Anyone signed on the dole while benched?

[Ardesco]

Nice comeback. Took you all of ten minutes for that response? Talk about dumbing down.

Another wannabe troll. Disagree and then start on the personal insults at the first opportunity.

You need to try harder we have had much more subtle, intelligent and successful trolls on these forums.

[Rookie]

Are you seriously telling me a contractor who has a nice stack of savings and money in his company is going to be worse off that some benefits chav if he does not claim benefits whilst looking for his next contract???

please.......

What if it takes several months to get a new contract? You don't know his circumstances.

Are you saying that if you were out of work for whatever reason that you would happily drain your savings before you would claim a penny in benefits? If so, then that is you decision.

[Rookie]

Another wannabe troll. Disagree and then start on the personal insults at the first opportunity.

You need to try harder we have had much more subtle, intelligent and successful trolls on these forums.

Not really. The first sign that someone argues with you then you call them a troll. How small minded and sensitive of you.

[Ravello]

With all fairness, there are a lot of people who choose not to support themselves and therefore decide to rely on those who do contribute to the system to fund their chosen lifestyle. Why should those who contributed and then find themselves out of work be worse off than those who choose to live off the taypaxers?

They shouldn't, I agree. Personally I'd like to see some form of mandatory work provided for the long-term unemployed who choose that lifestyle, benefits should be there to assist those who genuinely can't work through disability etc. or to support those that are seeking employment (properly, as opposed to going through the motions in order to claim.)

I'd still argue however, that being between contracts does not constitute being "out of work" in the accepted sense. It's one of the risks of contracting and should be treated as such.

[Rookie]

Another wannabe troll. Disagree and then start on the personal insults at the first opportunity.

You need to try harder we have had much more subtle, intelligent and successful trolls on these forums.

And besides. Check you facts before you state who threw the first insult.

[Jubber]

While my company could afford to pay my salary, tax and NI, I don't think I could sign on without some smoke and mirrors. When my company could no longer afford to pay my salary, tax and NI, I'd be a fool not to.

[Ardesco]

What if it takes several months to get a new contract? You don't know his circumstances.

Are you saying that if you were out of work for whatever reason that you would happily drain your savings before you would claim a penny in benefits? If so, then that is you decision.

So where does the cutoff come in. Should I take benefits if I have a couple of million in the bank? After all I don't want to spend all my savings.

How about half a million? quarter? 100k?

If you can't find any work for months go and get a job stacking shelves or something. It will tide you over, benefits were never designed so that you could keep a big stack of savings and not have to spend them, they were designed to help people who have nothing.

Your argument is flawed on many levels, the problem is that you honestly can't see why you should spend your savings can you?

[Mart001]

What if it takes several months to get a new contract? You don't know his circumstances.

Are you saying that if you were out of work for whatever reason that you would happily drain your savings before you would claim a penny in benefits? If so, then that is you decision.

an extra £60 week in your budget is massive when hitting the bottom line, your be kicking yourself later if you dont claim and things go south, maximise your companys proifits by making the claim, its a buisness decision that makes sense in the long haul. Why would you turn it down? proudness?

[Ravello]

Of course it isn't. If there is no work you need to feed yourself, the same as everybody else. You are thus working within the rules to be able to achieve this. Following your argument would mean that we could never close our companies down, and thus would starve to death. At some stage you have to make the decision that you are unlikely to find work and need help.

If, as a contractor you are unable to feed yourself after being out of contract for a month (as the OP has been), I'd suggest that contracting is probably not the life for you.

[Rookie]

So where does the cutoff come in. Should I take benefits if I have a couple of million in the bank? After all I don't want to spend all my savings.

How about half a million? quarter? 100k?

If you can't find any work for months go and get a job stacking shelves or something. It will tide you over, benefits were never designed so that you could keep a big stack of savings and not have to spend them, they were designed to help people who have nothing.

Your argument is flawed on many levels, the problem is that you honestly can't see why you should spend your savings can you?

If you check my post I haven't said that I agree or disagree that someone should claim benefits. I merely stated that someone CAN claim benefits.

Whay are you trying to force your values (noble as they are) on someone else.

I agree that benefits are not measnt to be a top up for those with 'enough' money. But whilst we have a benefit system there will always be ways to exploit it.

You have turned this argument into one about values which is basically unarguable.