No work for lottery winners.

[danot]

I'm not quite sure why anyone would decide to do it but some do.

 

Should winners of substantial sums of money £1million onwards. That have no financial reason to work but choose to do so be forced(by law)to give up paid work to make the position available to someone who actually needs the job?

 

Is it inconsiderate of them to continue earning a wage they don't need?

[TheTwirler]

On that basis, about 85% of our front bench Government would be out of work.

 

So lets bring it in ASAP

[pcspb1]

I'm not quite sure why anyone would decide to do it but some do.

 

Should winners of substantial sums of money £1million onwards. That have no financial reason to work but choose to do so be forced(by law)to give up paid work to make the position available to someone who actually needs the job?

 

Is it inconsiderate of them to continue earning a wage they don't need?

 

I would be inclined to become an employer, of a business set-up by my winnings, thus remaining in employment myself, and providing opportunities for employment to others.

 

I have always paid my own way in my life, and winning some money would not put a stop to my wanting that to continue. There are those who might choose to live it up, and give up on work altogether, but doing it my way could be a benefit to so many people.

 

Perhaps one day, I could even be the 'Secret Millionaire' and you might see me on TV deciding who to give, or which worthy causes to give baskets full of money to...

 

...or not

[danot]

I would be inclined to become an employer, of a business set-up by my winnings, thus remaining in employment myself, and providing opportunities for employment to others.

 

I have always paid my own way in my life, and winning some money would not put a stop to my wanting that to continue. There are those who might choose to live it up, and give up on work altogether, but doing it my way could be a benefit to so many people.

 

Perhaps one day, I could even be the 'Secret Millionaire' and you might see me on TV deciding who to give, or which worthy causes to give baskets full of money to...

 

...or not

But you wouldn't be in a position to walk away from your business, or offer the position to someone else being the employer. I was referring to the average employee who earns an average wage more than any other.

[pcspb1]

But you wouldn't be in a position to walk away from your business, or offer the position to someone else being the employer. I was referring to the average employee who earns an average wage more than any other.

 

Why should someone be forced to give up work, because of such a windfall?

 

Many I suspect would do it voluntarily anyway, but if someone has a job, they win some money, why should they give up their job against their will?

 

As I said previously, it would be my choice to leave any employment I was in, and become an employer, thus vacating my previous job leaving it available for someone else, and to provide employment for other people who don't have any.

 

Win-Win

 

Whatever the situation, you should not be forced by any law to give up because of your financial status. If that were the case, there would be a lot of current employers out of work because of their income.

[Grandad.Malky]

I think the reason we “work” is a lot deeper than finances.

[danot]

Why should someone be forced to give up work, because of such a windfall?

 

Many I suspect would do it voluntarily anyway, but if someone has a job, they win some money, why should they give up their job against their will?

 

As I said previously, it would be my choice to leave any employment I was in, and become an employer, thus vacating my previous job leaving it available for someone else, and to provide employment for other people who don't have any.

 

Win-Win

 

Whatever the situation, you should not be forced by any law to give up because of your financial status. If that were the case, there would be a lot of current employers out of work because of their income.

If someone not in need of benefit isn't allowed to claim it, why should someone that no longer needs to work be entitled to do so?

[pcspb1]

If someone not in need of benefit isn't allowed to claim it, why should someone that no longer needs to work be entitled to do so?

 

Entitlement to income benefits depends on a variety of factors, I would suggest that someone in the position to which you refer, would not be entitled to claim or receive benefit.

[medusa]

I think the reason we “work” is a lot deeper than finances.

 

^^^What he said.

 

The mental health problems which often come about with unemployment are only partly to do with lack of money and have a huge amount to do with not having a role.

 

People think that not having to work would be fabulous and a bit of a dream- until they are in the position themselves, then they find that they have day after day of nothing in front of them and even if they have the money to do nice things, that still is pretty hard to deal with.

 

I stopped work when advised to by doctors when my disabilities got really bad after my last tumour. I spent a year having radiotherapy, chemo, physiotherapy and the like then found that I was going slightly mad from lack of purpose, so I took an assortment of qualifications (all studied part time and at my own speed to fit around ill health), started various voluntary jobs, from teaching to cat socialising, and eventually to running forums.

 

My income is not an issue- I insured my income before I got ill- so I don't need to work for money and I'm not well enough to get a job because I'm too unpredictably unwell to be sure to be able to get to work predictably. I still need to challenge myself to keep my brain running and have a purpose in life though.

[danot]

Entitlement to income benefits depends on a variety of factors, I would suggest that someone in the position to which you refer, would not be entitled to claim or receive benefit.

They can't! Because they're not in need of benefit. Therefore, Im asking whether a lottery winner should or shouldn't be entitled to continue working, earning a wage they are not in need of?

 

You suggested that there's no reason why they shouldn't be entitled to continue working, earning a wage they are not in need of. Are the two circumstances really so different