"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 16:12:44 +0000, Brian Reay wrote:

On 18/11/2017 15:54, JoeJoe wrote:
On 18/11/2017 14:38, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Mark wrote:
Go for the basics. The basic OAP for a single person (assuming full
contribution years) is £119 The basic uneployment benefit if under
25 is
£57. Both can be supplemented by means tested benefits if eligible.

Now either one is super generous or one is parsimonious.

IMHO neither are generous.

Quite. Thus if you agree 119 isn't generous for a single OAP to live
on,
just how is half that generous for a younger person?

The proof is in the pudding: if it weren't generous and provide them
with comfortable enough life, then they would be forced to try and find
work (which they are not doing).


Those receiving state pensions are not expected to be looking for work-
they've (at least in theory) 'done their bit' and should be enjoying
retirement. Hopefully, many will also have other pensions to support this.

Those simply not working from choice should not expect those who do work
(or have worked and are still paying tax) to support them beyond a basic
level.

Not working from choice includes refusing available jobs, making
themselves unemployable etc. In fact, those who decide they don't want a
job shouldn't get any benefits.

We've far more EU migrants working in the UK than there are unemployed
people. Clearly being unemployed is more attractive than the jobs the EU
migrants are filling.

That's a false assertion.

Nope, its a fact.

Many employers prefer to employ EU migrants than UK citizens.

Because, when they have enough of a clue to move 1000 miles
to where their employment prospects are better, they are clearly
much more likely to be useful employees than those refuse to
move 30 miles from some village which had its only industry
like coal mine close 50 ****ing years ago,