Letter: Taxpayers should be happy to subsidise the unemployed

David Bell
Thursday 11 April 1996 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: John Philpott and the Employment Policy Institute have been offering sane solutions to the problem of unemployment for a decade and a half, so far with limited success. Even so, we need more than just the expansion of schemes for the long-term unemployed, valuable as they are.

Dr Philpott presents job creation subsidies and work-sharing measures as alternatives. The Gli Amici group of personnel professionals sees them as complementary measures. A job creation subsidy, paid to existing employers in the private and public sectors, would be paid for additional jobs. This would be for extra jobs, not for taking on only the long-term unemployed.

These additional jobs could be created by expanding business, but they could also be created by work-sharing measures. Technological advance ought to give working people the benefit of more leisure, but at the moment we do not share leisure equitably: we give it all to the unemployed, who would much prefer to have less of it.

At present, the whole emphasis is on the short-term gains to be had from redundancies and other cost-cutting measures. This, merely transfers the problem from the company to the state. It should only be the last resort of any company which has any regard for the long-term interests of the community. We need a new emphasis on expanding activities to make productive use of surplus employees and on sharing the gains from technological advice.

David Bell

Ware, Hertfordshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in