As someone who has taught in Ancoats and now teaches in an equally "impoverished" area, I have witnessed and continue to witness both sides of the "workshy/workless" debate: those, and there are plenty, who would rather "play the game", idle their days away knowing the dole/benefit will arrive as sure as night follows (not getting up in the) day and that a taxi from the supermarket is de rigeur; and those, and they are few, who strive hard to seek work and who'll go the extra mile to bring in the pay.
The sheer lack of ambition shown by so many of the parents can drain the soul. And the pocket. But I see the children who would suffer, were the benefits of these parents taken away. Kids who already arrive malnourished (phsically and mentall).Que faire? Let the children suffer? Methinks that would equate to a society that's lost its moral compass.
It's easy to play the right-wing rhetoric card and explicitly and tacitly lay the blame of all society's ills at the feet of the "poor". But that's too simplistic. The problems/issues that Osborne portrays as being pandemic are not based on reality. But the counter-argument, that were the jobs there, the unemployed would find them is equally the stuff of mythology.
The problem deserves better than Osborne/Duncan-Smith et al have currently mustered. But we, the public, need to engage. 'Cos remember: "We're all in this together."