Unemployed earning more than working households

Refuse collectors that dont empty a bin because it had 1(ONE) small plastic flower pot the size of a 1lb jam jar on top of the rubbish in the recycle bin, apparently it was the wrong sort of plastic (well a disabled pensioner would know that wouldnt she, silly woman) surely she has been on a plastic type awareness course And street cleaner's --- i cannot remember when i saw one last

Fair enough - but that simply reinforces my belief that the benefits system is a disincentive to work.

Having said that, it is perfectly possible to gain qualifications in your own time. Many employed people study during their own time to gain additional qualifications - so unemployed people could do so also.

Ret.

Would you care to list which public sector workers you consider to be bums and parasites and which you do not, so that we wont become confused in future?

Ret.

.

Cannot claim anything, if on JSA, if in 'P/T' education (

Of course it is. It is designed that way

How much does such a home study course cost, and would a person living on benefits be able to afford it?

You are saying that the uk benefits system is deliberately designed to deter people from seeking work?

I'm sure that there are government schemes to provide financial assistance to the unemployed to gain additional qualifications?

Ret.

Yes, some assistance is available (through college bursaries etc and EMA etc), but, as soon as one signs off, all other benefits are removed or reduced to, essentially, nothing.

Education allowance has failed, say Tories

Students with Dependants WM

It is either an unbelievably stupid design or has been designed with that deliberate intent. There are advantages for the government in keeping people poor (but not *too* poor) and completely dependent on the State.

I don't think you appreciate the way the system locks people out of legal work. For many people, getting a job would mean that they would be *considerably* worse off to the extent that they could no longer afford basic living expenses.

Having never been in receipt of benefits myself, I used to think as you do. I then got to know a person who was living on benefits but really wanted to get onto the job ladder, and went into the system in some detail. There was absolutely no way that he could afford to take any job likely to be available to an unskilled and unexperienced person.

It is simple.

It is cheaper to pay the benefits, than to pay for the consequences of them not being there, or how to solve the real problems which lead to the unemployed.

It is exactly the same for the penal system.

WM

I have told you what the function of the DWP is and it is not getting everyone back to work.

Have you seen the costs, of distance learning packages, recently, even with bursaries, where available?

Colleges also give (gave) heavily-discounted costs, on lower level courses, but they are limited in spaces, well-attended (initially) and colleges are under major financial pressures to up the fees.

Again, their vocational value is debatable.

Colleges are merely 'bums on seats' facilities, in the main.

WM

OK. My main point in this debate has been that the benefits system is a disincentive to employment, so at least we are in agreement over that!

Ret.

OK - I'll take your word for it. It's a pretty sad state of affairs.

Ret.

Yes, only for a certain number, which can then be used, as scapegoats, for The Man's PR episodes.

However, it is not really a disincentive, with choice, it is the necessity of survival (let alone the temptations of expectations).

WM

One, albeit special case, is that it is difficult (indeed, impossible, presently) for me to get any valuable 'retraining', as I already have degrees. That is without the prejudice dimension.

WM

What more training would you need? I know you've been out of work for a few years, but I'd have thought that your skill base was pretty up to date. You've said in the past that you have a bad back so there would be little point in undertaking a trades couse like plumbing as you couldn't do the job. It seems that your problems are to do with your age and the fact that nobody wants you in their workplace.

Well, the first of the latter is illegal and the second should be :), but, you are correct, of course, to a major degree.

My degrees are all in spheres, which are specialist fields, so not transferable.

As you suggest, my general skills are very well developed and transferable ... or would have been, a decade ago.

Almost all employers, now, ask for formal 'qualifications', for even the humblest roles (NVQs upwards etc).

So retraining is where the road begins, whilst time passes, to reduce prejudice.

Many of those on JSA are prejudiced against, for a number of reasons (even when employment figures are high).

WM

For anyone with children the tax credits system should ensure that they are better off in work than on benefit, regardless of family size and receipt of Housing and Council Tax Benefits. It is single people, especially those under 25 (the latter don't qualify for tax credits unless sick for 52+ weeks or in receipt of Disability Living Allowance and the former have to work 30 hours per week to qualify, again unless they have been long term sick / receive DLA).

Tax Credits have their faults but are better than the Social Security benefits they replaced as the taper is less severe, and in the case of the first "earnings top up" scheme, Family Income Supplement (1970 to

1988), that scheme actually had a negative taper for families on incomes below £9k a year as it used gross income as its starting point for calculating entitlement. The effect was that for every £1 you earned from £6k to £9k you lost £1.05 in benefits!

OU for people on benefits costs nothing and lots of people on benefits do take advantage of that. The people who miss out are those who don't qualify for assistance but can't afford the course fees. Another good reason to avoid work if studying for a higher qualification

You are surely wrong