Should long term jobseekers work in the community for their benefits?

Question

Is it right for somebody to have a never ending income from the taxpayer without making any sort of contribution? Also would it be a good idea to penalise criminals by giving food vouchers etc in place of cash?

For the benefit of Tattie Head-Out of 18 years of my adult life I have worked all but 3 months and this was financed from a pay off. Most of this time my lifestyle has been meagre to say the least due to my old fashioned view of paying my way. I am in a fine profession now though have a mountain of debt as at present we are a one wage family (5 of us) but things will be better when my wife, who put her career on hold to care for our children completes teacher training next year. We work hard for what little we have and i fail to see how you can defend lifelong dole wallers

Answer 1

You can not get unemployment benefits unless you lost a job, you can not quit. Unemployment benefits only last for 13 weeks. When unemployment is high it is sometimes extended to 26 weeks. What do you mean by long term? Are you thinking of welfare for families with dependent childern? Work requirements for them was put in place in the mid 90's. I know of no program that give criminals cash.

Answer 2

absolutely..... I have thought this for a long time. I believe that after a period of 3 months, those claiming benefits should work in the community at 37.5 hours a week for the same benefit entitlement. The work could consist of street cleaning etc. I'm sure they would soon find a job faced with that prospect. They do this in America apparently and I think it is a fantastic system, however, unfortunatley for us it infringes on human rights so that is why it isn't implimented. If you ask me, if our government can get away with the terrorism act without infringements on human rights they can introduce a work for welfare scheme. Shame no one in the big seats has got the balls to do it. (I'll get off my soap box now....)

Answer 3

There ain't enough jobs, this is a symptom of economic failure at high levels (or a contrived way to keep inflation low, take your pick).

also..
1)What would happen to the minimum wage?
2) Why wouldn't employers just put they're workforce on the dole and re-employ two weeks later as slaves?

Answer 4

Hmmmm, If the jobseekers worked for the community they would not be jobseekers anymore.
With the rise of immigrant cheap labour, fuelled solely by greedy corporations, jobs are scarce.
I would suggest you end your employment, (if you have any), and try living on benefit, before talking drivel.
P.S. I am in full time employment, and have been for 20 years, and I have seen local people turned down in favour of cheap immigrant workers!

Answer 5

You not think they would sell the food vouchers for cash???????

If you time it right you could have benefits seekers and criminals out on joint community service.

What a load of rubbish!!! Although i agree that the job seeking system should be more stringent and actually get more people into work.

Answer 6

In Australia we have 'work for the dole' - basically anyone on Newstart (welfare) for longer than 3 months is required to do public service of some sort and also job training courses.

Answer 7

Longterm jobseeker is an oxymoron. There are always jobs for those really looking. Benefits should only be given to those absolutely desperate.

Answer 8

Sure, maybe they could come over and mow my lawn.

Maybe in some places they need to be relocated to places with jobs. The mexicans don't seem to have much trouble finding work.

Answer 9

Long term jobseekers,,how long does it take to open a newspaper at the job section,,plenty of jobs available,,if the Polish people come here,,it don't take them long to find a job.

Answer 10

Yeah in a way, but in another way why should they? successive governments have destroyed their traditional industries or brought in immigrants to do the job cheaper.

so why shouldn't they stick 2 fingers up at the Government ?