1 Name: Anonymous : 2015-12-27 15:34
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/26/dutch-city-utrecht-basic-income-uk-greens Last Tuesday, Johanna von Schaik-Vijfschaft, 41, could be found updating her CV on one of the computers made available to benefits claimants at the Utrecht council building. A cleaner at a local department store, she had been told by council officials to find more work than the 12 hours she currently does.
But she will be under even more pressure in a few years when her 19-year-old son turns 21 and leaves her care. Once she has no dependants, she will lose £150 of her £500 monthly benefit payment and come under the remit of the participation laws, legislation recently brought in by the rightwing central government to make benefits claimants work harder for their cash. Von Schaik-Vijfschaft could be ordered to do some community work for the council in return for her benefits, and will face the threat of losing more of her income if her application rate for jobs falls away. And if Von Schaik-Vijfschaft were to dress inappropriately for interviews or, worse still, miss an appointment, she will lose all her benefits for a month.
Are we supposed to feel sorry for this lady?
2 Name: Anonymous : 2015-12-27 15:39
she will be under even more pressure in a few years when her 19-year-old son turns 21 and leaves her care. Once she has no dependants, she will lose £150
And why is the stupid shit of a Guardian reporter saying this will put her under extra pressure? She loses £150, but her costs come down, so she should be no worse off.
Guardian reporters are wankers.
3 Name: Anonymous : 2015-12-27 15:43
The country’s second city, Rotterdam, has even trialled a “work first” system, where aspiring benefits claimants must put on an orange jacket and spend two months clearing rubbish before they are handed any payments.
Why only 2 months? Why are all benefits claimants not made to work for the state for as long as they are claiming?
4 Name: Anonymous : 2015-12-27 15:46
That would mean scrapping the unemployment insurance part of National Insurance (at least for employees.)
Would that make financial sense?
5 Name: Anonymous : 2015-12-27 15:52
I wouldn't scrap it, but it needs some serious reworking.
For example, if I have paid in for 20 years, I should be able to take unemployment benefit at a higher weekly rate than someone who has only paid in for a year.
It can't be too difficult to get a system in place that runs an NI number like a deposit account which stores a balance and therefore has a drawdown rate.
So, if you haven't paid enough in, you have to work for the state.