Those who support the idea of paying money to the unemployed argue that society should shoulder its responsibility toward its sons and daughters and stand by them until they are able to stand up alone.
They say this is not welfare but rather an incentive to the unemployed to continue their search for jobs without being forced by unemployment and frustration to be criminals or mutineers against the values of society. The assistance to be paid to them will not quench their hunger or meet all their needs but will at least keep them alive.
The advocates of increasing pension payments say pensioners spent their lives serving their country and so it is not fair to let them fall prey to the rising costs of living while they are at the end of their years.
The opponents to the financial assistance to the unemployed say tens of thousands who are now doing petty jobs and housewives would compete to obtain the social security money for the unemployed. They also say the minimum wage in Saudi Arabia is close to the SR1,000 suggested by the Shoura Council to be paid to the unemployed, so it would be more tempting to the people to go for social security rather than doing their petty jobs.
These opponents say retirees did not serve their country for free and so this service should not be considered as a sacrifice to the homeland.
They also ask: what will happen to the retirees who did not work for the government? Are they not also entitled to pension money to keep them alive? They ask: does man wait until he reaches retirement age to start worrying about his living, or should he do that at an early age?
Which side are you on?
