Is it more economical (ie ‘cheaper’) to pay long-term unemployment benefit than it is to pay an increase in the state pension?
It’s a simple question for starters. It must be better to have many thousands in paid work paying tax than it would cost the Government to pay out an enhanced rate to pensioners willing (and able) to step away from the workplace.
An unemployed person is unable to contribute to either the state (and all the other societal costs that entails) or do much to move their own lives forward. And the young unemployed might be claiming benefits a hell of a lot longer than most pensioners will be claiming a pension.
Support The Big Issue and our vendors by signing up for a subscription
I’m sure that we all know of many seniors who continue to work, some of necessity, not all by choice, but who, with the prospect of an enhanced state pension and with more modest needs, might be better placed to consider an earlier retirement from the workplace. This would free up the job market for those more in need and, frankly, more longevity.
No way should this be mandatory, but when there are finite resources — by which I mean jobs — to go round, those that can, might consider sharing more equally for everyone’s greater benefit.