"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 20:35:58 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 18/11/2017 15:32, Mark wrote:

Yellow wrote:
ave Plowman (News) wrote:
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,

That £119 figure is incorrect.

The current pension starts at £155 (plus inflation increases since it
was introduced) and anyone on the old pension and only receiving the
base amount will be getting other benefits.

I just missed that (by a matter of weeks!) and consequently get less
than that amount.

But I'm not complaining or bitter. I understand that changes only take
place from when they take place.

just how is half that generous for a younger person?

The young person's benefit is supposed to be a stop-gap, not a life
style choice, and if they cannot afford to live on their benefits then
they have the option of getting off their arse and working.

So do retired people, and many do. It's not an ideal situation, but
it's the way of the world.

It's a choice for people over retirement age (I still do a bit of
freelance).

What's wrong with that?

Nothing. Iff they want to work and are able to do so.

And I find it as depressing as hell that there are people out there
that
think we should encourage young people not to work by paying them
enough
in benefits so that they never need to.

I don't accept that idea. There is plenty of incentives to work right
now.

There is clear reason to believe that the incentive effect is currently
inadequate.

If it was inadequate, why would anyone work?

Because they prefer to work than to veg out in front of daytime TV etc.