Is it morally wrong to claim unemployment benefit if you have savings?

[iansheff]

If it happens a week later when he's bought a car or an old folks home (why is he saving to by a retirement home?) then the asset is ignored.

 

Only cash is considered, not houses, not cars, not the picasso hanging on the wall or the fine wine in the cellar.

 

I thought second homes were considered? I know not a lot of people will have second homes but seem to remember it asking on a form once when I was on JSA.

[Cyclone]

Maybe they are, I've only a vague familiarity with the legislation.

[Bypassblade]

Savings up to £6,000 don't affect means tested benefits; savings above £16,000 stop them. In between there's a sliding scale of deductions.

 

Edit: Why would it be morally wrong, people have worked all their lives, its time the state gave them something back instead of just bums who won't work, or just come over here and expect a free ride.

[chem1st]

so a man thats worked hard all his life, done the right thing, built a home around him should lose it when he hits hard times for a while and a man thats never worked and contributed a penny should sit back and hold his hand out for more, thats not right, if someone is entitled to savings while claiming benefit then why shouldnt someone thats previously worked hard for all he might have be able to keep it, it isnt the workin mans fault that the man whos never worked doesnt have the same lifestyle hes worked for, why shouldnt he get a benefit to help him keep a home hes worked and paid for, the other guy gets the benefits and a home he hasnt worked and paid for too, and i wasnt refering to the bedroom tax either, that wasnt what the thread was about

some people have mortgages, some have rents, all different amounts so its difficult to say they should all get the same, no ones circumstances are the same, it should be on individual merit and situations, the goverment, banks etc are too eager to take things away from people rather than help them get back on their feet, for the most part people want to work and take care of themselves, its only a minority that think they are owed everything, the way people are treated when they need assistance never reflects this

im not sayin either that they should be able to keep their savings etc and have luxury holidays new cars etc while they are taking benefits, im sure most with savings would use it to support and make up the difference while they are claiming, i just dont agree it should all be taken away, thats no incentive for anyone to try and better themselves if in the back of your mind you think whats the point , if it all goes wrong tomorrow its gonna be taken away anyway, its a difficult subject to agree on isnt it

 

If a man who has worked hard and has £16000 is cash savings is disqualified from benefits.

Then a man who has worked hard and built up £16k of property equity in 'savings', should also be disqualified.

 

---------- Post added 30-03-2013 at 12:02 ----------

 

Excellent idea! Then I could buy the house and rent it out thus keeping another greedy landlord in pocket.

I always knew you were on the side of the landlord

 

I'm not. I'm just pointing out, that one group is treated much more favourably than another. And that should not be the case.

 

And to accuse me of being on the side of the landlord is quite frankly laughable.

[Longcol]

If a man who has worked hard and has £16000 is cash savings is disqualified from benefits.

Then a man who has worked hard and built up £16k of property equity in 'savings', should also be disqualified.

 

I thought you got the first 6 months of JSA regardless of any savings.

 

http://www.thesite.org/homelawandmoney/money/benefitsandtax/jobseekersallowance

[MrSmith]

If a man who has worked hard and has £16000 is cash savings is disqualified from benefits.

Then a man who has worked hard and built up £16k of property equity in 'savings', should also be disqualified.

 

But the man with a mortgage will only get the interest paid for two years, whilst the man that rents is given enough money to pay the landlords full mortgage and profits.

[gnvqsos]

I thought you got the first 6 months of JSA regardless of any savings.

 

http://www.thesite.org/homelawandmoney/money/benefitsandtax/jobseekersallowance

 

It depends if you want contributory or means-tested JSA-only the latter is dependent on savings etc.

[raymondo1952]

is it morally wrong that someone works hard scrips and saves then thro no fault of their own becomes unemployed should not claim unemployment benifits after contributing most of their working lives When other people just fritter their money away and expect to be kept by the state The goverments have a lot to be said for,people know its not worth saving for what they call a rainy day because you are penalized

[carosio]

Assuming a low wage worker was in the position to save, why would they save for old age care?

 

And if they save for a holiday or car, they are most likely planning to spend their money abroad, or buy a foreign made vehicle. The one who peed it up against a wall sounds like an alcoholic who has spent it on alcohol.

 

With alcohol being nearly pure tax. Then the one who peed it up against a wall has put much more into the state and clearly deserves to take more back out.

 

Are you advocating a principle that every taxpayer deserves to claim back all (or the same proportion of) the tax that he put in?

[ricgem2002]

Are you advocating a principle that every taxpayer deserves to claim back all (or the same proportion of) the tax that he put in?

shouldnt you be asking the gov that and the well off who dont seem to pay much ?