Austerity has hardened the nation's heart

Post Reply New Topic

An article by the independent that delves beneath the skin of the pro-austerity arguments. Good points.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 22568.html

I get it.

After all, if welfare benefits exceed having a minimum wage job, why would people bother trying to get minimum wage jobs?

It is the combination of unemployment benefit and housing benefit that is too high. Housing benefit is the culprit not unemployment benefit. Rent is much higher now than in the 80's.

If our stupid governments just sort out the housing issue then the benefit bill will drop.

As if it wasn't hard enough already............

People who work minimum wage can claim benefits in the UK... most people on benefits work over there.

Unfortunately, there are many Americans of that state of mind, as well.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

They don't.

Jobseeker's Allowance is £71.70 a week for over 25s. Minimum wage is £6.19 per hour for over 21s. A 12 hour working week will earn more than Jobseeker's, a 37.5 hour week will do so comfortably. Low earners are still entitled to all over benefits like housing and council tax assistance.

1,700 people applied for 8 jobs at Costa Coffee in Nottingham.

The problem with conservative/liberatarian thought is that the fault resides with the jobseeker/welfare recipient rather than the employer sector who intransigently refuses to raise the value of labour.

Like the Walrus said about Costa Coffee in Nottingham, the thing that the critics of benefit recipients are ignoring is that there is a vicious symbiosis between big business and the employment status quo. It gives them the power of social leverage over us to choose whether we live in mediocrity or poverty. Companies like costa coffee rely on the big pool of unemployment because it drives down the value of wages. I guarantee those 8 people who were selected werent getting much more if anything, than a few pennies above the minimum wage. The taxpayer is not the 'victim' of the welfare recipient. Welfare recipients are the victims of the government and private sectors failure to provide significant numbers of jobs with dignified salaries. If anything we are all victims of the government and private sector because the job shortage is what is dragging down the salaries of those who are already in work.

Anyone of us could be out on our ass on the street next, and don't forget it.

Costa is quite good tbf, the Costa Foundation does a lot of good work and isn't just something they pay lip service to. The starting hourly wage is £6.50, comfortably above minimum wage, above what the minimum wage will soon be raised to, and above what I earn in a branch of a national chain of book shops.

Costa also benefit from higher levels of employment because people have more money to spend on luxuries.

Soon enough that margin will become meaningless when the minimum wage is forced to £6.50 because of inflation.

They benefit far more from not having to pay their workers significantly more than what they are legally obliged to. I used to earn £7.15 an hour packing toothpaste, that was back in 2003. Shows that the standard of living is actually regressing. To be fair to middle companies like costa, the worst offenders are companies like multi national call centres, big logistics and manufacturing firms and ubiquitous supermarket giants like Tesco who force small locally owned community shops out of business while trickling out low paid, low skilled jobs and keep their own staff in a standard of living that does not justify the social impact they are having on the communities that host them. Especially the ones participating in the workfare robbery.

The answer is simple really. don't get on government housing, then they wont be able to tell you what to do with a spare bedroom
Its exactly the reason I pay retail for housing. I don't want the government having that kind of control over me

The reason people depend on government housing is partly the the exhorbitant sums that landlords insist on charging for deposits and partly the negative stigma against welfare recipients, fuelled by the job shortage. Many landlords in the UK stipulate in their adverts 'No DSS' meaning no department of social services clients welcome to apply.

Again the problem is gentrification and the prevailing attitudes with the private sector. Frankly though housing is only one symptom of the root problem. The key is generating jobs both in sufficient numbers, sustainability and of sufficient wages that will ease social mobility. Many of the working population here is also dependent on government housing because of the cost of private tenancy. Which means that the low value of labour is creating a further burden on state sector housing. Even aside from that there is a whole plethora or reasons why people choose to become government tenants. People prefer state housing often because they recieve a consistent and dependable service when it comes to things like repairs and maintenance. Often with private landlords the quality and consistency of service can be something of a Russian Roulette.

Being a private tenant though does not guarantee you protection against others having control over you, quite the contrary. I am a private tenant and my previous landlord became bankrupt which meant that his creditors gained posession over our home. We were given 6 weeks notice to vacate (right before Christmas) and find a new home otherwise we'd be on the street. It was lucky we had a friend with a spare house to rent otherwise we would have been at the mercy of the social housing system.

Where else would you suggest these people live?

Obviously in the magical surplus of imaginary, affordable private houses built by faeries that people ignore because they are too foolish not to be co-erced into gubbermint subjucation.

Worth bearing in mind the housing situation is different in the UK richard - this is an expensive and very overcrowded island. Folk don't always have a choice, and where social housing is available - usually in short supply - it is cheaper than private rents. The government already cap the amount they will pay towards housing benefit for private rentals - what the latest 'bedroom tax' travesty does is cut the incomes of those social tenants to below subsistence level, by moving the goalposts. In many areas there is a severe shortage of suitable smaller properties for tenants who fall foul of the new occupancy criteria, including carers and the disabled, to downsize into, particularly in Northern England where due to cheaper land councils and housing associations historically allocated a spare bedroom to tenants as a reasonable thing - making one bedroom homes a rarity.

Something will have to happen soon regarding the housing market before the situation becomes untenable - we need to build more affordable housing and renovate existing empty homes, now, and instigate rent controls in under pressure areas to prevent landlords from jacking up the prices. Of course the government won't do that. This cannot end well.

Thats actually a lie perpetuated by the right wing to advocate tighter immigration controls.

Both Germany and Japan have more people per square unit area, yet both nations enjoy superior average living standards than the UK.