I fully agree with that.
prisoners voting
- Thread starter skyblue
- Start date
I fully agree with that.
I am unemployed. I am actively seeking work. My welfare has now expired and I'm now on my own.
When I said that I did say "perennially unemployed". I think that term ought to be clear enough.
I assumed that by perennially unemployed, you meant someone who is unemployed for a long time, rather than someone who refuses to look for work.
apologies, I'll be clearer. There are 2 types of unemployed people. Those willing to work and those who are not. The latter category are criminals in my mind.
The biggest problem I have is that sometimes, with these long term unemployed people who have no intention of working, I think a lot of it is due to the fact that they get a lot of money from benefits and wouldn't be any better off working. Which surely is the intention. Now I know not every unemployed person is like that but some are, I've seen it first hand as I said earlier and the fact that someone can become that reliant on benefits and it gives them a bigger income than they would get from going out and doing a day's work worries me. It's the state of the country here that should be at fault. Sure the unemployed person should get a job, but the fact that it's become so easy to have that lifestyle means there is absolutely no incentive for them to get one.
Yeah it's kind of true. Some people do find it too easy to life on benefits.
I see the problem mostly being that there can never be 100% employment because the system won't allow it. Cheesy as it sounds, capitalism simply couldn't function properly without a level of job insecurity and a large unemployed populous.
I always thought that unemployed people should be able to go and work for the community for their benefits. Unemployment is very demoralising and it's so easy to get depressed and unmotivated. A part time responsibility to the community in exchange for benefits could work wonders for everyone.
Have you ever collected unemployment before? It's different from state to state, but you would get approximately 50% of what your pay was. Who can afford to live on half of what they are earning now? And each state has a cap... so for example. In PA if I was earning $1600/wk I would hit the cap of $537/wk (before taxes) That means I'm bringing home less than a third of what I was before. There is no way in hell I would survive on that cut in pay...
So how many people do you think would rather be collecting???
This is all well and good but I don't like in America.
It's different in England.
I agree, the whole idea behind Jobseekers allowance is that you are actively seeking work and fit for work. I don't see the problem in giving them 20 hours a week of work to do. I'd let them choose it by the way, like if you don't like working outside you can go and work in a charity shop. This way they are giving something back and actually giving them current up to date work experience.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not just that. It's also the fact that sometimes the money they get from benefits is greater than what they earn from working. Remember we have stuff like housing benefit here and council tax benefit here, now if you get that you wouldn't pay any rent or council tax, which you would obviously pay if you were working, so that's an immediate plus for the unemployed in terms of not working. So in short it's the fact that the rate of benefits far exceeds the rate of wage you would earn, and some people simply can't bear the fact that they might have to go without that the life on benefits once provided. Not in my town bub.
Well it's completely different here in the states. They look at what you made over the last 5 quarters and give you a percentage of that amount. So you will ALWAYS get less than what you were making. And if you didn't work in those quarters, you aren't eligible to collect.
See that seems a better way, course I don't have full working knowledge of the welfare system there. Any chance you could give more details? Or anyone else for that matter.
I only work 16 hours a week, but my paycheque last month came to £350 more than what a person claiming JSA would receive.
I fail then to see how anyone working full time could receive less than through benefits. Even when taking council tax and rent into consideration.
I fail then to see how anyone working full time could receive less than through benefits. Even when taking council tax and rent into consideration.
The problem I'm having right now is finding a job that will pay as much as my unemployment. I'm in PA. Finding a job really is horrible lately. My mother is having her 4th interview from a job, and in the previous three she had to travel three hours to go out of state. It's insane, you could make a reality show with all the people going after this single job, cut someone each week in interview rounds and have enough for a whole season.
Not to mention, hardly any of the jobs I've been applying for even offer any kind of benefits. I don't like being on unemployment, but I haven't found anything out yet. I'm sure my next door's have looked in the parking lot for the last couple months and seen that my car hasn't moved and are opinionated about it, but they don't know what's going on. To say that a person can't vote based on a criteria that they're not guaranteed is really...borderline offensive, but that's just my opinion.
As for prisoners...don't feel as strongly cause it's not effecting me personally. Seeing the voter turn out percentages in this last election, I really don't think we should deter anyone from voting in the US.
Not to mention, hardly any of the jobs I've been applying for even offer any kind of benefits. I don't like being on unemployment, but I haven't found anything out yet. I'm sure my next door's have looked in the parking lot for the last couple months and seen that my car hasn't moved and are opinionated about it, but they don't know what's going on. To say that a person can't vote based on a criteria that they're not guaranteed is really...borderline offensive, but that's just my opinion.
As for prisoners...don't feel as strongly cause it's not effecting me personally. Seeing the voter turn out percentages in this last election, I really don't think we should deter anyone from voting in the US.
I was talking about the whole concept of the benefits system though. £350 weekly is £87.50. Now I assume form that you pay rent and everything else. The thing is on benefits a person might claim housing and council tax benefits, which would eliminate the rent part and the council tax part, so at the end of the day that person on benefits would have a lot more disposable income than you. And that's what I'm talking about, the people who claim more than JSA who live on it, and that in my opinion is wrong.
I understand this, because of course people who work have a lot more to pay for than people on benefits and if they for example got offered a 20 hours a week job that paid £150 a week, that might not be enough to cover the bills, so in that sense I understand people not wanting to take that particular job. I wouldn't if it didn't cover my bills. It's the fact that people are allowed in some cases to live on benefits for years that defeats me.
I understand this, because of course people who work have a lot more to pay for than people on benefits and if they for example got offered a 20 hours a week job that paid £150 a week, that might not be enough to cover the bills, so in that sense I understand people not wanting to take that particular job. I wouldn't if it didn't cover my bills. It's the fact that people are allowed in some cases to live on benefits for years that defeats me.
Last edited by a moderator:
There disposable income is less than £60 a week (if I remember JSA is about £60 a week). Because benefits will pay rent and council tax, nothing else as far as I am aware of. You still pay bills, mortgages, etc
Again I direct you to my post, the whole benefits system. In truth I think the wider issue is the crap welfare system which has allowed people like the gentleman in a previous post I made to claim benefits for 20 years. It's an easy thing to abuse. I laugh at people on benefits sometimes who feel bad for themselves because as you said they only have £60 a week to live on. Well get a job then.
You're being contradictory.
I thought people on benefits had so much disposal income they didn't need a job?
They do, just not if they only claim JSA. If they claim other benefits as well as JSA then they will have more disposable income. Especially if they have kids.