Workfare - Long-term jobless 'made to work'

[Mecky]

As someone said on the phone in this morning, will people who are made to do this be given a different coloured tab to differentiate between them and the criminals doing the same work for community service?

 

You mean like a yellow star?

[Mecky]

Arguably, I suppose it is. - But I've been speaking it for 58 years or more and I'm probably fairly competent. Looking at your (ab)use of the language (and your amusing spelling ) I'd be quite happy to pit myself against you in an English Comprehension competition anytime.

 

 

Ok, you're on.

Let me remind you of what you said:

 

 

 

Given that a significant number - if not the majority - of the long-term unemployed have inadequate standards of numeracy and literacy, education is going to be vital to those people if they are ever going to get a job and have any hope of supporting themselves. You would make it voluntary. I asked how you were going to support those who couldn't be bothered to 'volunteer' to achieve the basic qualifications deemed necessary to get and keep a job and you said:

 

 

 

You evaded my question on how you were going to support those who couldn't be bothered to obtain the qualifications necessary to get a job, but I will answer your red herring:

 

I did not evade the question, I said it should not be made compulsory. That means, for the reasons I have through before, you should not force people to do something they do not want to

 

I have no objection whatsoever to supporting those who can't get a job because they are unfit to work through physical or mental incapacity, nor do I have an objection to supporting those who can't get a job because there are no jobs available. Provided there are indeed no (as in zero) jobs available. (And in my experience, that's an extremely unlikely situation.)

 

I object very strongly to supporting those who refuse to take jobs, either because they don't like the kind of work offered (or perhaps simply don't like work.) I also object strongly to supporting those who refuse to attempt to achieve the basic educational standards deemed necessary to get a job.

 

You say you would make education for those who need it voluntary.

 

I would make the receipt of benefits conditional on the beneficiary doing the courses should (s)he need them.

 

And id they don't you would let people starve?

 

I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make here. I do indeed pay my tax (in fact, I elect to be taxed in the UK ... I am permitted to do so and thus avoid having to pay German tax, which is higher ) I pay for food, clothes, heating, lighting, the telephone and all the other bills and expenses associated with day-to-day living. When I pay those bills and charges, I expect to receive value for money and if I don't do so, I complain (and perhaps take my business elsewhere.)

 

I - like you and probably everybody else - expect value for money when I purchase items or pay bills. Why should I, (or you, or anybody else) accept poor value for the money I pay in taxes?

 

I'm amazed! You don't seem to see anything wrong with the government throwing money (your money - they don't have any of their own) at people who can't be bothered to support themselves.

 

I do. I object vehemently to that.

 

I work and pay my taxes and it doesn't bother me. It would bother me, however, if people where throwing bricks and petrol bombs on my street.

 

Notwithstanding that there are some people who genuinely need benefits, if the support was taken away from those who are too lazy to help themselves, I suspect they would rapidly undergo a Damascene conversion.

 

 

 

 

'Resentment' is easy enough, I'll grant you that. It doesn't take too much effort.

 

Civil Strife? Riots? Overthrowing the government? - You're talking serious planning and a lot of hard work here! - I haven't done it so I'm not talking from experience, but I suspect that planning and executing a decent revolution might well involve rather more work and require considerably more skill than setting up your own company.

 

I think you'll find that most riots are impromptu and not planned, since planning something would alert the authorities. As it is, strikes and civil unrest will be inevitable

 

 

Anything else, just ask.

[TeaFan]

I used to read the express,about 6 or 7 months ago it started running front pages,with a theme,benefit cheat,the odd 1 or 2 a week became 3 or 4 a week,initially i was outraged,people,6,7,8 kids,million pound homes,cricklewood,slough,i thought this is never right,i pay my taxes,work hard,middle income,and im a million miles from that lifestyle......gradually it got boring,it was almost EVERY single day,every issue,normally my partner waits an AGE for the sunday edition,it even accompanies me to the small room!......one morning she said simply,"have you finished already!!" in a suprised voice,i said "yes,dont bother with the first 20 pages its all benefit cheats,some woman in chipping northam bought 2 plazmas and feeds her kids organic carrotts,try the back pages,thats all sporting cheats,and wer having the INDEPENDANT from monday"

Talk about priming a nation......im proud to say iv NEVER read that carp since,miss the puzzle page though!

 

It has been a very obvious propaganda job, I'm amazed that people have fallen for it so easily. In the run-up to the Comprehensive Spending Review all the Tory papers were printing headlines about benefit cheats with the obvious aim of making the cuts more palatable. Convince people that everyone on welfare is conning it and what does it matter if you get rid of mobility allowance for people in care homes, trapping them indoors?

 

It's also incredible that some people are still trotting out 'get a job' in the middle of a recession. Perhaps they'll stop when the unemployment figures reach 5 million but I'll not hold my breath. I really hope they lose theirs.

[Tony]

Civil Strife? Riots? Overthrowing the government? - You're talking serious planning and a lot of hard work here! - I haven't done it so I'm not talking from experience, but I suspect that planning and executing a decent revolution might well involve rather more work and require considerably more skill than setting up your own company.

One step at a time. The revolution will involve getting out of bed before Trisha.

 

 

 

Interestingly the poll has consistently had two thirds in favour or the proposal. It looks like a popular policy even in the People's Republic. Expect it to happen.

[mossdog]

Arguably, I suppose it is. - But I've been speaking it for 58 years or more and I'm probably fairly competent. Looking at your (ab)use of the language (and your amusing spelling ) I'd be quite happy to pit myself against you in an English Comprehension competition anytime.

 

 

Ok, you're on.

Let me remind you of what you said:

 

 

 

Given that a significant number - if not the majority - of the long-term unemployed have inadequate standards of numeracy and literacy, education is going to be vital to those people if they are ever going to get a job and have any hope of supporting themselves. You would make it voluntary. I asked how you were going to support those who couldn't be bothered to 'volunteer' to achieve the basic qualifications deemed necessary to get and keep a job and you said:

 

 

 

You evaded my question on how you were going to support those who couldn't be bothered to obtain the qualifications necessary to get a job, but I will answer your red herring:

 

I did not evade the question, I said it should not be made compulsory. That means, for the reasons I have through before, you should not force people to do something they do not want to

 

I have no objection whatsoever to supporting those who can't get a job because they are unfit to work through physical or mental incapacity, nor do I have an objection to supporting those who can't get a job because there are no jobs available. Provided there are indeed no (as in zero) jobs available. (And in my experience, that's an extremely unlikely situation.)

 

I object very strongly to supporting those who refuse to take jobs, either because they don't like the kind of work offered (or perhaps simply don't like work.) I also object strongly to supporting those who refuse to attempt to achieve the basic educational standards deemed necessary to get a job.

 

You say you would make education for those who need it voluntary.

 

I would make the receipt of benefits conditional on the beneficiary doing the courses should (s)he need them.

 

And id they don't you would let people starve?

 

I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make here. I do indeed pay my tax (in fact, I elect to be taxed in the UK ... I am permitted to do so and thus avoid having to pay German tax, which is higher ) I pay for food, clothes, heating, lighting, the telephone and all the other bills and expenses associated with day-to-day living. When I pay those bills and charges, I expect to receive value for money and if I don't do so, I complain (and perhaps take my business elsewhere.)

 

I - like you and probably everybody else - expect value for money when I purchase items or pay bills. Why should I, (or you, or anybody else) accept poor value for the money I pay in taxes?

 

I'm amazed! You don't seem to see anything wrong with the government throwing money (your money - they don't have any of their own) at people who can't be bothered to support themselves.

 

I do. I object vehemently to that.

 

I work and pay my taxes and it doesn't bother me. It would bother me, however, if people where throwing bricks and petrol bombs on my street.

 

Notwithstanding that there are some people who genuinely need benefits, if the support was taken away from those who are too lazy to help themselves, I suspect they would rapidly undergo a Damascene conversion.

 

 

 

 

'Resentment' is easy enough, I'll grant you that. It doesn't take too much effort.

 

Civil Strife? Riots? Overthrowing the government? - You're talking serious planning and a lot of hard work here! - I haven't done it so I'm not talking from experience, but I suspect that planning and executing a decent revolution might well involve rather more work and require considerably more skill than setting up your own company.

 

I think you'll find that most riots are impromptu and not planned, since planning something would alert the authorities. As it is, strikes and civil unrest will be inevitable

 

 

Anything else, just ask.

Admit it! you are completely out of your depth against Rupert................and still appalling spelling mistakes! tut tut.

[mossdog]

It has been a very obvious propaganda job, I'm amazed that people have fallen for it so easily. In the run-up to the Comprehensive Spending Review all the Tory papers were printing headlines about benefit cheats with the obvious aim of making the cuts more palatable. Convince people that everyone on welfare is conning it and what does it matter if you get rid of mobility allowance for people in care homes, trapping them indoors?

 

It's also incredible that some people are still trotting out 'get a job' in the middle of a recession. Perhaps they'll stop when the unemployment figures reach 5 million but I'll not hold my breath. I really hope they lose theirs.

Still does not stop people coming from countries with much worse conditions coming to live here though does it? and I don't hear them whingeing!

[anywebsite]

Still does not stop people coming from countries with much worse conditions coming to live here though does it? and I don't hear them whingeing!

 

It's stopped a lot of them, because there are fewer countries with worse conditions than here than there were a few years ago. A lot of eastern europeans have gone home.

[mossdog]

It's stopped a lot of them, because there are fewer countries with worse conditions than here than there were a few years ago. A lot of eastern europeans have gone home.

There might be more money left to improve things eventually then!

[INTERVIEWER]

Civil Strife? Riots? Overthrowing the government? - You're talking serious planning and a lot of hard work here! - I haven't done it so I'm not talking from experience, but I suspect that planning and executing a decent revolution might well involve rather more work and require considerably more skill than setting up your own company.

 

I have read and re-read the post you are referring to, no mention is made at all of "overthrowing the government". This statement was invented by you in order to ridicule the poster's assertion that civil unrest - low level intensity conflict - is a likely outcome of the growing discontent some significant sections of the population have with the government's harsh economic agenda.

 

This is not an isolated view. The leader of Leeds City Council, councillor Keith Wakefield, has recently warned: "I worry that young people in this city think if there isn't an offer for them to either go into training or jobs they will feel very unhappy with the society they live in. There are a number of ways you can express that and that is my biggest fear. I don't want to be over-dramatic on this but clearly if you've not got a hope about a job or even a university course that can make you a very unhappy person about the society you live in. If you've got civil disobedience and a lack of policing to help people calm down then I believe you could have far more damage to our properties and goods than people expect."

[anywebsite]

There might be more money left to improve things eventually then!

 

No, there will be less money, most immigrants come here to work, they pay taxes & spend their money in shops like everyone else.