Can work, wont work.

[Knock-on]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6187169.stm

Nearly 1,000,000 people in the UK claiming Job Seekers allowance.

These are not the people with phony disability allowance etc but people that are eligible to work.

Finally, is the Government getting tough on these wasters? I doubt it but live in hope.

If you have been looking for a job for 6 months, should your benefit be stopped?

In my little world, it would be stopped after 3!!!

I don't like paying for a NHS system that is fundamentally flawed but live with it. However, I do mind paying people that can't be bothered to get off their fat 4rses and get a bloody job. I am sick of it.

"I'll be worse off if I took a job."

Hard sh!t. Get a job and start working yourself up. I earned £2.50 per hour when I was 16 washing dishes and would earn up to £150 per week minus taxes just to survive, pay my rent and go out with my mates. One of my friends "earned" about £40 per week from benefit and lived at home. All his bills were paid, his food and other niceties while I paid rent and bills. I was lucky to end up with £20 per week after everything but never even contemplated going down the Dole route.

However, it's so easy. He didn't take a job until he was 25 and then still had a 2 bed house off the state all paid for and allowance as he doesn't declare.

Now we're approaching our Forties, he still has a 2 bed house and benefit while I have a house, a career, a life and prospects.

We are not helping these people by giving them the soft option but damaging them and the countries economic future. Time for a swift boot up the backside and a double shot of reality, me thinks.

[BeansBeansBeans]

Genuine cases aside, I find it disappointing that people falsely claim benefits. I have inherited a strong work ethic from my father, and I feel guilty even if I take a day off work through illness. I have experienced a 5 week period of serious inactivity this summer whilst absent with a back injury, and I must say, I strongly prefer being at work to sitting at home all day rotting my brain.

[Drew]

I agree that people who just lay around and don't want a job shouldn't be given benefits allowance.

It's just how exactly can you tell the difference between people that they are really trying to look and not just wasting around?

[Eki]

I remember someone once saying about some Finnish men choosing civil service instead of military service: "It doesn't bother me that some choose civil service instead of military service as long Finland still has REAL men". I think it's similar with those who choose not to work. As long as there aren't enough jobs even for those who want to work, it's not a problem if someone is voluntarily unemployed, at least he/she is then out of the way of those who REALLY want to work and won't waste time of potential employers.

[Knock-on]

I remember someone once saying about some Finnish men choosing civil service instead of military service: "It doesn't bother me that some choose civil service instead of military service as long Finland still has REAL men". I think it's similar with those who choose not to work. As long as there aren't enough jobs even for those who want to work, it's not a problem if someone is voluntarily unemployed, at least he/she is then out of the way of those who REALLY want to work and won't waste time of potential employers.

Why should I pay for people that cant be bothered to get off their fat butt and contribute?

Is not the money I earn, mine?

F*ck them, I say. If you don't want to work, then don't expect my money to support you.

We have a great influx of Polish immigrants that want these jobs. They can come into this country with limited skills, limited communication and no support framework. Yet, they start with nothing and build up a life. Fair play to them.

Yet, why should we support people that can't be bothered to contribute.

[Eki]

Why should I pay for people that cant be bothered to get off their fat butt and contribute?

Because you're humane and don't want people to starve or freeze to death or become criminals or prostitutes to support themselves?

Or maybe you'd prefer the Latin American style death squads that go around killing street children like rats or other pests?

[Dazz9908]

Hear in Australia, We have a jobs boom.
But it's only in the large cities or mining towns.
I've been lucky so far, I've always found work.
But My daughter is nearing working age.
and there are very limited jobs hear in rural areas,
should she have to move to large cities with no family and friends just to find work??!!!
No Me thinks I like her close so I can help her to start her life of right. Thats why we pay taxes to help out!!.

[tannat]

I once received unemployment(our equivalent of job seekers I suspect) when I was laid off from a job. I searched aggressively for months, yet nothing transpired, and I applied for jobs along the entire spectrum (fast food to positions comparable what I'd lost). It was in a small town in south Georgia (United States), and the jobs were few.

I'm certain some of the population referenced could be described as lazy and free loading, but I'm also certain a proportion are having a rough time as I was. To those looking-good fortune. To the lazy ones- may they find their place in Dante's Inferno...

[Knock-on]

Because you're humane and don't want people to starve or freeze to death or become criminals or prostitutes to support themselves?

Or maybe you'd prefer the Latin American style death squads that go around killing street children like rats or other pests?


They do not need to be a criminal or a prostitute to support themselves, there is a sure fire, legal and fulfilling way of surviving. GET A JOB!!

Are you really trying to suggest that the 3 options are.

1. Get a Job
2. Take the Dole
3. Become a Hooker or a Criminal

out of those 3 options, if you remove 2. then the work shy will automatically resort to 3.?

You do come out with some "interesting" opinions.

We have made it too easy in this country to settle for 2. I suggest that we stop making it so easy and force people back to work. Perhaps if more people were back to work than sitting on their bums getting bored, then the crime figures in this country may start to fall. Just a thought ;)

[courageous]

There are not enough jobs to go round though! We will never have 0 unemployment again - its good for business to be able to tell your workers that you can replace them (much easier to keep wages low).

I do agree that there are some people fiddling the system, but you have some people fiddling disability benefits & the solution is not to get rid of the entire system - go after the real benefit cheats, but you can't just draw a line in the sand with these things (the minute you commit to a black/white rule, people will find a way to stay within the wording of the law but not the spirit).

[Knock-on]

There are not enough jobs to go round though! We will never have 0 unemployment again - its good for business to be able to tell your workers that you can replace them (much easier to keep wages low).

I do agree that there are some people fiddling the system, but you have some people fiddling disability benefits & the solution is not to get rid of the entire system - go after the real benefit cheats, but you can't just draw a line in the sand with these things (the minute you commit to a black/white rule, people will find a way to stay within the wording of the law but not the spirit).

There are hundreds of thousands of jobs out there not being filled because British people don't want them. They are "beneath" them.

Yet, people from Poland etc can come into the country with next to nothing, with very little money or grasp of the English language and make a living out of these jobs.

So, why are we paying for the workshy to sit on their butt when it's obvious they could be working?

[LotusElise]

"Going and getting a job" is not as simple as you like to make out for some people. Many of those on long-term benefits have borderline (or stronger) mental health problems which make them unattractive to potential employers, who are increasingly picky about who they will take on. Add the menace that is employment agencies to the equation and the task is almost impossible for some.
I have been discussing this on another forum I visit and someone made the point that a large number of long-term claimants, especially in the north of England, are those who were made redundant by the demise of heavy industry under Thatcher. Their jobs simply disappeared and their skills were no longer required anywhere. Although many of them have made efforts to retrain, the majority are now in their 50s and beyond and are overlooked for new jobs. These people, in the main, are not "scroungers" and many had worked and paid taxes from teenage until their jobs disappeared.
The benefits system, in my opinion, does need an overhaul and more should be done to assist people in low-paid work. This will encourage more people to take jobs. At present, even those on very low wages are denied full housing and council tax benefit, even if they need it.

[slinkster]

I can't believe it's taken them til now to actually realise this has been a problem.. that or they simply haven't been bothered to get tough on it. If you CAN work, you SHOULD, tough ****. I applied for benefit when I graduated, I tried looking for work for months without an income as I didn't particularly want to claim. But then when I did, I was told I couldn't because my partner earnt too much. It pissed me off that I genuinely needed the system for a few months and would have continued to look for work, but others can play the system for years without being seen for the lazy gets they are! The system is meant to be set up to help people while they're looking for work... so if it's blatant that someone hasn't found a job after so many months... why isn't their benefit cut? I know it's not always that clear cut... but rewarding people for laziness is insane.

I admit it IS hard to find even menial work... I found that too... and I'm not happy where I am either, but everyone has to pay their way somehow.. it's a means to an end.

[Dave B]

Because you're humane and don't want people to starve or freeze to death or become criminals or prostitutes to support themselves?



"Going and getting a job" is not as simple as you like to make out for some people. Many of those on long-term benefits have borderline (or stronger) mental health problems which make them unattractive to potential employers, who are increasingly picky about who they will take on.

I think you're both missing the point somewhat.

Nobody is proposing to penalise those who are fhaving genuine difficulty finding work, rather the idea is to go after that small but significant minority who are perfectly capable of working but choose not to.

[LotusElise]

Who has the job of deciding who is lazy and who is genuinely struggling with a problem or discrimination?

Also, no-one wants to take lazy employers who can't be bothered to provide training and support to task. Where I live, companies offering jobs such as chambermaiding and car-cleaning get away with demanding experienced staff only! The agencies are worse and getting put forward for a decent job with them seems to be a bizarre popularity contest instead of an honest assessment of skills or potential.

[Eki]

They do not need to be a criminal or a prostitute to support themselves, there is a sure fire, legal and fulfilling way of surviving. GET A JOB!!

Are you really trying to suggest that the 3 options are.

1. Get a Job
2. Take the Dole
3. Become a Hooker or a Criminal

out of those 3 options, if you remove 2. then the work shy will automatically resort to 3.?

You do come out with some "interesting" opinions.

Your opinions are "interesting" too. For many, saying "get a job" is like "get up and walk" to a paralyzed man. It's easier said than done.

Just today, I received an email about a job I had applied for. It said "thanks, but no thanks" and that about 500 people had applied.

If you remove the options "Get a job" and "Take the Dole", option no 3 is pretty much what's left if you want to live.

[Dave B]

Your opinions are "interesting" too. For many, saying "get a job" is like "get up and walk" to a paralyzed man. It's easier said than done.

Just today, I received an email about a job I had applied for. It said "thanks, but no thanks" and that about 500 people had applied.

But you're making an effort, that's the point. And if you were offered help with finding work you'd probably accept it. As such, you'd have nothing to fear from this proposal.

It's the lazy feckless minority who refuse to work even though they're capable that this is aimed at.

[Eki]

It's the lazy feckless minority who refuse to work even though they're capable that this is aimed at.
How do you tell them apart from the rest of us? You can't draw a clear line between those who want to work and those who don't, unless those who don't want to work openly admit it. Right now there's already a rule that if you refuse work, you'll lose your benefits. But since there isn't much chance of anyone being offered a job without applying for it, that's not going to happen.

[Dave B]

Oh well have it your way then: let's just hand out money willy-nilly to anybody who moans a little bit. I truly cannot be bothered arguing with you any more. :wave:

[jim mcglinchey]

An unemployed but perfectly able bodied guy that I know had a nasty shock recently. He nearly crapped himself when the Dole office offered a place on a dry-lining course being organised in a joint initiative by local big building firms who are desperate for dry-liners. He was guaranteed work on completion, but a full time job is not what he wants from life. He s a bit of a waste of skin actually.

[Dazz9908]

An unemployed but perfectly able bodied guy that I know had a nasty shock recently. He nearly crapped himself when the Dole office offered a place on a dry-lining course being organised in a joint initiative by local big building firms who are desperate for dry-liners. He was guaranteed work on completion, but a full time job is not what he wants from life. He s a bit of a waste of skin actually.
sure sounds like it,
Only others who are trying to help themselves.
sounds like he needs a big steel cap up his backside.

[slinkster]

How do you tell them apart from the rest of us? You can't draw a clear line between those who want to work and those who don't, unless those who don't want to work openly admit it. Right now there's already a rule that if you refuse work, you'll lose your benefits. But since there isn't much chance of anyone being offered a job without applying for it, that's not going to happen.


Here, jobseekers allowance means you have to attend weekly (i think) interviews to prove that you've been activly seeking work. When you're continually being offered jobs that you are capable of doing and you turn them down or don't attend interviews then I think that says alot. People who are actuvely looking for work, or as someone mentioned aren't capable (mental health sufferers I doubt would be on jobseekers, or they shouldn't be, they should be allowed disability benefit, even temporarily in my opinion)... aren't the issue here... it's those who have been living quite happily off the state for ages without obvious attempts at finding work. It's NOT easy to find a job no... hence the point of jobseekers allowance. If you can prove your looking... no problem. Otherwise, prepare to have your benefits cut.

[Dave B]

^ That's a much better answer than mine, Eki, and I apologise. :)

[LotusElise]

Throwing another spin on this, I think they should be doing more to weed out those claiming disability benefits fraudulently. That isn't "playing the system", it's theft. It sounds like we all know of someone who is doing this and I'll wager that these people are costing more than the few who live on jobseeker's alone.

[Hazell B]

How do you tell them apart from the rest of us? You can't draw a clear line between those who want to work and those who don't, unless those who don't want to work openly admit it.

Several years ago, a friend, Edward, lost his job with an international transport company. He was the UK manager, in his 50's and used to working all his life.

He sent off hundreds of job applications and visited the local job centre most days, such was his eagerness to work. The job seeker club he went to paid for stamps and so on to help him, and even made an effort in other ways when he got really down about being turned down for work so much.

In contrast, some of the locals here have never visited the job centres, never worked and have bigger houses than poor old Edward. They have more children than him, better TVs and cars. They've learned our system and are playing it to perfection by claiming unemployment for so many months, then sickness for a few weeks (straining their backs playing pool in the pub, mainly) then returning to unemployment.

It's blindingly obvious who's taking advantage here, and the employment officials can generally spot them a mile off. Taking just some of them out of the system can do nothing but improve the life of workers who struggle to understand how such injustice can be allowed.

However, I'm still willing to bet it won't ever happen. They'll have some publicity out of this, but the politicians won't put together anything tough enough to be financially worth it. Their idea is good, yet I expect it will turn out to cost more to implement than it brings in :mark: