How do we compare, benefits wise?
Discussion
This subject may have been done to death, but I don't recall reading a thread specifically about it. I was pondering this the other night, and thought people on here might have a better insight as to how this works elsewhere in the world.
In this country, if someone leaves school and decides they don't really fancy working
then they can claim numerous benefits, get given a council property to live in, and seemingly have money to spend on alcohol, cigarettes, gadgets, drugs, decent cars, in fact everything that they want and that us working tax payers have to save up and budget to buy. This 'system' can be played to their advantage a bit further by having some sort of 'disability' that seemingly only affects their ability to work, and popping out children like they are going out of fashion.
It seems to me that acting like this is now a viable lifestyle choice for a lot of people, a situation that is probably only going to spiral and get worse as children are bought up in this environment.
What I want to know, is how do other countries structure their benefits system, and do they have a similar problem with people seemingly abusing it? For ease, lets only compare countries that are roughly similar to ours in financial and quality of life terms, so America, most of Europe, Japan, etc as I imagine Khabul and the like don't have comparible systems. Is there any countries that seem to have got it right, or is it a problem with the British mentality?
Genuinely interested.
In this country, if someone leaves school and decides they don't really fancy working
then they can claim numerous benefits, get given a council property to live in, and seemingly have money to spend on alcohol, cigarettes, gadgets, drugs, decent cars, in fact everything that they want and that us working tax payers have to save up and budget to buy. This 'system' can be played to their advantage a bit further by having some sort of 'disability' that seemingly only affects their ability to work, and popping out children like they are going out of fashion.
It seems to me that acting like this is now a viable lifestyle choice for a lot of people, a situation that is probably only going to spiral and get worse as children are bought up in this environment.
What I want to know, is how do other countries structure their benefits system, and do they have a similar problem with people seemingly abusing it? For ease, lets only compare countries that are roughly similar to ours in financial and quality of life terms, so America, most of Europe, Japan, etc as I imagine Khabul and the like don't have comparible systems. Is there any countries that seem to have got it right, or is it a problem with the British mentality?
Genuinely interested.
Very different here in Singapore.
We have something called CPF ( Central Provident Fund ) which is compulsary savings fund.
You pay a percentage of your income (up to about $60k a year) into the fund of about 20%. Your employer is also obliged to top this fund up with 15% above your salery, again to $60k.
This means that you are forced to save up to $21k a year (tax free)
This pot of money is divided into equal thirds,
On death, the surplus of peoples CPF funds can be passed on in estate to family memnbers.
For foreigners who finish working in Singapore, when they return their Employment Pass thier account is closed up and a cheque (with intrest payments) is drawn up and collected at the airport.
So in order to "live off thestateRepublic" you have to have contributed to the stateRepublic first.
We have something called CPF ( Central Provident Fund ) which is compulsary savings fund.
You pay a percentage of your income (up to about $60k a year) into the fund of about 20%. Your employer is also obliged to top this fund up with 15% above your salery, again to $60k.
This means that you are forced to save up to $21k a year (tax free)
This pot of money is divided into equal thirds,
- an Ordinary account which can be used for deposit and morgage payments on a property, insurance and education for your children
- Medisave to cover hospital and healthcare requirements and to pay for medical insurance.
- Special account for pension / retirement focused investment.
On death, the surplus of peoples CPF funds can be passed on in estate to family memnbers.
For foreigners who finish working in Singapore, when they return their Employment Pass thier account is closed up and a cheque (with intrest payments) is drawn up and collected at the airport.
So in order to "live off the
Edited by XJSJohn on Tuesday 14th July 01:40
The Australian system is far too similar to the UK system and it sickens me. Basically the same in every aspect. Except the previous government introduced something even worse. A “baby bonus”. Have a kid and get a 7k cash payment. So the DoleScum™ just keep on breeding.
I work up the road from a Centrelink main branch (Aust. Welfare department) and it is just depressing. I worked hard to get where I am. Why should some lazy piece of dirt be entitled to the money I pay into the system.
I’ve worked out a way of dealing with it: 1st year you get 100% of your entitlements. 2nd year 66% 3rd year 33% 4th year 0%. If you haven’t got work in 4 years then you are just lazy and deserve nothing.
I work up the road from a Centrelink main branch (Aust. Welfare department) and it is just depressing. I worked hard to get where I am. Why should some lazy piece of dirt be entitled to the money I pay into the system.
I’ve worked out a way of dealing with it: 1st year you get 100% of your entitlements. 2nd year 66% 3rd year 33% 4th year 0%. If you haven’t got work in 4 years then you are just lazy and deserve nothing.
OllieWinchester said:
So you have the same problem with people viewing benefits as a viable lifestyle choice in Australia? $7k for a baby! Bloody hell....
Yep. Around my area the average household income is only 42k a year (AU) which is, well, bugger all. to give you an indication I'm on 75k which isn't bad money given my age, but it's not amazing by any stretch. And a lot of that is down to a high proportion of welfare payments. Basically, you will be given dirt cheap housing, money every fortnight, cash bonus payments for breeding more dolescum and never have to life a finger. We also used to have a great scheme called work for the dole. Basically, in order to get your payment you needed to do what was basically community work - landscpaing projects, things like that. But the do-gooders got involved and it was deemed discriminatory.
To pick up John's point on Sing, nearly the same in Malaysia, CPF is a great scheme, when it has run a few years, as it is actuary based you pay in then you get, and it was set up by the British, so why don't we have it. (same as we give Germany an independent central bank and then waited 50 years to copy it).
But when we set up the National Insurance/Pension scheme we had a load of people who had returned from war and needed and desreved help, so we set the scheme up a revenue basis where we paid out the money collected in the same year, and included people who had never paid in..
So the answer to where did my pension go is 'your Dad had it', and that was the right decission at the time, so lets not second guess it today. The answer is to stop missuse.
Before people get to critical I know the above is an over simplification, but there is a big chunk of truth.
But when we set up the National Insurance/Pension scheme we had a load of people who had returned from war and needed and desreved help, so we set the scheme up a revenue basis where we paid out the money collected in the same year, and included people who had never paid in..
So the answer to where did my pension go is 'your Dad had it', and that was the right decission at the time, so lets not second guess it today. The answer is to stop missuse.
Before people get to critical I know the above is an over simplification, but there is a big chunk of truth.
I think part of the problem here is that you often hear people saying "well, I would work, but after I've paid for childcare I'm better off on benefits". Benefits need to be reduced to a level - for the people who *can* work - where that can't be the case. Humans like incentives. If you remove the "live better for no effort" incentive, they'd have to get a job.
Of course, we should still look after the people in society who can't work for whatever reason (and that doesn't include mythical bad backs, depression or any one of a million different excuses for being "disabled"). But essentially, if you're fit(-ish...) and well, there's no reason why you should sit in front of the TV all day/night. You should be out there and earning!
Of course, we should still look after the people in society who can't work for whatever reason (and that doesn't include mythical bad backs, depression or any one of a million different excuses for being "disabled"). But essentially, if you're fit(-ish...) and well, there's no reason why you should sit in front of the TV all day/night. You should be out there and earning!
I was made redundant about 5 weeks ago - an have been signing on since to get my jobseekers allowance, (which is all i'm entitled too - mainly because I looked after my money, and have savings, no children and a partner who works - i disgress)
Anyways - there is actually a printed leaflet in the jobcentre its title.....
"Am I better of in work"
I havn't actually picked it up and read it yet but from what i could see it was a brochure trying to explain to people why they might be better of actually getting a job.
I mean who'd have figured that one??!!!!
Anyways - there is actually a printed leaflet in the jobcentre its title.....
"Am I better of in work"
I havn't actually picked it up and read it yet but from what i could see it was a brochure trying to explain to people why they might be better of actually getting a job.
I mean who'd have figured that one??!!!!
The thing is though unless you have children, are disabled in some way or both for that matter being on benefits is s
t and you don't get a great deal.
approx £180 per month for Job Seekers Alowance
approx £220 per month for rent
approx £300 per year for council tax
Total:
£400 per month plus £30 for council tax
I can(and have) earn nearly £300 a week in a st agency job.
So I can earn nearly triple the amount for sitting on my arse in an office 5 days a week. I have a few/poor qualifications and not a great deal of experience.
t and you don't get a great deal.approx £180 per month for Job Seekers Alowance
approx £220 per month for rent
approx £300 per year for council tax
Total:
£400 per month plus £30 for council tax
I can(and have) earn nearly £300 a week in a s
t agency job.So I can earn nearly triple the amount for sitting on my arse in an office 5 days a week. I have a few/poor qualifications and not a great deal of experience.
SGirl said:
I think part of the problem here is that you often hear people saying "well, I would work, but after I've paid for childcare I'm better off on benefits". Benefits need to be reduced to a level - for the people who *can* work - where that can't be the case. Humans like incentives. If you remove the "live better for no effort" incentive, they'd have to get a job.
Reduce benefits and make childcare more affordableCurrent girlffriend has 2 young children 3 & 6 year olds.
I used to be the first to slate people like her who didnt work.
But when i see how much money she gets for the kids it's hardly anything in comparison.
She hates not being able to work as it means she has to sit at home all day & be 'given' money by the government.
The money she's given barely covers her rent/bills as she refuses to live in a council house.
The kids father only pays money for 1 of the kids & he does'nt even pay the full amount.
She has absolutely no money to spend on herself &s he got so bored of not working she recently started an evening job to earn a bit of extra cash so she could have a night out once a month.
Because she did it properly & informed the benefits service she was working she had her benefits reduced in accordance.
She is now worse off having worked because her work couldnt give her the the hours she needed to benefit from working.
She now has to wait until september when her youngest starts school full time so she can get a daytime job.
I used to be the first to slate people like her who didnt work.
But when i see how much money she gets for the kids it's hardly anything in comparison.
She hates not being able to work as it means she has to sit at home all day & be 'given' money by the government.
The money she's given barely covers her rent/bills as she refuses to live in a council house.
The kids father only pays money for 1 of the kids & he does'nt even pay the full amount.
She has absolutely no money to spend on herself &s he got so bored of not working she recently started an evening job to earn a bit of extra cash so she could have a night out once a month.
Because she did it properly & informed the benefits service she was working she had her benefits reduced in accordance.
She is now worse off having worked because her work couldnt give her the the hours she needed to benefit from working.
She now has to wait until september when her youngest starts school full time so she can get a daytime job.
lawrence567 said:
Current girlffriend has 2 young children 3 & 6 year olds.
I used to be the first to slate people like her who didnt work.
But when i see how much money she gets for the kids it's hardly anything in comparison.
She hates not being able to work as it means she has to sit at home all day & be 'given' money by the government.
The money she's given barely covers her rent/bills as she refuses to live in a council house.
The kids father only pays money for 1 of the kids & he does'nt even pay the full amount.
She has absolutely no money to spend on herself &s he got so bored of not working she recently started an evening job to earn a bit of extra cash so she could have a night out once a month.
Because she did it properly & informed the benefits service she was working she had her benefits reduced in accordance.
She is now worse off having worked because her work couldnt give her the the hours she needed to benefit from working.
She now has to wait until september when her youngest starts school full time so she can get a daytime job.
I do kind of agree. My ex had 3 kids with her ex. He went mental and subsequently was booted out. He refused to pay anything to help bringing up the kids. I used to be the first to slate people like her who didnt work.
But when i see how much money she gets for the kids it's hardly anything in comparison.
She hates not being able to work as it means she has to sit at home all day & be 'given' money by the government.
The money she's given barely covers her rent/bills as she refuses to live in a council house.
The kids father only pays money for 1 of the kids & he does'nt even pay the full amount.
She has absolutely no money to spend on herself &s he got so bored of not working she recently started an evening job to earn a bit of extra cash so she could have a night out once a month.
Because she did it properly & informed the benefits service she was working she had her benefits reduced in accordance.
She is now worse off having worked because her work couldnt give her the the hours she needed to benefit from working.
She now has to wait until september when her youngest starts school full time so she can get a daytime job.
Now all 3 have started school she works part time while studying her Psychology degree.
But she has had 2 years of having f'all money and struggling by.
However a neighbour of hers (Grimsby, great place to bring up 3 little ones after bank take house from you) is "disabled" and gets a f
k load of money and will never need to work again.In Swansea I see it constantly... Where I work, I meet so many people from the absolute crack heads, single mums, dole dossers to extremely affluent people. The difference in attitudes is shocking.
One notable example is that people who work, tend to buy a phone, sign up for a contract on what they can afford/what suits them best then decide on a phone.
Dole dossers/scratchers, scum of the earth want a certain phone and don't care how much the contract is or for how long it is. What makes me laugh is when you are going through the credit check, and I ask about they're 'employment status' many say between jobs (haha) or unemployed and when it comes to the dates of the direct debit date, they mutter something along the lines of 'Well, I gets paid(you dot get paid, you seal money every second Thursday because your too lazy to work, or your groin is sooooo wide after thousands of kids you cant walk!!!!) ever second fortnight, can you do do it then' or My bank wont allow direct debits to come out my bank....
surprisingly its very easy to sell to people who don't earn there own money!
One notable example is that people who work, tend to buy a phone, sign up for a contract on what they can afford/what suits them best then decide on a phone.
Dole dossers/scratchers, scum of the earth want a certain phone and don't care how much the contract is or for how long it is. What makes me laugh is when you are going through the credit check, and I ask about they're 'employment status' many say between jobs (haha) or unemployed and when it comes to the dates of the direct debit date, they mutter something along the lines of 'Well, I gets paid(you dot get paid, you seal money every second Thursday because your too lazy to work, or your groin is sooooo wide after thousands of kids you cant walk!!!!) ever second fortnight, can you do do it then' or My bank wont allow direct debits to come out my bank....
surprisingly its very easy to sell to people who don't earn there own money!
OllieWinchester said:
seemingly have money to spend on alcohol, cigarettes, gadgets, drugs, decent cars, in fact everything that they want and that us working tax payers have to save up and budget to buy.
This is a myth, perpetuated largely by Daily Wail-esque headlines.Realistically, unless someone is supplementing their benefit income by, either by a legit job on the side or by nefarious means, the average person on benefits will have a quality of life that is significantly worse than someone who is even earning less than the national average.
I've had Jobseekers Allowance in the past, to keep up NI contributions between contracts, and let me tell you, it doesn't cover a decent weekly grocery shop, never mind anything else. I was fortunate enough not to have to rely on the JSA payments, but if I had to, I would have been in dire straits.
I'm willing to bet that there are very very few people who are genuinely financially comfortable, on a benefits-only income.
Work out what you would be entitled to in terms of benefits, then try to maintain anything approaching the lifestyle you describe above (booze, fags, decent car) I bet you can't
Edited by ApexJimi on Tuesday 14th July 11:02
The Ben said:
'Well, I gets paid(you dot get paid, you seal money every second Thursday because your too lazy to work)
That's one of my main bugbears. They refer to benefits day as "payday", and often they refer to their benefits as their "wages". If we changed "wages" to "handouts", I wonder if they'd be so keen to take the cash and sit at home all day? Actually - they probably wouldn't care.BTW, just to make it clear, in case it isn't already - my rants are aimed squarely at the "can but won't" workers. Not people who are out of work due to redundancy. These are the people the welfare state is meant to help, not the lazy chavs who sit on their backsides all day.
Wasn't there once a stigma attached to being "on the dole"? Where did that go?
Edited by SGirl on Tuesday 14th July 11:01
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff