[imagist]

How does your myopic focus on punishing laziness deal with the situation where there aren't enough jobs to go around, i.e. where unemployment isn't caused by laziness? In your system, how does the worker create jobs? Given that unemployment Cody's is money, would you rather reduce the cost of unemployment or punish the unemployed, given that punishing the unemployed costs more?

[funkyy]

The moment, where asking people to work in exchange for money is called punishment, we have failed as a society.

People that are for a long time on unemployment have a hard time to get back on the market. By forcing them to work few hours here and there in exchange for benefits forces them to leave houses and actually do something instead of sitting in front of TV. It mobilizes them. And it serves public as they will work jobs that benefit everyone. So instead of taxing rich and giving handouts, rich could see this as an investment in better tomorrow and be more willing to pay up.

[imagist]

The punishment I'm describing isn't work, the unemployed don't have that. The punishment is unemployment, and the associated depression, homelessness, starvation, etc.

You have yet to respond to what I said.

Your proposed system is to punish people for being unemployed while not giving them any jobs. You can wax poetic about the benefits of working all you want, but without any jobs, people can't work.