Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 8897385)

it doesn`t register on most people`s radar unless, of course, one lives close to a First Nation Reserve

Originally Posted by dbd33 (Post 8897501)

Or in Scarborough near rent-geared-to-income housing. In Summer those apartments are packed with Newfies, sleeping on the floor contrary to the lease. They come and earn enough for their stamp then go home and laze all winter. It's an entrenched culture of benefit exploitation such as the Mail regularly has conniptions about.

Originally Posted by fledermaus (Post 8897520)

EI payments are about 55% of your average wage over the previous 6 months.

It also covers maternity leave and sickness for those who do not get sick pay from their employer.

Originally Posted by Atlantic Xpat (Post 8897534)

'yis my son. 'Tis payback for Confederation.

In a similar vein, in that part of rural Newfoundland that depends upon the fishery, everything revolves about getting your 14 weeks work so you can get EI through the rest of the year. Whilst, I can see the argument for sustaining rural communities, the Daily Mail reader in me gets all hot under the collar about supporting people who could/should go find a year round job somewhere else.;)

Originally Posted by snowdogs (Post 8897604)

The problem with benefits in the uk, as far as I can see is they are poor for people that need help and rewarding for those who chose to exploit the system

Originally Posted by dbd33 (Post 8897668)

Where is it not so?

Originally Posted by snowdogs (Post 8897756)

I can't speak about anywhere else from experience, but I don't here of many countries putting people up in 1 million plus pads at tax payers expense.

Originally Posted by snowdogs (Post 8897756)

I can't speak about anywhere else from experience, but I don't here of many countries putting people up in 1 million plus pads at tax payers expense.

Originally Posted by iaink (Post 8897456)

Its a MAXIMUM of $457 a week. and its taxable income, so you are likely to owe them money come tax time if you are on EI for any considerable period!

The maximum rent assistance you can get used to be ~$200 a month. If you own a house and have a mortgage, tough luck. Living on benefits is no picnic here.

Originally Posted by iaink (Post 8897812)

If they have the place already, and unemployment is likely to be a temporary state of affairs, I dont see who gains by them being forced out in the short term. Obviously abuse of the system is a problem with any welfare provision, regardless of location.

Not sure what would happen here were I unable to afford my mortgage payment through short term unemployment, there seems no welfare coverage for that.

Then again, in some parts of the SE a million quid doesnt get you too much. Should all the unemployed be removed from central london?

Originally Posted by iaink (Post 8897287)

That area is for the nuts

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian (Post 8897385)

We don`t have the Daily Mail here

Originally Posted by CanadaJimmy (Post 8897464)

The other problem with the UK is that any work nullifies the benefits so it's hard for someone to gradually come off of state-mooching.

Originally Posted by BristolUK (Post 8897885)

You had me going for a minute....:rofl:


Judging by comments in the press and on forums in this part of Canada there might be the equivalent.;)


Again, I have to say that is a myth.

Housing Benefit can still be claimed on a low income basis if the wage gain is not sufficient to take care of rent. The assessment process does leave a gain on benefit levels.

Housing Benefit can be extended for a month regardless of new wage levels. Back to work grants are available.

It's all there if people can be bothered to look and actually read the literature issued and on display in Job Centres.

It's not great, but it's better than benefits and it can lead to better.