I mean I’ll happily have a debate about the merits of UBI in a world where we’re rushing towards mass unemployment, but that’s aside it’s a very very small segment of people on welfare who are “playing the system”.
It’s bullshit rhetoric designed to get people shouting down at the poorest in our society whilst the richest get away with stealing from us all.
UBI changes the game too though as you don’t lose if if you are working. Its always there so you don’t have to navigate a beurocratic process instead of being able to look for work.
It’s a very small segment, if you assume everybody that is labelled as “sick” are actually unable to work in any way (doubtful). But even without that it’s close to a million
Plenty would happily work “a bit” or “in some way”, but there’s not a lot in the system to support assisted/flexible/partial working etc.
If you have injuries, ailments, illnesses, they’re still asking you to work 40 hours or go fully on sick, rather than supporting a “however many hours you can manage” and a small topup to maintain a basic standard of living.
These used to be part of the system, in the earlier part of the “working tax credits” era.
How many of those who claim to be happy to work also happen to be incredibly picky about the work they would choose to do and when it comes to it in reality are actually happier cashing in benefits?
I’m sorry to hear that - and I don’t doubt they exist, but i don’t think it’s in the numbers that sometimes get portrayed, more in “statistically irrelevant” sort of numbers - though it will depend vastly on where you live in the country. I’m sure it’s a visible problem in some specific areas or communities.
However, I also think people (and the job centre) should be picky about the work people are applying for, at least for a while. This was also formerly part of the system, where they pretty much gave you a year of looking for relevant work, before enforcing other options.
When someone better qualified (like when a large employer in an area suddenly closes) is forced to do an entry level job, especially through one of those “supporting you back to work” scams, where you work 40 hours in exchange for your dole & landlord benefit (i.e. working for ~£3 an hour) - you’re blocking all the entry level work from people who can currently only apply to it.
Personally, I’d rather let the handful of gleeful scroungers skip joyously down the road with their £70 in hand and do nothing, than punish millions of genuinely struggling people “just in case”.
It’s a massively visible problem. The fact you don’t see it leads me to believe you had a rather comfortable upbringing.
I’m not saying punish the scroungers, but there are a lot of champagne socialists out there who don’t see the genuine problems out there from their village bubbles. There are millions out there who are completely unincentivised to better themselves in any way whatsoever. Many who stretch the definition of sick, and many who are just apathetic about society in general.
This is why the left struggles with courting the genuine working class, because they don’t understand their legitimate grievances or even worse just brush away glaring social problems because of their idealistic view of people on benefits.
By the way, I’m absolutely not advocating punising those who need it.
Unless anything magical has happened in the last few years, I still live in one of the “worst” inner city places to be in the UK for income, employment, crime and reputation etc (i.e. you can still buy a 3 bed terrace on my street for less than £100k) - but, yes, I’m probably only ten minutes walk away from a “nice bit”, and the “worst bit” is over a mile away, in a direction I generally don’t need to go in - but it’s definitely no leafy village :)
Regardless, I do know what you mean - I think I just look at it more optimistically (or naively) and assume the best in everyone.
I used to do work with community groups round here (and in the “worst bit”) so I was constantly meeting and working with desperate people trying their best, but being shat on by the world/benefits system - so obviously my view is skewed a bit in favour of those who’d turn up to such things - and I’m not going to meet any of those that truly don’t care.
I’ll accept my numbers are likely a bit off and biased, but I still feel The “scrounger” number is tiny compared to the genuinely struggling.
The difference between my time on the dole (~18 years ago) and my partner’s time on the dole (~7 years ago) is astonishing. I was respected and supported to set up my own business. She wanted to do the same but was treated like a criminal.
I mean I’ll happily have a debate about the merits of UBI in a world where we’re rushing towards mass unemployment, but that’s aside it’s a very very small segment of people on welfare who are “playing the system”.
It’s bullshit rhetoric designed to get people shouting down at the poorest in our society whilst the richest get away with stealing from us all.
UBI changes the game too though as you don’t lose if if you are working. Its always there so you don’t have to navigate a beurocratic process instead of being able to look for work.
It’s a very small segment, if you assume everybody that is labelled as “sick” are actually unable to work in any way (doubtful). But even without that it’s close to a million
Plenty would happily work “a bit” or “in some way”, but there’s not a lot in the system to support assisted/flexible/partial working etc.
If you have injuries, ailments, illnesses, they’re still asking you to work 40 hours or go fully on sick, rather than supporting a “however many hours you can manage” and a small topup to maintain a basic standard of living.
These used to be part of the system, in the earlier part of the “working tax credits” era.
How many of those who claim to be happy to work also happen to be incredibly picky about the work they would choose to do and when it comes to it in reality are actually happier cashing in benefits?
I know my father is exactly that.
I’m sorry to hear that - and I don’t doubt they exist, but i don’t think it’s in the numbers that sometimes get portrayed, more in “statistically irrelevant” sort of numbers - though it will depend vastly on where you live in the country. I’m sure it’s a visible problem in some specific areas or communities.
However, I also think people (and the job centre) should be picky about the work people are applying for, at least for a while. This was also formerly part of the system, where they pretty much gave you a year of looking for relevant work, before enforcing other options.
When someone better qualified (like when a large employer in an area suddenly closes) is forced to do an entry level job, especially through one of those “supporting you back to work” scams, where you work 40 hours in exchange for your dole & landlord benefit (i.e. working for ~£3 an hour) - you’re blocking all the entry level work from people who can currently only apply to it.
Personally, I’d rather let the handful of gleeful scroungers skip joyously down the road with their £70 in hand and do nothing, than punish millions of genuinely struggling people “just in case”.
It’s a massively visible problem. The fact you don’t see it leads me to believe you had a rather comfortable upbringing.
I’m not saying punish the scroungers, but there are a lot of champagne socialists out there who don’t see the genuine problems out there from their village bubbles. There are millions out there who are completely unincentivised to better themselves in any way whatsoever. Many who stretch the definition of sick, and many who are just apathetic about society in general.
This is why the left struggles with courting the genuine working class, because they don’t understand their legitimate grievances or even worse just brush away glaring social problems because of their idealistic view of people on benefits.
By the way, I’m absolutely not advocating punising those who need it.
Unless anything magical has happened in the last few years, I still live in one of the “worst” inner city places to be in the UK for income, employment, crime and reputation etc (i.e. you can still buy a 3 bed terrace on my street for less than £100k) - but, yes, I’m probably only ten minutes walk away from a “nice bit”, and the “worst bit” is over a mile away, in a direction I generally don’t need to go in - but it’s definitely no leafy village :)
Regardless, I do know what you mean - I think I just look at it more optimistically (or naively) and assume the best in everyone.
I used to do work with community groups round here (and in the “worst bit”) so I was constantly meeting and working with desperate people trying their best, but being shat on by the world/benefits system - so obviously my view is skewed a bit in favour of those who’d turn up to such things - and I’m not going to meet any of those that truly don’t care.
I’ll accept my numbers are likely a bit off and biased, but I still feel The “scrounger” number is tiny compared to the genuinely struggling.
The difference between my time on the dole (~18 years ago) and my partner’s time on the dole (~7 years ago) is astonishing. I was respected and supported to set up my own business. She wanted to do the same but was treated like a criminal.
You’ve brought your father up a couple of times in this thread. It feels like you’re projecting a bit.
I get having a shit dad, but not everyone is the same