Great unwashed to do manual work for benefits

[Alf W]

Another stupid and impractical Tory policy. Having a cabinet full of out of touch trust fund millionaires is really not proving to be a good idea.

[AtW]

Having a cabinet full of out of touch trust fund millionaires is really not proving to be a good idea.

What's so wrong with saying that those who get paid by the state whilst being unemployed should work if they can't find their own? The state PAYS them - it's like small salary and they should work for it.

[Moscow Mule]

Another stupid and impractical Tory policy. Having a cabinet full of out of touch trust fund millionaires is really not proving to be a good idea.

I'm hoping it's a better idea than 11 years of plastic "do-gooders" lining their own pockets in the name of "socialism".

[Troll]

The state PAYS them - it's like small salary and they should work for it.

I always thought of it as Insurance based

[AtW]

I always thought of it as Insurance based

No, it's not insurance based as otherwise premium (NI tax) would be risk based, and every attempt not to pay it would be used especially if its persons fault to lose job.

HTH

[MrMark]

I always thought of it as Insurance based

well yes, ideally this is how it should work, as a safety net when times turn bad. It may be an idea to have a gradual wind-down ie the first 6 months you're unemployed (providing you've paid into the system) you actually get more, but then it decreases 5% every 6 months. You'd have to have some guaranteed work or training though, otherwise some folk in depressed areas will simply resort to crime once the value of their benefits decreases. Plus, you always need some provision for the children - why should some kids starve because they're the offspring of Wayne and Waynetta?

[Troll]

well yes, ideally this is how it should work, as a safety net when times turn bad. It may be an idea to have a gradual wind-down ie the first 6 months you're unemployed (providing you've paid into the system) you actually get more, but then it decreases 5% every 6 months. You'd have to have some guaranteed work or training though, otherwise some folk in depressed areas will simply resort to crime once the value of their benefits decreases. Plus, you always need some provision for the children - why should some kids starve because they're the offspring of Wayne and Waynetta?

Perhaps if more kids did starve because they were the offspring of Wayne & Waynetta, Wayne & Waynetta would perhaps limit their offspring to what they could actually afford ?[/ advocate mode off]

[MrMark]

Perhaps if more kids did starve because they were the offspring of Wayne & Waynetta, Wayne & Waynetta would perhaps limit their offspring to what they could actually afford ?[/ advocate mode off]

I tend to think people who have a shag aren't normally weighing up their employment prospects/wage levels in five years time. You could argue they should be, but I can't see it happening for the section of society we're talking about. To be fair, I couldn't have predicted 5 or 10 or 15 years ago what job I'd be doing now, nor what rate I could command.

[Fred Bloggs]

IF they pull this off I will be deeply impressed indeed. However, I can see a HUGE backlash from the do-gooders out there. It won't happen, pity, but it won't.

[MarillionFan]

I think there's some fairly enormous practical problems, like, hiring all the people that are going to be needed to organise and supervise the scheme. And then there's the potential job losses of people who currently clean the streets etc.

.

I don't agree about the point about 'losing jobs'.

There are holes in roads, dirty streets, maintenance that needs doing that gets put off because of cost/labour. By getting the likes of RC to do these we get cleaner streets, nicer places to live, the cost of maintence reduces and you still keep your basic workforce. It's a win win situation.