Friday, January 25, 2013

Why pay the unemployed 400 euros a month for doing nothing?

I’ve never gotten this… if you are going to give people 400 euros a month because they are unemployed, why not give them a job for 400 euros a month doing something semi-useful?

They don’t have to be demeaning jobs, but it would give people something to do and the motivation to go find something better. In addition, if they are doing useful things, they are contributing to the economy and to the country.

It would also challenge the government to be a little bit more creative and figure out something useful that 6 million people could do instead of just sitting on their ass.

The sad thing is that 400 euros for doing nothing is probably better than many of the sub 1000 euro jobs that are available out there, so it’s only logical for people to take the 400 euros and maybe do something off-the-books to get a little extra cash.


Lee said...

I have absolutely no doubt that the long-term unemployed would be thrilled with constructive work. But I think the powers that be would see this as an affront to the conventional "job creators". Just like common sense says that instead of kicking people out of their foreclosed homes, they be allowed to stay on to at least keep them occupied and maintained (instead of starting a merry-go-round of people leaving and squatting in each other's houses.) And while we're at it, let's take people in dying metal industries and retrain them in useful work (and create work here) instead of maintaining them on starvation subsidies....and so on and so on..Seriously? I hate violence, but if I were desperate as I'm sure so many are, I'd resort to violence. Let's hope that doesn't happen. Soon.

Anonymous said...

I disagree with the sentiment that unemployed people should be made to work for their benefits. I live in Sant Cugat and I work in Barcelona. I am a highly educated person and gave up a well paid job abroad to come to spain so my inlaws could be involved in my son's life. Unfortunately my husband is unemployed since we arrived 5 months ago. If he was made to work to receive his benefit we would have to put my son in a creche and would be financially worse off. My husband currently stays home with my son, which thankfully saves us money and I don't consider taking care of his son comparable to "sitting on his ass". Your opinion appears to come from somebody who has not experienced the financial difficulties that come with unemployment.

santcugat said...

The point I was trying to make was that for many people, being on benefits is financially better than having to work in the kind of jobs that are available, (which after taxes, social security, transportation, meals, childcare etc would probably net less than 400 a month anyway).

For people that are doing useful things like taking care of kids or aging parents, of course that should count as work. To be fair, the benefit should be available to any parent that chooses to stay at home and take care of the kids.