Benefits Crackdown

[Harry H]

Rivenink said:

So your solution to long term unemployment is to make people so cold in winter they can think of nothing but finding warmth, turn off their electricity so they can't charge their phone so they can recieve calls from employers, or look for jobs online, and make them so poor they can't afford new clothes to look good at interviews.

Wonderful logic. Struggling to get a job? Clearly we need to up the difficulty.

"Struggling to get a job?" That's the problem they're not. We're talking about people here with relatively simple needs. If all those needs are being met why would they bother working.

How good do you need to look for a job labouring.

Give them a treadmill to generate electricity. They can spend 5 hrs on that each day or 1 hour in work for the same results. The other 7 hrs of work will give them even greater benefits.

I'm sure most will see the downward spiral they're in and jump ship into full time employment before it gets to that stage.

Edited by Harry H on Monday 20th November 11:50

[Zoon]

Gerradi said:

I'd like to know how "sTEVO" & others know so much about these peoples spending habits, ie side of a house TV , new cars, multi holidays etc...Are they your friends ? How do you know so much about their finances? How do you know what they have in their homes? How do you know them... you seemingly despise them yet you must be in their circle or are you gleaning this from rumour?

I know a woman who is quite open about gaming the system.
She has two kids by two different men who the kids have never met.
She works 16 hours a week (not a minute more)
The eldest kid has "autism" and "adhd" was home-schooled because he couldn't be bothered to attend.
She has her rent paid, a new car on Motability, plus additional income from carers allowance etc.

She doesn't hide the fact there is no point her working full time as she wouldn't earn anywhere near what she does now.

Her "autistic" son does a sideline in dealing cannabis and is out drinking most days.

[Tom8]

Rivenink said:

Harry H said:

Tom8 said:

otolith said:

Our system only appears to work well for people happy to subsist long term on a very low income. It's crap if you are short term unemployed and it's useless if you have liabilities consistent with a decent income.

The German system looks interesting - I think that the fact that our system is useless to anyone who has a good job is one of the factors causing resentment.

https://www.germany-visa.org/insurances-germany/un...

European systems are all fairly similar paying a percentage of your last salary tapered over time out of work. Far better. You pay in then it looks after you properly if you lose your job. For anyone on almost any salary our system is hopeless for someone needing to pay the bills, but it is diluted so much by paying anyone not working.

I've thought this for a long time. (only those capable of work)

You're trucking along quite well and for some reason beyond your control your life hits the skids.

I'd like the state to step in and help these people out whilst they recover. But then the payments start to reduce over time to the point that ultimately the only thing covered is a roof over their heads and some food in their stomachs.

You want TV/ Entertainment, get a job
You want heating to be warm, get a job
You want the lights on, get a job
You want new clothes, get a job

Working has its benefits.

Long term unemployment should never be able to be a lifestyle choice.

So your solution to long term unemployment is to make people so cold in winter they can think of nothing but finding warmth, turn off their electricity so they can't charge their phone so they can recieve calls from employers, or look for jobs online, and make them so poor they can't afford new clothes to look good at interviews.

Wonderful logic. Struggling to get a job? Clearly we need to up the difficulty.

Give someone everything for nothing, why would they then look for a job? That is what long term unemployment is non?

[2xChevrons]

Harry H said:

I've thought this for a long time. (only those capable of work)

You're trucking along quite well and for some reason beyond your control your life hits the skids.

I'd like the state to step in and help these people out whilst they recover. But then the payments start to reduce over time to the point that ultimately the only thing covered is a roof over their heads and some food in their stomachs.

You want TV/ Entertainment, get a job
You want heating to be warm, get a job
You want the lights on, get a job
You want new clothes, get a job

Working has its benefits.

Long term unemployment should never be able to be a lifestyle choice.

It was all going so well until the third paragraph!

What you're effectively doing is taking someone who is having difficulty getting a new job (and, remember, you don't know whether 'long term unemployment' is through indolence or the dozens of other factors that probably deserve more sympathy) and make it even harder for them to sort themselves out. Sitting in a cold dark house all winter will surely inspire and encourage you to sort yourself out if the previous 12 months hasn't! [/sarcasm].

Working definitely does have its benefits - in the typical European social-democratic system working makes direct contribution to the out-of-work benefits you receive if you become unemployed, with the salary you earned determining your level of welfare and the length of employment determining how long you receive them (and at what percentage). But in, for instance, Germany, once you've run through the contributory 'insurance' type welfare, you still get access to their basic UC-equivalent payment (which has different tiers depending on the numbers in a household, number of dependants, a medical allowance etc.) and which, beyond subject to periodic re-evaluation (to confirm that you do still have a spouse and two kids, for instance), cannot be sanctioned or taken away. Unless they've changed it recently, it is actually against the constitution for a German citizen to be denied their Hartz IV money (which amounts to about 430 Euros in living expenses plus housing, heating and health costs).

Such a system definitely seems theoretically fairer and practically more effective than the British system which, like most British social systems, ends up having a stark divide between those who receive but do not contribute and those who contribute but do not receive. As other posters have already mentioned, the British benefits system seems to be inversely proportional to contribution and progressively more difficult to access the more of an employment history and/or savings you have. I suspect this is a combination of unintended consequences (assuming/allowing for a 'worse case scenario' of utter impoverishment when people have no contribution history or income) and the 21st century obsession with means testing, so you're expected to burn through savings and/or sponge of an in-work partner before the system you contributed to while in-work actually helps you, and then it does so meagrely and begrudgingly.

Tom8 said:

Give someone everything for nothing, why would they then look for a job? That is what long term unemployment is non?

Does basic food, a home with light and heat, clothes and a phone with a data package count as 'everything'? If you were given those things - and only those things - by the welfare system would you desire nothing more? If that is the limit of human desire and ambition why does anyone take a job that pays more than about £22k/year?

Edited by 2xChevrons on Monday 20th November 11:51

[Harry H]

2xChevrons said:

Does basic food, a home with light and heat, clothes and a phone with a data package count as 'everything'? If you were given those things - and only those things - by the welfare system would you desire nothing more? If that is the limit of human desire and ambition why does anyone take a job that pays more than about £22k/year?

Edited by 2xChevrons on Monday 20th November 11:51

That's the problem we're discussing. There are a lot of people that probably desire more but are too lazy to do anything about it. The state already gives them every thing they need.

They can literally sit at home all day nice and warm, watching the telly. Something the majority of the population have to go out and do a full days graft to be able to enjoy.

Edited by Harry H on Monday 20th November 12:10

[blueg33]

Zoon said:

Gerradi said:

I'd like to know how "sTEVO" & others know so much about these peoples spending habits, ie side of a house TV , new cars, multi holidays etc...Are they your friends ? How do you know so much about their finances? How do you know what they have in their homes? How do you know them... you seemingly despise them yet you must be in their circle or are you gleaning this from rumour?

I know a woman who is quite open about gaming the system.
She has two kids by two different men who the kids have never met.
She works 16 hours a week (not a minute more)
The eldest kid has "autism" and "adhd" was home-schooled because he couldn't be bothered to attend.
She has her rent paid, a new car on Motability, plus additional income from carers allowance etc.

She doesn't hide the fact there is no point her working full time as she wouldn't earn anywhere near what she does now.

Her "autistic" son does a sideline in dealing cannabis and is out drinking most days.

I don't think anyone is saying that no one "games" the system, however the rate of benefits fraud is 3.6% including errors by the benefits service, over payments due to fraud are 2.7%

So fraud rates are pretty low, and much lower than tax fraud rates which is 5.1%. You don't see tax rates put up for everyone because some people game the system.

[Tom8]

Zoon said:

Gerradi said:

I'd like to know how "sTEVO" & others know so much about these peoples spending habits, ie side of a house TV , new cars, multi holidays etc...Are they your friends ? How do you know so much about their finances? How do you know what they have in their homes? How do you know them... you seemingly despise them yet you must be in their circle or are you gleaning this from rumour?

I know a woman who is quite open about gaming the system.
She has two kids by two different men who the kids have never met.
She works 16 hours a week (not a minute more)
The eldest kid has "autism" and "adhd" was home-schooled because he couldn't be bothered to attend.
She has her rent paid, a new car on Motability, plus additional income from carers allowance etc.

She doesn't hide the fact there is no point her working full time as she wouldn't earn anywhere near what she does now.

Her "autistic" son does a sideline in dealing cannabis and is out drinking most days.

I wonder what the correlation is between Jaydens with "ADHD" and "Autism" and the amount of furniture in the parents' gardens?

[2xChevrons]

Harry H said:

That's the problem we're discussing. There are a lot of people that probably desire more but are too lazy to do anything about it. The state already gives them every thing they need.

They can literally sit at home all day nice and warm, watching the telly. Something the majority of the population have to go out and do a full days graft to be able to enjoy.

Edited by Harry H on Monday 20th November 12:10

Yes. And therefore the problem becomes that if we've got a portion of people who are so dull-brained, unmotivated, myopic and indolent that they are happy (or not discontented enough to do anything else) with living on the bare minimum (food, house, heat, clothing, communication) then the only shot that is apparently in the government (and a lot of PH's) locker is to take away the bare minimum. Which is cruel on a basic human level and - much more importantly - always, always, ends up taking away the bare minimum from people who genuinely rely on it because they cannot easily (or at all) change their circumstances by themselves.

Speaking personally I don't quite share the moral outrage. If people really want to live their life like a prize pig and just sit on the sofa eating KFC and watching daytime telly all day and will genuinely feel that when they get to their deathbed they'll look back and consider their life well lived then they can do so, as far as I'm concerned. There aren't very many of them and they are costing me personally and society more broadly very little in the round. I feel sorry for them. There are people who are living large off extracting other's hard-earned wealth from society in far greater quantities and proportions than a few layabouts on benefits that irk me far more.

The other aspect of the German system is that (as per my previous post about how the DWP's entire raison d'être is backwards) it's far better geared towards actually helping people get jobs rather than just existing to deny people welfare (with job-finding as a means to achieve that, as per the DWP). Even the name - Federal Employment Agency - speaks to its rather better-defined purpose. It exists to match people's skills, needs and wants with available jobs and to help people gain further or new skills, rather than just looking for an excuse to send a 30-something with a honours degree to a work experience placement stacking shelves at Tesco on the basis that if they accept the job then they're off the DWP's books and if they turn it down they can sanction them, which is what the DWP as an institution exists to do.

[Timothy Bucktu]

blueg33 said:

Zoon said:

Gerradi said:

I'd like to know how "sTEVO" & others know so much about these peoples spending habits, ie side of a house TV , new cars, multi holidays etc...Are they your friends ? How do you know so much about their finances? How do you know what they have in their homes? How do you know them... you seemingly despise them yet you must be in their circle or are you gleaning this from rumour?

I know a woman who is quite open about gaming the system.
She has two kids by two different men who the kids have never met.
She works 16 hours a week (not a minute more)
The eldest kid has "autism" and "adhd" was home-schooled because he couldn't be bothered to attend.
She has her rent paid, a new car on Motability, plus additional income from carers allowance etc.

She doesn't hide the fact there is no point her working full time as she wouldn't earn anywhere near what she does now.

Her "autistic" son does a sideline in dealing cannabis and is out drinking most days.

I don't think anyone is saying that no one "games" the system, however the rate of benefits fraud is 3.6% including errors by the benefits service, over payments due to fraud are 2.7%

So fraud rates are pretty low, and much lower than tax fraud rates which is 5.1%. You don't see tax rates put up for everyone because some people game the system.

But the above example is not fraud, as you said. It's simply playing the system and is widespread.

[blueg33]

There is a connection with ADHD and stressful family life. Is not the child's fault it has ADHD just like its not the child's fault if the parents gamble or there is domestic abuse. This means that ADHD is more prominent in the sectors of society most likely to be in receipt of benefits.

They way people speak about ADHD and autism on this thread implies that its just a scam and that is offensive to people who have these conditions and most of the time its probably not a scam.

[Zoon]

Timothy Bucktu said:

But the above example is not fraud, as you said. It's simply playing the system and is widespread.

I never said it was, just an example of people knowing how to make the system work for them.
To her credit, she does go to work and doesn't just sit at home watching This Morning.

[Rivenink]

Harry H said:

Rivenink said:

So your solution to long term unemployment is to make people so cold in winter they can think of nothing but finding warmth, turn off their electricity so they can't charge their phone so they can recieve calls from employers, or look for jobs online, and make them so poor they can't afford new clothes to look good at interviews.

Wonderful logic. Struggling to get a job? Clearly we need to up the difficulty.

"Struggling to get a job?" That's the problem they're not. We're talking about people here with relatively simple needs. If all those needs are being met why would they bother working.

How good do you need to look for a job labouring.

Give them a treadmill to generate electricity. They can spend 5 hrs on that each day or 1 hour in work for the same results. The other 7 hrs of work will give them even greater benefits.

I'm sure most will see the downward spiral they're in and jump ship into full time employment before it gets to that stage.

Edited by Harry H on Monday 20th November 11:50

You seem to have a very sure and specific idea of what a long term unemployed person is.

There is a real issue with older people who're reaching the end of their working lives, who find themselves out of work, and unable to land a new job.

They might have worked proudly for 40 years of their life, paid in their NI in full.

But to you, if they don't find a new job within 18 months, they should freeze to death in the dark, because you're worried they watching a little too much TV, and that's the only possible reason they're unemployed long term.

And you've thought about this for a long time.

[Rivenink]

Tom8 said:

Rivenink said:

Harry H said:

Tom8 said:

otolith said:

Our system only appears to work well for people happy to subsist long term on a very low income. It's crap if you are short term unemployed and it's useless if you have liabilities consistent with a decent income.

The German system looks interesting - I think that the fact that our system is useless to anyone who has a good job is one of the factors causing resentment.

https://www.germany-visa.org/insurances-germany/un...

European systems are all fairly similar paying a percentage of your last salary tapered over time out of work. Far better. You pay in then it looks after you properly if you lose your job. For anyone on almost any salary our system is hopeless for someone needing to pay the bills, but it is diluted so much by paying anyone not working.

I've thought this for a long time. (only those capable of work)

You're trucking along quite well and for some reason beyond your control your life hits the skids.

I'd like the state to step in and help these people out whilst they recover. But then the payments start to reduce over time to the point that ultimately the only thing covered is a roof over their heads and some food in their stomachs.

You want TV/ Entertainment, get a job
You want heating to be warm, get a job
You want the lights on, get a job
You want new clothes, get a job

Working has its benefits.

Long term unemployment should never be able to be a lifestyle choice.

So your solution to long term unemployment is to make people so cold in winter they can think of nothing but finding warmth, turn off their electricity so they can't charge their phone so they can recieve calls from employers, or look for jobs online, and make them so poor they can't afford new clothes to look good at interviews.

Wonderful logic. Struggling to get a job? Clearly we need to up the difficulty.

Give someone everything for nothing, why would they then look for a job? That is what long term unemployment is non?

Right, so if I quit my job, go on the dole, I'll get to live the same lifestyle I have now? I won't need to cut back my expenditures? I'll live a life of luxury will I?

I suppose you too think that homelessness is a lifestye choice, and think if you just ban homeless people from sleeping in a tent, they'll magically pass credit checks to rent a luxury apartment.

[GroundEffect]

Rivenink said:

Harry H said:

Rivenink said:

So your solution to long term unemployment is to make people so cold in winter they can think of nothing but finding warmth, turn off their electricity so they can't charge their phone so they can recieve calls from employers, or look for jobs online, and make them so poor they can't afford new clothes to look good at interviews.

Wonderful logic. Struggling to get a job? Clearly we need to up the difficulty.

"Struggling to get a job?" That's the problem they're not. We're talking about people here with relatively simple needs. If all those needs are being met why would they bother working.

How good do you need to look for a job labouring.

Give them a treadmill to generate electricity. They can spend 5 hrs on that each day or 1 hour in work for the same results. The other 7 hrs of work will give them even greater benefits.

I'm sure most will see the downward spiral they're in and jump ship into full time employment before it gets to that stage.

Edited by Harry H on Monday 20th November 11:50

You seem to have a very sure and specific idea of what a long term unemployed person is.

There is a real issue with older people who're reaching the end of their working lives, who find themselves out of work, and unable to land a new job.

They might have worked proudly for 40 years of their life, paid in their NI in full.

But to you, if they don't find a new job within 18 months, they should freeze to death in the dark, because you're worried they watching a little too much TV, and that's the only possible reason they're unemployed long term.

And you've thought about this for a long time.

I have an ex-colleague in this situation. Just turned 60, was employed as a contractor (really, agency employee) for many many years in my last company but couldn't become a permanent engineering head as he didn't have a degree, only HND. Come a belt-tightening the agency heads go first. He's been out of work for over a year with a significant mortgage and hole in his pension due to a previous divorce. Sad to see as he's a lovely guy and as ex-navy he's very proud to work, but just can't land anything meaningful.

[irc]

blueg33 said:

I don't think anyone is saying that no one "games" the system, however the rate of benefits fraud is 3.6% including errors by the benefits service, over payments due to fraud are 2.7%

7.6% actually.

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/6765/departm...

And given that estimate is from the DWP who have an interest in the figure being as low as possible I wouldn't be surprised if it was higher.

[blueg33]

irc said:

blueg33 said:

I don't think anyone is saying that no one "games" the system, however the rate of benefits fraud is 3.6% including errors by the benefits service, over payments due to fraud are 2.7%

7.6% actually.

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/6765/departm...

And given that estimate is from the DWP who have an interest in the figure being as low as possible I wouldn't be surprised if it was higher.

My figures are from the .gov website and prepared by National Statistic Office

Fraud and error in the benefit system Financial Year Ending FYE 2023 said:

3.6% (£8.3 billion) of total benefit expenditure was overpaid due to fraud and error

These are the latest figures up to Fin Year End April 2023, I think that your figures are 2021/2 and the article you linked to specifically says that these are higher than usual due to COVID 19. As you can see the rate has dropped in the last year to the more usual level that was actually cited in the article you linked to!

Its not great to base your argument on cherry picked figures and ignore material comments on the front page of the article!


In addition the amount underpaid due to error is 42% of the amounts overpaid due to error and fraud.

Edited by blueg33 on Monday 20th November 15:08

[Sticks.]

GroundEffect said:

I have an ex-colleague in this situation. Just turned 60, was employed as a contractor (really, agency employee) for many many years in my last company but couldn't become a permanent engineering head as he didn't have a degree, only HND. Come a belt-tightening the agency heads go first. He's been out of work for over a year with a significant mortgage and hole in his pension due to a previous divorce. Sad to see as he's a lovely guy and as ex-navy he's very proud to work, but just can't land anything meaningful.

Difficult for him. It's unfortunately the case that as he's been u/e for a while now it'll be more difficult to get back into a similar position but taking any sort of work will help. Employers will generally prefer someone who's in work already.

[cptsideways]

There is no end of litter lining our streets, there is no shortage of those who cant & wont ever find work. There is a very simple solution to both problems.

Community service = benefits.

[otolith]

cptsideways said:

There is no end of litter lining our streets, there is no shortage of those who cant & wont ever find work. There is a very simple solution to both problems.

Community service = benefits.

Cool, we can fire all the street cleaners and rehire them on less than minimum wage!

[119]

otolith said:

cptsideways said:

There is no end of litter lining our streets, there is no shortage of those who cant & wont ever find work. There is a very simple solution to both problems.

Community service = benefits.

Cool, we can fire all the street cleaners and rehire them on less than minimum wage!

Considering many councils are operating at minimum levels, i suspect they would very much appreciate the free help.