Generous unemployment benefits?

[David Johnson]

Hi
I have lost track of the thousands of posts I must have seen on this forum going on and on about how generous our welfare system is, how wonderful the vast array of benefits there are for the unemployed, how such generous benefits put people off looking for work etc etc. These posts seem to be made by people who are not actually unemployed themselves.

Am I missing something? A mate of mine who has worked all his life and has savings was made unemployed through no fault of his own. He told me that because he had savings above ?16K he would only be able to get contribution based Jobseekers Allowance of about ?65 a week and nothing else. Also he said that the contribution based JSA would only last 6 months after which he would not be able to claim anything because of his savings. He decided that he would rather not have all the endless hassle of signing on for the princely sum of ?65 a week for 6 months and he told them to get stuffed more or less.

He told me that even if he had had no savings he would have only got about ?65 + council tax (goes to the council) + rent (goes to the landlord) so he would be still living on a pittance.

So to all those posters who go on about people living the life of reilly on the dole etc etc bleeding etc. perhaps you can come up with some info that backs up this argument, because I ain't hearing from people I know!

Note I am not talking about fiddling the dole or having a job on the side. That's fraud. What I am talking about is someone explaining to me why they think these benefits are so generous for a western European country.

Cheers
D

[David Johnson]

Aren't you missing the Jeremy Kyle show?

[David Johnson]

Given that you are one of the people who seem to enjoy giving the unemployed a verbal kicking re. generous unemployment benefits, perhaps you can defend your position.

If not, best to wander off and waste someone else's time, I guess!

Cheers
D

[Alex L]

This one has not done too bad, scroll down for a running total.



I guess that the mistake your mate has made is having actually paid something into the system.

[David Johnson]

"I guess that the mistake your mate has made is having actually paid something into the system."

I don't think so. Like I said in my original post, he reckoned he wouldn't personally be any better off in terms of day to day living, if he had had no savings in the sense that a lot of means tested benefits such as council tax support and rent go to others, not him.

"This one has not done too bad, scroll down for a running total."

This is a fairly typical response that newspapers of a certain persuasion take. They pick the most extreme example which is I would guess typical of less than 1% of claimants and use that to foster the opinion that ALL claimants are on easy street.

What I am looking for is some actual facts as to what Joe Public i.e. single bloke, single woman or married couple two kids etc etc. can claim for in benefits, in particular what they would get to spend on themselves as opposed to passing on to a landlord, council etc etc.

Cheers
D

[Lizard]

[img]http://annietv600.files.wordpress.com/2 ... prozac.jpg[/img]