[Closed] People that want to dismantle the welfare state

Generally, carrot is better than stick.

Give people jobs they might actually not hate, and I suspect you'd get them in work. If it were me I'd fund a government programme to get them doing something they could handle, so that if they screw up it's not someone's business on the line. Better than benefits, and it might break even.

However, there are people that are just unemployable through no fault of their own. People who just cannot mentally handle the shitness of a menial job, and become depressed. I've known people like that, one of whom later (aged about 25) was diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. It made him virtually impossible to work with, but he was an otherwise functioning adult and quite intelligent. Grim to condemn him to a life of washing dishes, but was he really eligible for benefits if he didn't work?

Again what do you suggest?

I see we have the few options suggested in the thread so far -

1) put up with the status quo
2) have some sort of government employment scheme
3) euthanasia / sterilisation of the poor
4) kill all the pensioners

(2, 3 & 4 probably non-starters)

When I left school, I went onto a community industry scheme for a little while whilst I figured out what I wanted to do. We got the equivalent of dole money but went around schools painting and decorating. It felt much more like a job, and we had a laugh doing it. Generally it was a bunch of toe rags, but even the loosest of all took pride in their work. If anyone got called a shit painter, there would be fights. A few are now self employed P&Ds.

Elevate them to the Lords?

2) Could work and ideally have private investment as well. There is a local bakery to me that employ a significant amount of people with learning difficulties e.g. Downs and it still manages to churn out the best quality product. I accept the service in the cafe can be 'interesting' at times, but that is fine. We need more schemes like that IMO. Although I expect the majority of people the OP is talking about are not people classified as having learning difficulties but just had poor, messed upm uninspiring upbringings etc.

I would be very surprised if the bakery was purely commercially viable
It may be most of the "supported employment schemes" I have been involved in have , in one way or another, been publicly funded or supported by something other than profit.

Problem with 2 is that it is dearer than 1 as you need places to send them

Second issue is that it can decrease employment

For example locally there is a [bad] employer who takes on circa 20 staff for the summer rush. With work programme he took on 4 and employed the rest for free. It may actually be a way of subsidising the worst employers costs.
IIRC a number of other employers did it with very low menial jobs such as shelf stackign wher eyou can train someone very quickly to do the same job as a paid one.

I can see why it is suggested but the reality is it is costly in terms of money and it, somewhat perversely, can reduce employment.

Very few are real training schemes leading to real employment its the same employers churning through different free labour.

To be clear I also know of two commercial operations that do a very good job scheme and do have excellent employment outcomes. However the vast majority are pretty poor.

I would be very surprised if the bakery was purely commercially viable

Yes but:

1) Is it cheaper than unemployment benefit and
2) Does it produce better outcomes and better quality of life for those with learning difficulties?

1) they are almost definitely on ESA and/or PIP or similar rather than unemployed as even this govt recognises that people with severe LD cannot work*. Given that it will be more expensive to "subsidise" this than not. Its a while [ decades] since i did this so my knowledge is not up to date or current enough to comment knowledgeably.

2)Almost definitely Yes but it also depends on the individual

* I have worked with people with LD and do not mean to say they cannot ever work and mean no offence to anyone affected by the example given in getting this point across.

molgrips - Member
I would be very surprised if the bakery was purely commercially viable
Yes but:

1) Is it cheaper than unemployment benefit and
2) Does it produce better outcomes and better quality of life for those with learning difficulties?

I don't think a bakery for people with down is a good comparison though, for won't works,

No I know, I was responding to JY, pointing out that it might not matter if it's not commercially viable.

molgrips - Member
I don't think a bakery for people with down is a good comparison though, for won't works,
No I know, I was responding to JY, pointing out that it might not matter if it's not commercially viable.

I see mention of "the olden days" when everyone had a job and there was no welfare state. The same "olden days" when if your husband was killed in the pit you also lost your income and your home? We know what society was like before the welfare state and it stank.
Don't forget that people had to stand before charity panels to be judged on whether they were workshy, ****less or immoral. The poor have long been blamed for their own poverty, by people whose wealth was often dependent on keeping other people poor.

It was dragon who brought it up as a solution to

2)have some sort of government employment scheme

I did not mean the dark satanic mines i meant say 30-60 years ago when we have full employment

When I was unemployed a couple of years ago, I saw folk at the job centre that looked like they had necer worked, and did not intend to. Far from being angry I felt sorry for these people. I can only imagine what it must be like to have no drive at all to be proud of achieving some kind of work goal.

I suspect that if we went back to the original rules and requirements for welfare state benefits, a lot of the problems and costs would reduce.

Very interesting programme on last year where they took some current claimants back to the 50s and the original rules. Attitudes were changed quite quickly.

And I'm not just saying this as an ignorant Daily Fail pensioner - spent the last 10 years working in the benefits system , wife has nearly 20 years dealing with struggling families.

My mates brother was long term unemployed and proud of it. Mocked people who worked, went on numerous courses paid by the state but never finished any, he had been sent to numerous job interviews which he'd purposely fail. Eventually he was forced to take an arranged job at a well known supermarket on the run up to Christmas. He was determined that he would get himself sacked within the week. This was years ago, he is still working there and loves it with him now working on the checkouts.
Some people need a bit of tough love and this would allow more benefits to go those that do need support. For context both of my brothers are disabled. Whilst one has claimed benefits for a short period both of them have worked since leaving school doing some of the crappist jobs going getting bullied along the way for less money than their co-workers. They both now have half decent jobs and get the respect they deserve.

The wife and I have had this discussion - and I've read the above with interest (surprisingly sensible for and STW politics thread!).

The conclusion that we came to is that this is about marginal gains. The people of the UK are (by-and-large) generous and compassionate..... but people [i]believe[/i] (whether it's actually true or not) that the social welfare system is being abused significantly. I think all people want to see is a bit of an effort to reduce the amount of p*ss taking going on.

When I worked in Tower Hamlets I was aware of abuse of the system on an industrial scale, vorteile macht frei, but corporate tax evasion and avoidance is a bigger problem. Both, however, need sorting.

Unfortunately there are people who want to do nothing but live off the state, and there are people willing to exploit the welfare state for everything they can. Just like the rich tax evaders, they should be rooted out, exposed and not tolerated.

My cousin and some of her family are exactly these people. She has worked a grand total of 35 hours in the last 20 years (1 week in a Spar) before she stated that she would be better off on the dole. She then proceeded to start having babies by two different fathers (first one sodded off, the second hung around and they're now married), she only stopped at 5 kids after the doc told her another one would kill her. This allowed her to claim to need to be near her family (me and my parents) so got moved from the hell-hole of Ringland, Newport to the middle of the Brecon Beacons in a 5-bed house (which she has now trashed and is kept in a state). Daughter 1 is now 18 and has had a child by an absent father so is living off the state in a 2-bed house nearby, she's never worked either. Son 1 basically lives feral roaming the streets all day and night as he's been expelled from all the local schools and the mum told the council she would home school him (she failed all her exams so god knows what she could teach him). Daughter 2 is the epitome of a Vicky Pollard character. Daughter 3 and Son 2 are turning out OK so far (aged 13 and 11) but that's down to my mum basically raising them as they don't like going home so hole up at my parents most days, only to go home for supper and bed.
The husband does do a bit of odd-job work but it's all cash-in-hand to avoid any benefits being stopped. They have also sold a load of puppies through facebook (undeclared income, naturally) over the last few years. 20 puppies at £3-400 a time is a lot of cash! The also have the full Sky TV package, new TV's and white goods and the housing association keeps having to fully redecorate the house every year or so as it's left to get to uninhabitable status.

None of them see anything wrong with this lifestyle and don't care that they are a massive drain on the country, they're actually quite proud of it!

I have nothing to do with them whatsoever, I only see the two youngest kids when they're at my parents house. The only reason I have not reported them is that it would mean the two youngest kids being put into care (nearly happened last year anyway) so I'm just refusing to have any dealings with that part of my family.

If a politician can find a way of getting them into work and providing for themselves then they'd be a miracle worker!!

Resurrect the workhouse system.

I think all people want to see is a bit of an effort to reduce the amount of p*ss taking going on.

I think not having constant reports of it might help

I would also like them to try and do the same with global corporations and their tax avoidance rather than us just shrugging and going its impossible

For all the examples cited above by ilky there are decent people trying their best to get by

TBH its hard to see how anything can help a a family like that and I dont see how extreme poverty will improve their lot or, as they note, the lot of their kids.

FWIW i do see a lot of dog breeding going on these days as a money earner usually with Blue staffies.

I think it's Utrecht, those Dutch have [s]some[/s] lots of good ideas...

There is a trial program which gives everyone a small subsistence income, in the hope that most people will choose to work/volunteer in some way.

The idea is that the few people who choose to do naff-all are a small minority, an acceptable price to pay for an easy system.

We'll see what happens...

The only reason I have not reported them is that it would mean the two youngest kids being put into care

Hmmm, maybe the people qualified to make those decisions should be allowed to do their job?

Interestign enough thread. Reason I posted it was I was looking for the logic in attacking the welfare state. As this particular group is often given as the reason for those attacks. I was wondering if there was much logic in it.

Apparently not! 😆

seosamh77 - Member
Personally, I work in a area were I see alot of downright un-employable people floating about the streets...

The answer is more employment. Plain and simple.

It's amazing how many so-called lowlife layabouts are actually quite happy to work and to have a decent income.

The percentage of the truly workshy is actually incredibly small.

I was involved in a survey in Australia in the 70s to look at this problem, and the final results were that the work avoiders were actually a tiny amount of the unemployed. The biggest problem was demotivation usually coupled with some amount of depression at their situation.

If a govt doesn't want to have a large welfare bill for unemployment, it should have a policy to protect jobs and encourage (real) job creation. What that policy may be, I don't know, but starting by protecting your local industries strikes me as a good start. The problem being not featherbedding them I suspect.

Perhaps if the deprived classes started eating toffs we'd see some incentive for improvement. (A Swiftian solution 🙂 )

No, I know they are a tiny percentage. Hence my confusion as to why they are the main reason for the attacking of the welfare state.