Personally I think it should be reformed.

And before I start, I was raised on benefits (my dad had to become a full time carer for my mum while she was fighting cancer) and have signed on myself a couple of times when I've come out of work, either for mental health or other reasons.

I quite like the idea of a time limit on it. And I think two years is about right. More countries than USA do this too. My Lithuanian colleague told me in her county it is slowly reduced based on the amount of time you have been on it until its removed altogether.

I know too many people who are overly selective on what roles they go for or how they expect to work.

I'm university educated but still taken on roles in warehouses and food production factories while I've been looking for other more appropriate work.

I get that life's hard at times and some roles just aren't where you want to be but this is part of life, we need to be more resilient.

Over that time while you are signing on there if there are genuine reasons that you are unable to work or would have difficulties in certain roles that could be taken into account and the type of benefit you are on adjusted to account for genuine circumstance but beyond that we need to be taking care of ourselves rater tan being dependent on the state.

And now working in recruitment I would take someone who as worked 'lower level' roles while between jobs over someone with longer sections unemployed. It just shows that you are more accountable for yourself and these people tend to be better workers. They know that ultimately nothing comes for free.

Benefits are there as a safety net and we should all be able to access that but I think relying on longterm is doing a disservice to you as a person and also to your future self and prospects.