Most people in business have bumped up against the benefits trap on some occasion. The current result of the on/off nature of their application means that they are an incentive not to work or not to do overtime or accept more responsibility. I think it is this aspect that is more emotive than looking at the net income some may receive.
Surely some sort of tapering mechanism would solve the problem.
Do we need welfare reforms?
Welfare reforms were on the agenda earlier this week, when the House of Lords overturned ministers proposals to change the system.
While plans to cut payments to tenants with a spare bedroom and capping benefits at £26,000 a year per household are well meaning, could the £100 million which the exemptions would cost be better spent?
While many individuals claiming benefits have valid reasons for doing so, others are genuine job seekers. Perhaps this cash could be better used to incentivize job creation within local communities, rather than just encouraging a reliance on government money?
What do you think?
Comments
-
John Bignall
-
I can’t believe that the benefit system can pay a ‘family’ more than £26,000 per year. Many working families have an income of less than this.
A safety net is all well and good but surely it shouldn’t be a bed of roses? -
Patrick
People who are benefitting from the welfare system shouldn’t be paid “money” they should be paid “vouchers” which are redeemed for goods and services that are “absolutely” needed to “survive“. An experiment to prove that this would sort out the “slackers” would be required but I have a sneeky feeling it would work.
-
Reina
Love the bauble belceart & the dress…...I don’t know why I never find such good stuff on Ebay??? You must tell your friend to share the links with us! :)
