Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
cashinmattress

Jobless Who Refuse Work To Lose Benefits For Three Years

Recommended Posts

Link

Unemployed claimants will be barred from claiming benefits for three years if they turn down work.

Ministers will today announce dramatic reforms to the welfare state in an attempt to provide greater incentives for work and sanctions for those unwilling to do so. Central to the plan, being announced by the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, is the proposed "universal credit", which would amalgamate dozens of existing benefits into one single payment.

Unemployed people who turn down offers of work, or refuse to apply for appropriate jobs, will be stripped of their benefits for up to three years. The allowance will be removed for three months on a first offence, six months the second time and three years on the third breach of the new rules.

David Cameron said the changes would create "clear responsibilities and clear incentives for those on benefit to take steps towards getting back to work wherever it's feasible for them to do so".

Duncan Smith told BBC Breakfast: "We right now have a system that traps people, because it is complex, there are so many benefits withdrawn at different rates. People going back to work don't fully understand whether they are better off or worse, it is almost impossible to make that calculation.

"By simplifying and having one withdrawal rate we will actually make sure people will retain more of what they earn as they go back to work, thus making work pay more than being on benefits. That's the critical bit.

"We will help people look for work and get them work ready, that will go alongside it. Then, if having done all of that people have a job offer, they should take that work. That's a condition most taxpayers would accept."

Sounds good on paper, but what will be the cost of policing the state welfare system?

I'd rather pay for somebody to watch over the hoard at the end of the day versus other options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Link

Sounds good on paper, but what will be the cost of policing the state welfare system?

I'd rather pay for somebody to watch over the hoard at the end of the day versus other options.

I'll have to claim the hardship payment innit, it might be a loan they intend to take back with higher taxation once I'm working in the legitimate ekonomy, but that don't bother me cos of cash in hand.

How do they expect me to work PAYE when I'm already on t'fiddle.

I'm taking the mickey, but, the above is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Link

Sounds good on paper, but what will be the cost of policing the state welfare system?

I'd rather pay for somebody to watch over the hoard at the end of the day versus other options.

Far too late for two I know of, who hardly ever worked since leaving school, simply chose not to and nobody ever made them, both now mid-late 30s, both with kids.

And both now finally realizing too late that if things are ever going to get better, it's down to them - they're not going to win the lottery, nobody's going to come knocking on the door with a nice little job paying 3 x min wage. (Just one former excuse was, 'I'm not working for minimum wage.' Another was, 'I'm not participating in the capitalist system.')

But both also realizing too late that they have no experience of anything useful, no track record, no CV, and what is more, no confidence - and no bugger is going to want to employ them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What some don't seem to grasp is that people who want to not work and live a life on benefits will find a way to do so, whatever changes to rules you make -- unless you make changes that actually punish legit claimants too.

This isn't anything new, it's not a Labour or Tory policy -- remember, the Tories started the big shift to being "on the sick." If there are benefits, there are benefit fiddles and they will never be stopped. As much as ardent right-wingers would like benefits abolished, that isn;t going to happen, we all know that. It's a vote loser, because too many people need them now (legitimately)

How are they going to check whether someone has applied for a job or not? Ring the employer? Employer says no, claimant says yes, but there's no proof. "Application got lost in the post" etc. And they wont ring every single employer for every supposedly applied for job because they can't, they don't have the man power or the time -- too busy signing people on every 4 minutes or whatever it is.

There's an option to abolish benefits, but this comes at a time when people need them the most (when more people are losing their jobs). Not politically viable.

So it's gonna be the same old -- a few tweaks to a system that the "long-term unemployed" can get around if they so wish and the usual bleating from both ends of the political spectrum.

Here's a fact for you Mr Duncan Smith...many people aren't "trapped" they just know that the hum-drum jobs that they could do are shit, so they choose another option that is open to them (and I don't blame them). You can't close the option without hurting legit claimants, this number has risen sharply because of recession. You hurt all those people (legit ones) you create civil unrest and get voted out. So you'll cut around the edges, those "trapped" will choose to stay there, those looking for work will continue to look and claim in the meantime.

It's such a non-issue: if you want to change the benefits system, you need to change our economic system as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am mistaken but isn't JSA only £62 a week? Even if there is 2 million peope on this, the total cost of those payments would be £6 billion a year.

Which is just under 1% of the national budget which is £700 billion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What some don't seem to grasp is that people who want to not work and live a life on benefits will find a way to do so, whatever changes to rules you make -- unless you make changes that actually punish legit claimants too.

This isn't anything new, it's not a Labour or Tory policy -- remember, the Tories started the big shift to being "on the sick." If there are benefits, there are benefit fiddles and they will never be stopped. As much as ardent right-wingers would like benefits abolished, that isn;t going to happen, we all know that. It's a vote loser, because too many people need them now (legitimately)

How are they going to check whether someone has applied for a job or not? Ring the employer? Employer says no, claimant says yes, but there's no proof. "Application got lost in the post" etc. And they wont ring every single employer for every supposedly applied for job because they can't, they don't have the man power or the time -- too busy signing people on every 4 minutes or whatever it is.

There's an option to abolish benefits, but this comes at a time when people need them the most (when more people are losing their jobs). Not politically viable.

So it's gonna be the same old -- a few tweaks to a system that the "long-term unemployed" can get around if they so wish and the usual bleating from both ends of the political spectrum.

Here's a fact for you Mr Duncan Smith...many people aren't "trapped" they just know that the hum-drum jobs that they could do are shit, so they choose another option that is open to them (and I don't blame them). You can't close the option without hurting legit claimants, this number has risen sharply because of recession. You hurt all those people (legit ones) you create civil unrest and get voted out. So you'll cut around the edges, those "trapped" will choose to stay there, those looking for work will continue to look and claim in the meantime.

It's such a non-issue: if you want to change the benefits system, you need to change our economic system as a whole.

I agree completely. I believe if we paid some real money at jobs, miraculously many Brits would find the motivation to get those jobs. But when the jobs pay so little that they don't come close to covering cost of living, amazingly the motivation is lacking.

People on this forum have pointed out to me another fact. Another way so they can make some real money is to make reforms that bring down the cost of living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am mistaken but isn't JSA only £62 a week? Even if there is 2 million peope on this, the total cost of those payments would be £6 billion a year.

Which is just under 1% of the national budget which is £700 billion.

But you you have to factor in the extra tax revenue gained from someone in employment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely. I believe if we paid some real money at jobs, miraculously many Brits would find the motivation to get those jobs. But when the jobs pay so little that they don't come close to covering cost of living the benefits you get if you don't work, amazingly the motivation is lacking.

Corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am mistaken but isn't JSA only £62 a week? Even if there is 2 million peope on this, the total cost of those payments would be £6 billion a year.

Which is just under 1% of the national budget which is £700 billion.

Tories just want to deflect peoples attention

from the trillion pound bailout. Attack the poorest less influencial people in society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tories just want to deflect peoples attention

from the trillion pound bailout. Attack the poorest less influencial people in society.

yep

It really is the oldest rick in the book. Get the serfs to turn on each other.

Edited by tallguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely. I believe if we paid some real money at jobs, miraculously many Brits would find the motivation to get those jobs. But when the jobs pay so little that they don't come close to covering cost of living, amazingly the motivation is lacking.

People on this forum have pointed out to me another fact. Another way so they can make some real money is to make reforms that bring down the cost of living.

But many, if not most, of the conservative voters are retired and no longer interested in the labour markets as long as the pensions keep rolling in and they don't have to, horror of horrors, sell their house to pay for care in their dementia years. Its all politics and Cameron is giving the carrot to the senile and the stick to the potentially productive.

Education spending will increase as well but that is so far removed from helping the workers as to be useless except to the teachers and bureaucrats.

Generational politics have replaced class based politics for the time being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am mistaken but isn't JSA only £62 a week? Even if there is 2 million peope on this, the total cost of those payments would be £6 billion a year.

Which is just under 1% of the national budget which is £700 billion.

there is also the HB which will be in London limited to only £2000 pm what is an equivalent of a £37k pa job ....

as you say .. peanuts ...

-----------------------------------------------

1% of the budget is only 7.6% of the budget deficit of current 13% ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tories just want to deflect peoples attention

from the trillion pound bailout. Attack the poorest less influencial people in society.

was not this bailout caused by the New Labour government with the greatest of the greatest Mr Brown ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in before comments about too many public sector workers.

hi Injin,

I still do not understand how somebody earning 25k pa is extracting value/money from his team mate who earns only 15k pa or from unemployed who earns 0k pa ????

can you please provide me with some example?

cheers

d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Injin,

I still do not understand how somebody earning 25k pa is extracting value/money from his team mate who earns only 15k pa or from unemployed who earns 0k pa ????

can you please provide me with some example?

cheers

d

Sure, give me a starting point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am mistaken but isn't JSA only £62 a week? Even if there is 2 million peope on this, the total cost of those payments would be £6 billion a year.

Which is just under 1% of the national budget which is £700 billion.

I get £51.85, I'm under 25 you see.

The JSA bill is a lot less than you suggest, not everyone claims and some get 0, but NI contributions made on their behalf.

The big numbers are council tax benefit, housing benefit, in - work benefit, child benefit

PENSIONS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get £51.85, I'm under 25 you see.

The JSA bill is a lot less than you suggest, not everyone claims and some get 0, but NI contributions made on their behalf.

The big numbers are council tax benefit, housing benefit, in - work benefit, child benefit

PENSIONS.

sorry to hear about your situation ..... it is not easy these days ...

what would you think if you can not find any job for 12 months and you would be required to do some work for council ???

a) makes sense; at least I will get out

b/ it is good to feel working again

c) I am punished

d) nobody has a right to force me

e) cool, I will get some skills

f) any other thoughts ...

thanks

Edited by Damik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 140 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.