Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

"Benefit cuts: Monday will be the day that defines this government..." Watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    There used to be government funding for training and to start businesses. All cut.

    Success of workfare in US? Evidence?
    I'm on my mobile so I can't get you good links ASAP, but off the top of my head, workfare cut claimant numbers by more than 30%.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnonymousPenguin)
    I'm on my mobile so I can't get you good links ASAP, but off the top of my head, workfare cut claimant numbers by more than 30%.
    I don't believe you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Bleeding heart something-for-nothing liberals WILL be the death of this country.

    You're obsessed with handing things out to people for free instead of helping them to help themselves and the country. Many of the complaints regarding the benefit cuts stem from the average Briton's sense that they're entitled to luxuries that actual poor people would give their left arm for. Today's 'poor' in Britain have absolutely no concept of what actual poverty is. No idea. The internet is not a human right, Sky TV is not a human right, several cases of stella each week isn't a human right.... some guy in another thread was whining that he couldn't live on JSA because he needs £200 a month to go clubbing with his mates. He sums the attitude up. People have got used to a whole range of benefits and now are horrified that they're being forced to go out and actually work to maintain the lifestyle they've become accustomed to. I see the guy down the road from me who never goes to work, he walks with a slight limp so I assume he's off claiming disability allowance. I'm sorry, if you can move and use a computer then you can work. It needs to change.

    People are lazy and feel they're entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. I saw it during the England riots 2 years ago when some little chav told a news reporter (as she was about to raid a clothes store) that she was 'getting her taxes back innit'.

    This country needs to take a collective look at its self and shape this insane benefit culture up. I believe this is what the government is doing and all the screaming and hysterical nonsense we hear from the left is just that; utter nonsense. Stop your whining you bunch of babies. Go educate yourselves on actual poverty.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    I don't believe you.
    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/09/ny...ted=all&src=pm

    It was actually two thirds of claimants who stopped claiming. Admittedly, there's little data if they went into employment. However, welfare budgets are usually enormous, so even if say 3-4% of those who leave the program get employed the savings would be in the hundreds of millions in the UK, which is about as much as they've managed to save now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnonymousPenguin)
    http://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/09/ny...ted=all&src=pm

    It was actually two thirds of claimants who stopped claiming. Admittedly, there's little data if they went into employment. However, welfare budgets are usually enormous, so even if say 3-4% of those who leave the program get employed the savings would be in the hundreds of millions in the UK, which is about as much as they've managed to save now.
    You didn't actually read that did you.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    Bleeding heart something-for-nothing liberals WILL be the death of this country.

    You're obsessed with handing things out to people for free instead of helping them to help themselves and the country. Many of the complaints regarding the benefit cuts stem from the average Briton's sense that they're entitled to luxuries that actual poor people would give their left arm for. Today's 'poor' in Britain have absolutely no concept of what actual poverty is. No idea. The internet is not a human right, Sky TV is not a human right, several cases of stella each week isn't a human right.... some guy in another thread was whining that he couldn't live on JSA because he needs £200 a month to go clubbing with his mates. He sums the attitude up. People have got used to a whole range of benefits and now are horrified that they're being forced to go out and actually work to maintain the lifestyle they've become accustomed to. I see the guy down the road from me who never goes to work, he walks with a slight limp so I assume he's off claiming disability allowance. I'm sorry, if you can move and use a computer then you can work. It needs to change.

    People are lazy and feel they're entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. I saw it during the England riots 2 years ago when some little chav told a news reporter (as she was about to raid a clothes store) that she was 'getting her taxes back innit'.

    This country needs to take a collective look at its self and shape this insane benefit culture up. I believe this is what the government is doing and all the screaming and hysterical nonsense we hear from the left is just that; utter nonsense. Stop your whining you bunch of babies. Go educate yourselves on actual poverty.

    + rep
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    [...]
    You are being deliberately dishonest or just plain stupid.

    No political party wants to discuss pensions rationally - especially the Conservatives - because they would bleed votes if they treated pensioners like everyone else. The idea that every pensioner has worked their entire life and paid an adequate amount of national insurance is plain nonsense. The entire benefit system is weighed heavily in favour of women, especially female pensioners who may have contributed nothing during their working lives and depend upon their husband's national insurance contributions to qualify for a pension. This is a slowly changing social issue where the number of women in work has increased slowly from the end of the second world war onwards. But there are persistent social issues that need be addressed rationally. For example, women are usually the primary carers and therefore sometimes can only find part-time work. They should not be punished by the system. But nor should they be idolised either.

    Your point about benefits is just plain dishonest. The benefit cap is the maximum threshold for the largest families living in one of the most expensive areas in the world. Given that they never see the majority of this money, because it is paid directly to landlords, you are talking out of your arse.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    No idea. The internet is not a human right
    The introduction of the universal credit will see almost all of the welfare claiming process shifted online, to save money for the government. People cannot be expected to do without the internet if you need the internet to claim benefits. Moreover, do you think people will be more or less successful at finding jobs without the internet? Clearly, it is impossible to be integrated in today's society without internet access. Everyone should have it.


    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    some guy in another thread was whining that he couldn't live on JSA because he needs £200 a month to go clubbing with his mates.
    You are summing up the problem with right-wing attitudes to welfare; using unrepresentative stories to characterize large groups without looking at the statistics. The fact is that JSA is £71 a week. A food bill alone for one person for a week is £40. You can probably then just about pay for heating, water, electricity, and internet but only just. You would not have money, for example, to travel to visit family who do not live within walking distance. You would be on the poverty line. Right wing people simply do not grasp this, thinking that people on benefits are somehow 'doing better' than people in work. Obviously, benefits claimaints are, looking at their quality of life, on average far, far worse off than people in work.

    (Job Seeker's Allowance, by the way, has an annual bill to the Treasury of £1.7bn, out of a total government budget of over £600bn).


    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    People are lazy and feel they're entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. I saw it during the England riots 2 years ago when some little chav told a news reporter (as she was about to raid a clothes store) that she was 'getting her taxes back innit'.
    Again, using an unrepresentative anecdote to characterize millions of people. It's vile.


    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    Stop your whining you bunch of babies. Go educate yourselves on actual poverty.
    Go educate yourself on actual poverty.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    […] You're obsessed with handing things out to people for free instead of helping them to help themselves and the country. Many of the complaints regarding the benefit cuts stem from the average Briton's sense that they're entitled to luxuries that actual poor people would give their left arm for. Today's 'poor' in Britain have absolutely no concept of what actual poverty is. No idea. The internet is not a human right, Sky TV is not a human right, several cases of stella each week isn't a human right.... some guy in another thread was whining that he couldn't live on JSA because he needs £200 a month to go clubbing with his mates. He sums the attitude up. People have got used to a whole range of benefits and now are horrified that they're being forced to go out and actually work to maintain the lifestyle they've become accustomed to. I see the guy down the road from me who never goes to work, he walks with a slight limp so I assume he's off claiming disability allowance. I'm sorry, if you can move and use a computer then you can work. It needs to change.

    People are lazy and feel they're entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. I saw it during the England riots 2 years ago when some little chav told a news reporter (as she was about to raid a clothes store) that she was 'getting her taxes back innit'.

    This country needs to take a collective look at its self and shape this insane benefit culture up. I believe this is what the government is doing and all the screaming and hysterical nonsense we hear from the left is just that; utter nonsense. Stop your whining you bunch of babies. Go educate yourselves on actual poverty.
    Coming from someone who has probably never paid any income tax or national insurance before in his life, and is about to suck £40,000+ out of the system to do a pointless degree at a **** university. Get off your high horse...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    The introduction of the universal credit will see almost all of the welfare claiming process shifted online, to save money for the government. People cannot be expected to do without the internet if you need the internet to claim benefits. Moreover, do you think people will be more or less successful at finding jobs without the internet? Clearly, it is impossible to be integrated in today's society without internet access. Everyone should have it.
    If they need to access the internet to find work and such. They can go to the job centre and indeed many charities and local libraries offer free internet access.


    You are summing up the problem with right-wing attitudes to welfare; using unrepresentative stories to characterize large groups without looking at the statistics. The fact is that JSA is £71 a week. A food bill alone for one person for a week is £40.
    You don't need to spend £40 a week on food to survive as a single person. If you're on benefits you aren't entitled to nice foods. Benefits should be about providing enough so people's basic needs are met. It should be about need and not want you see. You can survive on a £1 a day on food and still meet your basic nutritional requirements. If you want more money to spend, then get out there and pound the streets till you get a job.

    You can probably then just about pay for heating, water, electricity, and internet but only just. You would not have money, for example, to travel to visit family who do not live within walking distance.
    More incentive to find work then.

    You would be on the poverty line. Right wing people simply do not grasp this, thinking that people on benefits are somehow 'doing better' than people in work. Obviously, benefits claimaints are, looking at their quality of life, on average far, far worse off than people in work.
    I'm not some rich boy talking out of my ****. My family has gone through periods where both parents have been out of work and we've had to carefully budget and use our brains and certainly couldn't afford niceties. Your concept of poverty bears no resemblance to actual poverty. In some countries where real poverty exists there are kids who rummage around on toxic rubbish dumps for bits of metal to trade, parents and children who have to beg on the bloody streets for food. In our country the idea of poverty is when someone can't afford sky TV. It's ridiculous.

    (Original post by evantej)
    Coming from someone who has probably never paid any income tax or national insurance before in his life, and is about to suck £40,000+ out of the system to do a pointless degree at a **** university. Get off your high horse...
    Guessed wrong you pompous little brat.
    I've worked since I was 19 (I'm 25 now). I spent 6 months on JSA then thought **** this and became self-employed.

    Your academic info:

    2010-11 University of Bristol - MA European Literatures
    2007-10 Manchester Metropolitan University - BA English

    Yet you think you can look down at my degree choice? xD A sandwich degree that gets me actual work experience and good job prospects and you picked those pointless pretentious subjects at those mediocre universities yet have the nerve to look down your nose at me? :lolz: You'll come straight out of doing your pointless pretentious course and live off benefits for the next 4 years whining.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    Bleeding heart something-for-nothing liberals WILL be the death of this country.

    You're obsessed with handing things out to people for free instead of helping them to help themselves and the country. Many of the complaints regarding the benefit cuts stem from the average Briton's sense that they're entitled to luxuries that actual poor people would give their left arm for. Today's 'poor' in Britain have absolutely no concept of what actual poverty is. No idea. The internet is not a human right, Sky TV is not a human right, several cases of stella each week isn't a human right.... some guy in another thread was whining that he couldn't live on JSA because he needs £200 a month to go clubbing with his mates. He sums the attitude up. People have got used to a whole range of benefits and now are horrified that they're being forced to go out and actually work to maintain the lifestyle they've become accustomed to. I see the guy down the road from me who never goes to work, he walks with a slight limp so I assume he's off claiming disability allowance. I'm sorry, if you can move and use a computer then you can work. It needs to change.

    People are lazy and feel they're entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. I saw it during the England riots 2 years ago when some little chav told a news reporter (as she was about to raid a clothes store) that she was 'getting her taxes back innit'.

    This country needs to take a collective look at its self and shape this insane benefit culture up. I believe this is what the government is doing and all the screaming and hysterical nonsense we hear from the left is just that; utter nonsense. Stop your whining you bunch of babies. Go educate yourselves on actual poverty.

    I'm just wondering what your experience or training is in managing disability? This person you're on about could well be swinging the lead. Equally, he could have a debilitating back injury or other health problem. I suffer from sciatica caused by a bulging spinal disc. When its bad its excruciatingly painful and I can barely walk more than 5 minutes without sitting down. When its bad, even sitting down means I am in lots of pain, there's no way I could concentrate on work. Now my injury is actually very mild in terms of disc injuries. Yet it stops me from working when bad and if I aggravate it, it can take months to get better. This person you're on about could well have a more serious back injury, maybe he's on loads of meds that mean he can't concentrate. Maybe its worse on some days than others, maybe its worse at some times of day than others. Maybe he has MS or another neurological condition that means he has good days and bad days. Not many employers want to take someone on who can't predict from one day to the next whether they are able to work or not.

    My point is that you assuming he's on the fiddle says more about you than it does about him.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oh how I love The Guardian. Thanks for sharing.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    If they need to access the internet to find work and such. They can go to the job centre and indeed many charities and local libraries offer free internet access.
    Actually, because of funding cuts, many local councils are now charging for internet access in libraries. There are not 'many charities' that offer free internet access. In any case, it is clear that to be a functioning member of society you need internet access at home. This would allow you, for example, to stay in email contact with friends and families. It would allow you, for example, to stay up to date with how to use a computer, which is essential to many jobs. Even if you don't buy that we should provide enough for internet access on my "functioning member of society" argument, then you should want it on a purely instrumental level; I am convinced that jobseekers with internet access at home would be on benefits longer than jobseekers without internet access. It provides all kinds of help with jobseeking.


    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    You don't need to spend £40 a week on food to survive as a single person. If you're on benefits you aren't entitled to nice foods. Benefits should be about providing enough so people's basic needs are met. It should be about need and not want you see. You can survive on a £1 a day on food and still meet your basic nutritional requirements. If you want more money to spend, then get out there and pound the streets till you get a job.
    You do not mean a distinction between "need" and "want"; you are distinguishing between different needs. "Need" requires two inputs: you "need" x to do y. Your position is that we should provide what is necessary to meet "basic needs", which you have not really elucidated beyond what is required to survive. If this is your test, why do you not advocate rounding up benefits claimaints and keeping them in huge bedsits, feeding them mass produced cheap food, and consolidating costs? This would keep them alive at minimal cost to the taxpayer.

    I reject the position that we should simply be trying to provide them with what they need to stay alive. We have a basic human obligation to help them beyond staying alive. I cannot comprehend an ethical position which states we have an obligation to keep people alive but none to be concerned for their welfare beyond that. Insufficient money will damage your relationships, your skills, your self-esteem, and your ability to be a functioning member of society (for example, by following current affairs). People should not be ostracised from society because they are unemployed.


    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    More incentive to find work then.
    That there is an incentive to find work is a legitimate concern when it comes to defining the benefit system. But I do not doubt that there is such an incentive. Again, I ask yourself whether you would prefer to have a job, or to be unemployed, given the benefits system? People in jobs will have better self-esteem, better relationships, and much better material well-being. It is ludicrous to suppose that the unemployed are better off. Additionally, the jobs situation at the moment, especially for young people, is awful. Simply look at the careers section of this forum; plenty of people applying for dozens of jobs a week cannot find work.

    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    In some countries where real poverty exists there are kids who rummage around on toxic rubbish dumps for bits of metal to trade, parents and children who have to beg on the bloody streets for food. In our country the idea of poverty is when someone can't afford sky TV. It's ridiculous.
    (there is no way you would be able to afford Sky TV on Housing Benefit+JSA without additional support from elsewherE)

    I am well aware of global inequality, and I think we have strong obligations there too. But I reject your assumption that the sole purpose of benefits is to prevent death (or abject poverty). It is about keeping people as functioning members of society.

    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    Guessed wrong you pompous little brat.
    I've worked since I was 19. I spent 6 months on JSA then thought *** this and became self-employed.
    Congratulations. You have just provided an interesting case study into whether or not JSA is sufficiently high to stop people from seeking work.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnonymousPenguin)
    Admittedly, there's little data if they went into employment. However, welfare budgets are usually enormous, so even if say 3-4% of those who leave the program get employed the savings would be in the hundreds of millions in the UK
    :rolleyes:
    And if say 6-8% could be expected to find employment without being on workfare?

    Were you looking for this?
    http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/...08/rrep533.pdf

    Have fun cherry picking the positives out of that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    Actually, because of funding cuts, many local councils are now charging for internet access in libraries. There are not 'many charities' that offer free internet access. In any case, it is clear that to be a functioning member of society you need internet access at home. This would allow you, for example, to stay in email contact with friends and families. It would allow you, for example, to stay up to date with how to use a computer, which is essential to many jobs. Even if you don't buy that we should provide enough for internet access on my "functioning member of society" argument, then you should want it on a purely instrumental level; I am convinced that jobseekers with internet access at home would be on benefits longer than jobseekers without internet access. It provides all kinds of help with jobseeking.
    The internet is a poor example for this argument to be honest. The cheapest internet deals are indeed so cheap now that even the poorest families can have a basic service at home. The Job Centre supplies terminals for people to search for work.

    There are charities out there in almost every town that will help you and let you use the internet.

    You do not mean a distinction between "need" and "want"; you are distinguishing between different needs. "Need" requires two inputs: you "need" x to do y. Your position is that we should provide what is necessary to meet "basic needs", which you have not really elucidated beyond what is required to survive. If this is your test, why do you not advocate rounding up benefits claimaints and keeping them in huge bedsits, feeding them mass produced cheap food, and consolidating costs? This would keep them alive at minimal cost to the taxpayer.
    One should be kept warm, fed and dry by the state. Anything more then you have to work for it. That's how life works. The benefits are sufficient to meet those needs.

    I reject the position that we should simply be trying to provide them with what they need to stay alive. We have a basic human obligation to help them beyond staying alive. I cannot comprehend an ethical position which states we have an obligation to keep people alive but none to be concerned for their welfare beyond that. Insufficient money will damage your relationships, your skills, your self-esteem, and your ability to be a functioning member of society (for example, by following current affairs). People should not be ostracised from society because they are unemployed.
    Letting people live comfortably off benefits traps them in a cycle that destroys their self-esteem. Going out there and finding work builds one's self-esteem immeasurably.


    That there is an incentive to find work is a legitimate concern when it comes to defining the benefit system. But I do not doubt that there is such an incentive. Again, I ask yourself whether you would prefer to have a job, or to be unemployed, given the benefits system? People in jobs will have better self-esteem, better relationships, and much better material well-being. It is ludicrous to suppose that the unemployed are better off. Additionally, the jobs situation at the moment, especially for young people, is awful. Simply look at the careers section of this forum; plenty of people applying for dozens of jobs a week cannot find work.
    I know of people who constantly come up with excuses as to why they don't have a job... whether it's "there aren't any' even though there's more people employed than ever. Or whether complaining about ethnic minorities taking the work or whether it's complaining that they might have to travel more than 2 miles from their home. There are large sections of society who are simply lazy and feel they're entitled to a good life without working for it.

    Congratulations. You have just provided an interesting case study into whether or not JSA is sufficiently high to stop people from seeking work.
    That's not a very ecologically valid case study I'm afraid. The amount of money I got played no part in my decision to go self-employed as I was living at the family home and supported. What drove me was my sense of self-worth, desire to be productive.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    THERE AREN'T ENOUGH JOBS.

    It ain't complicated to get your head round.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    Bleeding heart something-for-nothing liberals WILL be the death of this country.

    You're obsessed with handing things out to people for free instead of helping them to help themselves and the country. Many of the complaints regarding the benefit cuts stem from the average Briton's sense that they're entitled to luxuries that actual poor people would give their left arm for. Today's 'poor' in Britain have absolutely no concept of what actual poverty is. No idea. The internet is not a human right, Sky TV is not a human right, several cases of stella each week isn't a human right.... some guy in another thread was whining that he couldn't live on JSA because he needs £200 a month to go clubbing with his mates. He sums the attitude up. People have got used to a whole range of benefits and now are horrified that they're being forced to go out and actually work to maintain the lifestyle they've become accustomed to. I see the guy down the road from me who never goes to work, he walks with a slight limp so I assume he's off claiming disability allowance. I'm sorry, if you can move and use a computer then you can work. It needs to change.

    People are lazy and feel they're entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. I saw it during the England riots 2 years ago when some little chav told a news reporter (as she was about to raid a clothes store) that she was 'getting her taxes back innit'.

    This country needs to take a collective look at its self and shape this insane benefit culture up. I believe this is what the government is doing and all the screaming and hysterical nonsense we hear from the left is just that; utter nonsense. Stop your whining you bunch of babies. Go educate yourselves on actual poverty.
    Stop ranting and raving jheez. Look this one termed government will be gone soon I can guarantee you that one 2015 cant come quick enough. It's nothing about entitlement look the top 1% i,e Cameron and Co want to keep the money in only their hands, they don't want people who I call "NEW MONEY" to have a chance and to prosper everyone wants to be rich and live a good life obviously legally but to attain that life you need a good education and unfortunately you need to have gone to a private school and oxbridge to land a top high end job now a days and have alot of contacts which the top 1% have access to exclusively that is how it is I know you will deny it as you are clearly a David Cameron advocate and will probably vote conservative in the next election.

    People don't want a handout they want a leg up i.e business loans etc to get on the property ladder etc, but when you have a cabinet full of multi-millionaires who don't how it feels to be poor and people always vote on who most relates to them you have to connect with people in 21st century political elections and that is why David Cameron and co are finished politically they show no empathy just snarling aggression at those at the bottom, who they seem to hold in contempt like you exhibit but you forget that those folks can vote lol GAME SET AND MATCH READ THIS ARTICLE:ttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tony-parsons-david-cameron-will-lose-1427861
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by InnerTemple)
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...nes-government

    Worth a read. I know some, particularly on this forum (which seems to be UKIP HQ for some reason), will believe it to be liberal, wishy washy, hand ringing nonsense. However it is without a doubt that, as the piece points out, the changes will bring challenges. They will hurt many more people than the "scroungers" we have been told about and all with access to legal advice severely restricted.

    I believe that the government has acted in a disgusting manner when it has come to welfare. I am also saddened that there has been little resistance from any other party - no one has been quick to point out the flaws or lies in the government's case.

    I think the last paragraph in the piece is a good summary: "People should know that historians will record the earthquake of social destruction that happened in their name, while they read of nothing but "scroungers" and the 'soaring benefit bill'."

    Cameron and his boys will be judged for this. With any luck, it will leave his party unelectable for a very long time.
    Really? I've always thought this forum is staunchly left-liberal.

    The disgruntled comments on Urban Dictionary seem to suggest this...
    http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...Student%20Room
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geetar)
    Really? I've always thought this forum is staunchly left-liberal.

    The disgruntled comments on Urban Dictionary seem to suggest this...
    http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...Student%20Room
    Its fairly on the right this forum. Have a look at the threads on benefits for example or austerity. Not surprising though, given its predominately middle class constituency.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJ_Moose)
    The internet is a poor example for this argument to be honest. The cheapest internet deals are indeed so cheap now that even the poorest families can have a basic service at home. The Job Centre supplies terminals for people to search for work.

    There are charities out there in almost every town that will help you and let you use the internet. […]
    Internet access is actually a good example as it shows how out of touch you are. I will provide some specifics.

    My local library is open 15 hours per week over four days. They have two computers. They offer free internet for two hours per day. After that it is £1 per half hour. They charge 20p to print out an A4 sheet in black and white. This means you have eight hours per week to find and apply for jobs before costs increase exponentially.

    Thankfully most jobs are online. But if they are not then it can cost a small fortune. For example, Morrison's in-store application form is six pages long (£1.20 to print off). A first-class stamp costs 60p. You can buy a pack of envelopes for £1. To apply for this job it has cost almost £3. Other jobs will be cheaper because you already have an envelope but there is nothing you can do about the cost of print outs or stamps.

    My local Jobcentre is 15 miles away. The bus costs £5.70. This means you spend 5% of your Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) just to sign on if you are under 25. The Jobcentre has one computer. You are not going to travel to there to use their computer because it is not cost effective.

    You say home internet access is cheap. My line rental and internet costs £30 per month. That represents 14% of JSA. Before you have even applied for any jobs, you have spent 19% of your JSA just to sign on and have internet access.

    Of course this is in an ideal world. I have not touched upon privacy and security issues when using public computers. (I would not be happy about using public computers to do job applications given the amount of sensitive information you include). What if other people are using the library's or Jobcentre's computer? What if their computers are broken or their internet is down? What about the recent bank holidays? My library was shut on Friday and yesterday. That is half a week's searching gone. Applying for a graduate job could take eight hours itself: filling out the application form, researching the company, and doing a number of online assessments. If you go the home internet route then what about installation fees which could easily be over £100? Where does the computer come from to use the internet?..

    The fact is you lived at home when you were on JSA. Your parents subsidised you and you frankly have no idea how easy or hard it is to get by on benefits.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 17, 2013
Poll
Which Fantasy Franchise is the best?
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

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