Surely if they're looking for work they don't have time to go to the gym??!!
I presume this is a facetious comment, or do you think that "job seeking" ought to be a full-time activity in itself, lasting from 8am to 10pm, with breaks for meals and sanitation?
Nope, not a facetious comment. If someone is getting job seekers allowance, then yes, why shouldn't they spend a day i.e. working hours, looking for a job?
And before anyone shouts at me, I have been out of work, did not claim benefits and did spend all the hours god sent looking for a job, which I did eventually find. The last thing on my mind at that time was joining a gym which I still consider to be a luxury item.
So let's get this straight. Not only do you think gyms shouldn't be subsidised for unemployed people (fair enough, it's an arguable case), but you would have a problem with them joining and/or using a gym at all until they've found a job? Just so's I'm clear.
This is also interesting. I think most people forget that a large part of the benefits bill goes to families that DO work - thus the state is subsidising low-paying employers. Also, this research suggests that most people prefer to work than not - there is no evidence of a 'culture of worklessness'.