Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Do people deserve benefits? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, on humanitarian grounds, "people" should be given money by the government to support a basic standard of living if they cannot get work themselves.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Although it's heralded as a common view, I honestly believe that those whom are fit to work SHOULDN'T get benefits on the basis on the following:

    The government should have minimum wage jobs, doing essentially community service. They will be paid minimum wage, or a living wage. This way, the amount of money spent on benefits will actually have a positive impact. There should then be further support for education, and further employment under the job seekers office, much more so than there currently is.

    Those whom are unfit to work, it is our duty to pay for them. (And that's coming from someone whom would generally consider ones self as being very right wing, generally.)

    Obviously there isn't a one-fit-all answer for this, otherwise it'd already be implemented. People will always loose out under any-system.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Xelfrost)
    I didn't call them handouts to insult the poor, It was an expression. As for your point on the community service stuff, fair enough if it's too expensive all my concern is with the current system is that plenty of people who go into it end up in a loop as the lack of work can demotivate people. Sitting down all day with nothing to do sounds lovely on paper but in practice it's nothing but depressing which in turn can cause people to give up job searching all together.
    Yes, but it's an expression that is heavily loaded and feeds into the idea of a 'something for nothing culture' and the whole 'shirkers versus workers' rhetoric.

    And I think it's important that people are aware that there are various schemes that the unemployed are mandated to do or lose their benefits because at the moment, a lot of the public do believe that the unemployed are just 'sitting down all day with nothing to do' when, for many, that's simply not the case.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blobby1759)
    It depends on the person. If you are unable to work then of course you are entitled to benefits. If you are able to work but you are to lazy to get a job then no you don't deserve benefits.
    How would it be decided that someone is 'too lazy to get a job'?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slam3000)
    How would it be decided that someone is 'too lazy to get a job'?
    For example if they would just sit on their backside all day long when they have no disability.

    Some people are too lazy to get a job however a lot of people on benefits are entitled to them.

    I see nothing wrong with getting benefits however if you're to lazy to get a job then it's wrong.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blobby1759)
    For example if they would just sit on their backside all day long when they have no disability.

    Some people are too lazy to get a job however a lot of people on benefits are entitled to them.

    I see nothing wrong with getting benefits however if you're to lazy to get a job then it's wrong.
    This doesn't answer the question. Not being able to find a job, and being 'too lazy to get a job' are not the same thing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slam3000)
    This doesn't answer the question. Not being able to find a job, and being 'too lazy to get a job' are not the same thing.
    For those who are unable to find a job who are on benefits it is completely understandable. I know people who are in that situation some who are very close to me and I do not have a problem with it.

    When I say "too lazy" what I mean is those who complain they do not get enough of benefits but don't want to get a job because they are to lazy.Those who you see in the magazines, papers etc.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Many people who claim benefits are, in fact, working.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I think for lazy people who cant be bothered to work they shouldn't be allowed, but for people who are injured or disabled i think they do deserve it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sw651)
    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Because they dont have to work, they have housing and bills paid for by the taxpayer and and thus they get as much as they like. Some have 14 kids, why? Because more money, it is that simple. I opened this thread for good debate, not passive aggressive attitudes so can we be a bit more civilised?

    I don't agree with you on many things, but I agree with you on this. Thankfully the government are doing something about it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blobby1759)
    For those who are unable to find a job who are on benefits it is completely understandable. I know people who are in that situation some who are very close to me and I do not have a problem with it.

    When I say "too lazy" what I mean is those who complain they do not get enough of benefits but don't want to get a job because they are to lazy.Those who you see in the magazines, papers etc.
    The stories you see in the papers are there to whip up hysteria about people on benefits in general. it's a way to demonise the poor to justify taking even more from them as the coalition and now the Tories are successfully doing.

    The vast majority of unemployed people do want to work but, for various reasons, haven't been able to find a job.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ikhan94)
    I think for lazy people who cant be bothered to work they shouldn't be allowed, but for people who are injured or disabled i think they do deserve it.
    So is everyone who isn't injured or disabled 'lazy', then?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    It;s very hard to find figures on uk family sizes broken down by actual numbers of kids, but i did read a report that estimated that there were only about 30 (if that) families in the Uk with 14 kids.

    Not all will be dependant on benefits, Even assuming that a mother has single births every year, by the time the 14th is born, the oldest is shortly due to cease being eligible for child benefit.
    Personally, I feel that kids need to be afforded by the parents, including housing, but some kind of support does need to be available for larger than normal families.

    The DM loves to find exceptional cases to highlight and imply that theses are commonplace.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by ikhan94)
    I think for lazy people who cant be bothered to work they shouldn't be allowed, but for people who are injured or disabled i think they do deserve it.
    Are carers lazy then? You know, the ones who get about £62 a week for doing anything up to 168 hours a week with no break and unlike paid carers, not entitled to at least minimum wage and all the other legal entitlements?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slam3000)
    The stories you see in the papers are there to whip up hysteria about people on benefits in general. it's a way to demonise the poor to justify taking even more from them as the coalition and now the Tories are successfully doing.

    The vast majority of unemployed people do want to work but, for various reasons, haven't been able to find a job.
    I understand a lot of it is the Tories as I know a family who are desperate to work to pay bills but are unable to. Benefits are good however they can also be bad. If the government cared more about the poor people then people would never be in this situation.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    Many people who claim benefits are, in fact, working.


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    According to official stats, more than 50%
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sw651)
    Posted from TSR Mobile

    According to official stats, more than 50%
    Yes. And the reason they claim benefits is because of penny-pinching employers who refuse to pay enough for people to live on. It's this, along with corporate tax evasion, and the exorbitant cost of rent in many parts of the country, that people should be focusing on, rather than taking aim at those in the lower echelons of society.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slam3000)
    Yes. And the reason they claim benefits is because of penny-pinching employers who refuse to pay enough for people to live on. It's this, along with corporate tax evasion, and the exorbitant cost of rent in many parts of the country, that people should be focusing on, rather than taking aim at those in the lower echelons of society.


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    To be fair not all of them avoid taxes. And we need a higher minimum wage, at least to the minimum living wage
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by slam3000)
    Yes. And the reason they claim benefits is because of penny-pinching employers who refuse to pay enough for people to live on. It's this, along with corporate tax evasion, and the exorbitant cost of rent in many parts of the country, that people should be focusing on, rather than taking aim at those in the lower echelons of society.
    Of course, it's nothing to do with people workign the minimum hours they can to get the maximum amount of benefits they can.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sw651)
    Posted from TSR Mobile

    To be fair not all of them avoid taxes. And we need a higher minimum wage, at least to the minimum living wage
    Yes, I know, and it wasn't what I suggested in my comment either. However, the 'creative accounting' of large corporations in order to minimise their tax bill costs the country billions of pounds each year. If only the Daily Mail were as vocal in highlighting this scandal as it is in running endless stories about 'beneifit scroungers'.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.