The Student Room Group

Should we give unemployed people benefits?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Treblebee
Actually, I think you'll find that most of the time, there is a good reason Linda can't get a job. She may have a psychological condition (this includes eating disorders - they are often viewed with contempt, as though it's just a matter of self-control, but actually, it's a disorder, and laughing at them would be like laughing at someone who is in a wheelchair), or a physical one. I know many people who don't have a job, and they really want one. Few people will be content just lazing around, with no purpose in life. Jobs are about more than just money.


Lmao did you even read what I said?
Goodnight delusional commie X
Original post by walkonby
my mum was going to be forced off disability benefits during the government reforms but luckily got an appeal and was allowed to keep them. they were a low yearly rate, barely enough to get by especially with two children. she wasn't skiving around on her backside, which is an incredibly insulting remark by the way. and before she became disabled, she worked hard and paid taxes and contributed to the economy.

there are many people with the same problem - physically unable to work due to illness/disability and thus unable to support themselves and their families without the (very small) help from the government. it's not rocket science.


Now hang on a sec, I never said Pluto is a planet. If your mum is claiming disability benefit then its not classed as unemployed. So my insulting remark does therefore, not apply to her. My comment was referring to people claiming unemployment benefit but are not physically handicapped or have a mental health issue.
Original post by Dandaman1
Yes, I know. But he specifically said welfare, not unemployment benefits.

Even so, MP's total annual expenditures, inluding salaries and office costs, aren't even close to the £3 billion spent on unemployment benefits.


*she

And yes, I stupidly said welfare. But this is a thread about unemployment benefits and that's what I'd been talking about in my posts.

In terms of MP expenses, looking at it on an individual level, I would think that use of taxpayers money is more justified in the case where an unemployed person gets £70+ JSA a week, plus £100ish housing benefit, than when an MP (already on a significant wage) gets expenses to cover much higher accommodation costs alongside the other costs they claim for (some of which have been highly documented to be a complete waste of money).
Have you ever heard of machinery? That is why a large workforce is no longer needed. The trouble is, the machines are all owned by someone.
Original post by Laomedeia
Now hang on a sec, I never said Pluto is a planet. If your mum is claiming disability benefit then its not classed as unemployed. So my insulting remark does therefore, not apply to her. My comment was referring to people claiming unemployment benefit but are not physically handicapped or have a mental health issue.


with respect, your post didn't specify those on unemployment benefits. my point still stands if she hadn't got an appeal she would've gone straight onto unemployment benefit because she'd still have been too disabled to work - and there are many disabled people who didn't get appeals when the government reforms came in and forced them 'back into work'. A lot of these people are now claiming unemployment benefit because they have no other way to survive - still doesn't make them skivers
(edited 7 years ago)
of course everyone is going to say no

wait until you become unemployed then we'll see how you really feel.
Original post by years101
Benefits for the disabled and people who have SEARCHED for jobs AND are STILL doing so.

That is it. Apart from that nobody else. The money of HARD working people shouldnt be drained because Linda couldnt get her ass off the sofa and find a job.



Communists & socialists dont @ me


So what's the motivation for Linda? Carrot or stick? If living costs e.g. rent become too high it will have to be the stick (e.g. 50% of income goes to landlord, not very motivating is it).
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Dandaman1
That's just not true at all. Welfare is the largest fraction of UK public spending, followed by healthcare. MP annual expenses aren't even measured in billions.

This is the 2016/17 breakdown of UK government's spending budget:


Unemployed benefit is scant % of that. But perversely in democracies it's minorities of all sorts that get the blame.
I'm not sure understand why so many people are saying no; are we supposed to let people starve instead then?

Posted from TSR Mobile
I don't think we should be giving people benefits just to sit on their arses all day long. I would introduce something called a Universal basic income because most jobs are or are in the process of being automated. We should also encourage people to have less kids.
Original post by Can'tWait4Brexit
I don't think we should be giving people benefits just to sit on their arses all day long. I would introduce something called a Universal basic income because most jobs are or are in the process of being automated. We should also encourage people to have less kids.


It doesn't make sense for people to have less kids in an ageing population.
You lot are probably lucky that you've never found yourself without a job. Either that or mummy and daddy have been able to give you money. Not everyone is as lucky.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending