is a massive body of evidence that suggests cutting benefits does not automatically get more people back into long term work, and can exacerbate poverty and poor health - actually costing the tax payer more money.

People can’t do jobs that aren’t there just because you cut their benefits, and they can’t do jobs they’re not physically capable of or not trained for just because you cut their benefits.

We need to be much more long term and pragmatic: more job creation, better vocational training, better mental health support, better preventative health care etc etc.

All of it is a lot more complicated than just shouting, “cuts benefits”.

If people want more jobs then look at what taxes are doing to SMEs. It’s hammering jobs especially for young people.

Governments are constantly enacting welfare reform.

The benefits system is one of the most constantly "reformed" parts of the state.
Every government seems to feel duty bound to ficker about with it.

Thats one reason why social security legislation is so complex. And Welfare Rights Officers (such as myself) can't take a career break without coming back and finding everything changed.

Most recently we've seen cuts to the amounts paid to people who have "Limited Capability for Work Related Activity" under Universal Credit.

But honestly....there's always something.
Check out the "News" section of the RightsNet website for an idea of how quickly and constantly the benefits system changes.

Personally I wish governments would leave the benefits system alone and let everyone get used to one set of rules. It can't be efficient to keep chopping and changing.

Presumably you skipped education altogether…

Shouldn’t you be getting ready to go to work, or….

Not today! Day off. Lovely long dog walk.

I will leave you to it. Setting the worlds to right. After morning registration and then food tech.

Ah, on a ‘fixed income’, then - that explains it.

Enjoy the inflation ride - it’s about to get wild.

A debt crisis so severe the IMF intervenes and forces the issue.

I completely agree in that I don’t think you can talk about welfare cuts without looking at the economy and job creation too.

There’s a bigger picture.

Alas, and despite the repeated Labour rhetoric - you cannot tax your way to growth.

Perhaps but 🤷‍♀️ thankfully I have a very thick safety net.

Anyway I’ll leave you to get on. Hope all goes well with the friendship issues

But not every unemployed person will need benefits?

Some may choose not to work. Some (hopefully most?) will be in families and supported by their families not benefits (= other tax payers). Some might even put away savings whilst employed to cover periods of unemployment or take out insurances.

Christmas temp jobs are a blessing for students btw

Why is it the state (= other peoples) responsibility to put in place better preventative health care? The fundamental of how to avoid most lifestyle caused health issues are basic: eat healthily, move more. Everyone should understand and have a responsibility to their own body to do that. If they choose not to, then others shouldn’t be forced to pickup the bill.

Similarly for mental health. What happened to parents teaching their kids good mental health and helping them become resilient individuals (the stiff upper lip some might say). Why is it not that a change in weather and half the population are wobbling? Noting: my previous solution goes 80% to addressing this issue also

We shouldn’t need the state to provide basic functions for society. That where the cost comes from.

It won’t work. If there was a chance it would work, one of the successive governments shouting about getting tough on benefits would have made it work.

Even if you take all morality out of it, the economic fact is, on their own, punitive cuts just cost the tax payer more in the long run: exacerbating people’s health and mental health needs adds more cost to the NHS; more people turning to crime adds costs to the prison and probation services; and more kids in poverty adds more cost in education.

Maybe the NHS shouldn’t have to pickup the tab for preventable illnesses….? Might it be that expecting individuals to take some self responsibility could be a good starting point.

Look forward to continuing the debate when you are back.

Your view on removal of the two-child benefit cap, please.