No one 'wants' to be on benefits!

Brigadier said:
The Wail says that claimants are getting "thousands of pounds a month", so why quote the claimant who isn't? ;)


And there will always be some who are happy in benefits, not "no-one" as the OP is using for his strawman.
Click to expand...
Incorrect.

I have seen plenty tv progs over the years where someone on the panel will state to the effect 'no one would choose to be on benefits' this is inaccurate.
 
ajohn said:
There were 2.4 million people on Universal Credit in employment for December 2023, 38% of all people on Universal Credit. This figure has been stable since January 2023.
The number of households on Universal Credit is 5.4 million
Households with children accounted for 50% of households on Universal Credit with a payment in November 2023.
Another report linked off the one I posted
  • 2.0 million people were on UC health compared to 1.6 million a year earlier
  • of these, 272 thousand (14%) had acceptable medical evidence of a restricted ability to work pre-WCA; 347 thousand (18%) were assessed as limited capability for work (LCW), and 1.4 million (69%) were assessed as limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA)
  • 53% of claimants were female
  • of all claimants on UC health, 37% were aged 50 plus and 11% aged under 25...
Click to expand...
22.4 million people claimed some combination of DWP benefits in August 2022 (of the 17 benefits included in these statistics).
12.7 million were of State Pension age; 9.1 million of working age and 600,000 were under 16 claiming disability allowance.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
Incorrect.

I have seen plenty tv progs over the years where someone on the panel will state to the effect 'no one would choose to be on benefits' this is inaccurate.
Click to expand...
no you havent

"plenty" you say

nah, didnt happen
 
berty3000 said:
There were various factors that led to rising crime, pinning it on the one that supports your desire to maintain a paid army of lazies is unconvincing. Violent crime is out of control in some urban areas in this country right now. It can't be blamed on a lack of benefits.
Click to expand...
There will always be poverty and crime but it’s not our obligation to make it worse
 
Mention of over 50 is interesting. Conversation with some one at work who lives in an area with a level of unemployment. It would seem going on how the gov handles them they have little expectation of people 50 or older of ever getting work.
 
ajohn said:
Mention of over 50 is interesting. Conversation with some one at work who lives in an area with a level of unemployment. It would seem going on how the gov handles them they have little expectation of people 50 or older of ever getting work.
Click to expand...

I would suggest you are wrong in principle - at 50, I was still updating my skill level, as well as seeking out and getting alternative jobs.
 
Notch7 said:
Yes we all know, that’s a given.

But when people on the right wing of politics talk about “benefit scroungers”, they never apply to that small subset of people on benefits.


I know a lady I see when out walking my dog, she suffers PTSD from historic domestic violence she also clearly has some other health issues. She lives on benefits. Last winter she could afford to heat her flat, as universal credit didn’t give her enough money to do it.


When people like you, Berty, Harry etc talk about “benefit scroungers” without qualifying who you mean: You include her in that. That’s the problem.
Click to expand...
I dont think you have ever seen me use those words.

When people go on about benifit scroungers (as you put it) then I think they are talking about a different breed of people and not the likes of the lady you speak of.


I see all walks of life when I go through front doors. So I see that your correct that people are in need and are not in a good way.
The other side I don't see so much these days as they are generally council tenants.
 
I have more than likely said about this before.

It's not the same but it's similar.

I worked for a company called Behive in the Oxford Street area of Sydney. Apart from the girls in the office and 3 strong young good looking lads to do the lifting; the whole work force was pensioners or disabled.

Their roll was to deal with the returns from readers digest. Unpack and organise.
Nothing too hard. The owners I would imagine got some cheap labour that they didn't have to pay the benefits of a normal workforce.

The pensioners got fed breakfast and dinner every day and got taken out on day trips plus socialising was wonderful for them all.
There was no commitment, if they didn't want to work then they either wouldn't come in or do their own thing.

It worked for everyone. These where happy old people who where no longer stuck in their homes.

If this doesn't exist for pensioners, disabled and those who's health isn't that good. Then we need to encourage this, as it must be great for mental health, dignity and people's general well being.
 
I think this is it.

Beehive Industries – A social enterprise and ethical business

Beehive Industries seeks to support seniors, people with a disability and by helping them connect to their peers and their community, and give them a sense of purpose. We are a social enterprise that provides supply and procurement business solutions for government and corporate agencies.
www.beehiveindustries.com.au www.beehiveindustries.com.au


It brought a tear to my eye. It was a lovely job.
 
Bod ... said:
The other side I don't see so much these days as they are generally council tenants.
Click to expand...
I know someone who works for a company that the council contract out repair work on council houses. I needed a plasterer and he put me in touch with one who works for the same co. I believe he is a plumber.
This aspect is probably what Mrs T wanted to get rid of when the sell off started. No need to even replace a light switch etc.

Bod ... said:
When people go on about benifit scroungers (as you put it) then I think they are talking about a different breed of people and not the likes of the lady you speak of.
Click to expand...
I see them as people who manage to claim when they shouldn't be able to. The gov produces figures they know about which isn't really the same as that number so posted the figures. Here you see questioning if they can work - a job that suites their problem. This is not the same as saying they can definitely work or that a suitable job is available. The differences between men and women and also with and without children complicates things further. As does age. Really a much more thorough break down is needed.

Number of true swindlers - very probably rather small hence the little money spent monitoring and watching them. Some occasionally hit the headlines.
 
Justin Passing said:
That's the behaviour which needs some attention. If B-I-L was told he had to do community service to get his benefit, then he may not have suffered the dereliction he did. I know a River Warden who was unemployed a long time after tryoing some office jobs. He's very good about the state of the river and the wildlife. I may be optimistic but I'd like to think there woud be others on the dole who would be ok at a job like that, though they never thought it possible.


That was the stupid situation for as long as I can remember. Is it still? I hope not.
Click to expand...

It's meant to be more flexible now with Universal Credit. There's a taper rather than a cliff edge. I don't know how well this works in practice.
 
JonathanM said:
That is such a stupid comment. These are jobs for young, fit people.
Click to expand...
They are a small number of examples and not everybody who is choosing to be idle is unable to undertake such tasks.

Out of interest, what is your argument in favour of having large numbers of people paid to do nothing, long term, from the public purse? Is it that you are a doleite yourself?

Encouraging people to be weak, lazy amd dependent is a form of cruelty. Like having a dog you only ever feed and allow to sit indoors growing fat. Not kind.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top