Benefits and Sky TV/plasma's etc

How about a "special " queue for those who have never worked,perhaps a kind of tunnel ,with sound proofing,mobile phones would be banned and they could only wear shinning tracksuits or a least look like they have never worked.
Then A gold line queue for those who worked for 20 years or more.They would be kept the furthest away from the untouchables..
A silver queue for those who have only worked for 10-20 years and
A bronze queue for those who have worked for 0 to 10 years.
I think in India they call it a caste system..

Note; Yes I am being sarcastic..
 
Last edited:
How about not giving 'jobseekers' indefinitely?
I mean if you havent managed to ever have a job and you are years and years collecting 'jobseekers'- are you really seeking?
 
I agree.

12 months of JSB at 250pw.

Then maybe 12 months of JSA at 200pw.

Then less, then cut JSA altogether.
 
To those of you who recommend cutting off the dole completly. Where exactly do the thousands of starving people go? Do we get the foreign versions of Concern and Goal to come in to feed them?

One of the reasons there is long term unemployment payments is to stop rioting on the streets. Think before you post guys or at least suggest alternatives .

Truthseeker your own OH might end up long term unemployed the way things are going.
 
lightswitch said:
To those of you who recommend cutting off the dole completly. Where exactly do the thousands of starving people go? Do we get the foreign versions of Concern and Goal to come in to feed them?
Click to expand...

I agree with Protocol but with the addition of basic food/shelter benefits for those who run out of both JSB and JSB. Im not suggesting we starve anyone, but handing out 200 a week, year after year, to people who dont actually jobseek - is madness.

lightswitch said:
One of the reasons there is long term unemployment payments is to stop rioting on the streets. Think before you post guys or at least suggest alternatives .
Click to expand...

I dont see a lot of rioting in the streets in countries that dont give the equivalent of jobseekers.

lightswitch said:
Truthseeker your own OH might end up long term unemployed the way things are going.
Click to expand...

Maybe. He is the type who has no job snobbery at all and despite excellent qualifications and experience would shovel coal if it meant earning a wage. If it really did come down to it and there was NO work at all and he was unemployed for over a year I think both of us would consider leaving the country altogether. But I dont believe that there has been NO work in this country for the past 10 years and yet there we have 'long term unemployed'.
 
Is it just the title you have a problem with then? ie; jobseeker?
There are many reasons why some people do not have a job.

They could be unemployable for example.They could have had jobs but were not capable of keeping a commitment,they may have had jobs but been sacked due to incompetence etc etc.

So the result would be for those who are actively job seeking, they should be made to take any job.There are jobs out there now yet even though some on the dole are educated etc they still cant get those jobs.And they could be on jobseekers for a long long time...

During the boom, there was plenty of jobs,yet some remained unemployed,I think a lot of those were the unemployable.

So perhaps "jobseekers " should be for those who seek a job,and prove it,and if they dont get the job they move to unemployable benefit...
Once again seperate queues so no one makes the mistake of thinking that someone on the dole for a year or more could possibly be unemployable...or could possibly not taking the job in mcdonalds etc..
In fact you wouldn't have to "shovel coal" just have a look here..www.jobs.ie for example.
 
Separate queues would be a good idea - at least people would see who is trying and who is not

People who are incapable of keeping a commitment or are incompetent shouldn't be rewarded with €200 per week, the same payment as somebody who has worked every day for the previous 10 years.

There should be graded levels of unemployment benefit, based on the level of tax paid over, say the previous 5 full tax years. So somebody who earned say €50K would get slightly more than somebody who earned €30K

Also we should set a minimum level of payment at say €100 per week

For example

Say we set the level of payment at 0.5% of your gross wage. The weekly payment for this level is therefore €250 per week

Ms A earns €50K and becomes unemployed. She has paid tax for the last 5 tax years so she gets the full week's payment for the first tax year of €250 per week

After year one she now only has 4 full tax years in the last 5 tax years so her payment reduces by 20% of the difference between what her salary scale payment should be and the minimum payment of €100

So in Year 2 she gets €220. This is a drop of €30 per week, calculated as 20% x (€250 less €100)

In Year 3 she has another drop of €30 per week each year until Year 6 when she has no tax paid in the previous 5 tax years so she now gets the minimum payment of €100 per week.
 
Complainer said:
True indeed. Just as there are some in the queue who mind their own business.
Click to expand...

Yawn.

Back on topic - its not the title jobseekers I have a problem with in itself, its people who dont jobseek claiming jobseekers. On a broader level I have an issue with the large numbers of people who claim from SW and work for cash in hand, who fraudently aquire homes based on being single but then move the working gf/bf in and never tell the local authority, who refuse to even look for work because "ill lose my benefits", women who claim they dont get a penny from their childs father to maximise the amount they get paid from SW,

I think the system is being played every which way and its the taxpayers that are paying for it. I dont have any problem with genuine cases but I fear we have a lot of wastage sucking up benefits in this country and its just accepted. On top of that the benefits that are being paid out are very generous and dont encourage some people to go back to work.
 
Have you reported many of these 'large numbers of people' to the relevant authorities?
 
Interesting - this article highlights a number of points Ive already made:

truthseeker said:
On a broader level I have an issue with the large numbers of people who claim from SW and work for cash in hand...
Click to expand...

Mr O Cuiv believes false claims for child benefit, co-habiting couples claiming two rent allowances and working people in the black economy drawing unemployment benefit are among the major problem areas.
Click to expand...

truthseeker said:
....who fraudently aquire homes based on being single but then move the working gf/bf in and never tell the local authority..
Click to expand...

Mr O Cuiv believes false claims for child benefit, co-habiting couples claiming two rent allowances and working people in the black economy drawing unemployment benefit are among the major problem areas.
Click to expand...

truthseeker said:
..women who claim they dont get a penny from their childs father to maximise the amount they get paid from SW..
Click to expand...

Mr O Cuiv believes false claims for child benefit, co-habiting couples claiming two rent allowances and working people in the black economy drawing unemployment benefit are among the major problem areas.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Im NOT imagining things eh? Perhaps the old 'mind my own business in queues and elsewhere' attitude just cant allow one to see whats actually going on.
 
truthseeker said:
Interesting - this article highlights a number of points Ive already made:

Perhaps Im NOT imagining things eh? Perhaps the old 'mind my own business in queues and elsewhere' attitude just cant allow one to see whats actually going on.
Click to expand...
So just to be clear - is your understanding of 'large numbers of people' based on personal experience and knowledge, or based on what you've read in our right-wing media?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register