BF2S Forums Should long term benifit claimants have there benifits cut/stopped

Yes they should have it taken away if they have no valid reason, like a disability or something. I don't see how they can stand being unemployed for so long life gets boring and meaningless without a job or at least something to do other than go pub.

Working for benefit surely means that employers are getting cheap/free labour which should be paid at minimum wage thus reducing unemployment.

And anyway, if you go into a dole office and say "I don't want to work" you can count the cash you'll get on no hands.  That's why they call it "jobseekers".

wah1188 wrote:

Yes they should have it taken away if they have no valid reason, like a disability or something. I don't see how they can stand being unemployed for so long life gets boring and meaningless without a job or at least something to do other than go pub.

Hmm, benefit = £45-55 odd p/w (not too sure), which needs to cover food and general living so how is anyone going to afford to spend any length of time in the pub these days @ £3 per pint?  I'm sure that superstrength lager and park benches are more likely hangouts for the people who simply cannot be put to work.  To solve these issues I reckon the government should budget for at least the amount spent per student per year on state school education on high quality training, and offer rewards for those who can stick out a year of basic skill training and get onto the next level. 

Some people just aren't compatible with the work that's in demand in this country, and simply job vacancy numbers doesn't reflect this.  People who might have done well in mining or factory work simply aren't needed, and it's a cruel society which would let these people and their families just starve to death rather than take care of them and gradually allow their children and their childrens children to assimilate into the changing society.  Companies chose to switch the manufacturing overseas to make more money, so it's only right they take care of the people they sold out to increase the profit margins.  Of course, these benefits should be levied entirely against the companies who make the cuts for profits, otherwise they are basically robbing taxpayers to make money.

Last edited by UON (2006-12-18 12:53:24)

SMELLYMONKEY wrote:

Uon---Working for benefit surely means that employers are getting cheap/free labour which should be paid at minimum wage thus reducing unemployment.

No you get them to do community based work i.e cleaning up litter ect.

Street sweeper isn't a job?

SMELLYMONKEY wrote:

Uon---And anyway, if you go into a dole office and say "I don't want to work" you can count the cash you'll get on no hands.  That's why they call it "jobseekers".

Youy proffesional scrounger would not do this, simply the bare minimum required to continue getting benifits.

So raise the minimum required.  Withhold benefit if they don't attend frequent (government provided) training or don't attend interviews.  And FYI "professional scroungers" are more often on the sick... to stay on you just turn up to the medical on smack and say you hear voices.  Not tricky.  If they don't believe you threaten people at the dole office. 

SMELLYMONKEY wrote:

Uon---Hmm, benefit = £45-55 odd p/w (not too sure), which needs to cover food and general living so how is anyone going to afford to spend any length of time in the pub these days @ £3 per pint?  I'm sure that superstrength lager and park benches are more likely hangouts for the people who simply cannot be put to work

Most pro scroungers subsidise there benifits via the black economy, and I see these lazy fuckers in the pub all the time no park benches.

And you ask to see their dole book?  Or you just guess who's unemployed?

SMELLYMONKEY wrote:

Uon----Some people just aren't compatible with the work that's in demand in this country, and simply job vacancy numbers doesn't reflect this.

600'000 Polish workers might disagree, if you need work you will find it.

Most of them are much better qualified and have genuine competency.  Hence they are in demand.

edit: and as for your local factory, the dole office should be forcing the long term claimants to interview... but most of them probably aren't trained in hygiene so aren't the best candidates.  Without knowing all the facts and job descriptions it's hard to just put down to laziness of the local jobseekers.

SMELLYMONKEY wrote:

Uon---Companies chose to switch the manufacturing overseas to make more money, so it's only right they take care of the people they sold out to increase the profit margins.

Yup agree with you there maybe in cases such as this there should be a special high rate redundancy package rather than the goverment minimum pitance.

Yes, but redundancy packages generally provide cover until other work can be found... some people may have excelled at the career they did for the first 40 years of their live, but be incapable of adaptation if their job is no longer needed.  Those people should get jobseekers for the rest of their life because no matter how hard they seek, there won't be anything they can do.  They can't even get a job cleaning litter if the government is destroying the demand by forcing people do that job just to get their dole money.

Last edited by UON (2006-12-18 14:01:03)

Maybe they can get jobs correcting your spelling and grammar. That could keep hundreds of people busy.