Rowan22 Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 I know exactly what I am talking about, I have tried again and again to explain it to you to no avail but it seems impossible for you to comprehend. You still have explained nothing. I have asked you to explain and you dodge the issue. Now for the last time explain your justification for the removal of inalienable rights. It’s an easy question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savstar Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 yes I do have a suggestion, I don't think the long-term employed should be forced and bullied into working for their JSA entitlement, as I would class that as discrimination to been unemployed. For instance take into consideration, a man may have worked in the steel industry most of his life, until been made redundant. That man only has the skills required for that particular kind of work and may not have many transferable skills to use within a different job. Taking into account their is not enough training and funding available within the job center, then how do you expect people to find employment elsewhere?. Considering many steel workers have been made redundant and many people in other professions. Through no fault of their own, why should they be discriminated against for not finding employment within 12 months?. You have no need to respond to my question or opinion, because you will simply contradict yourself on what I have just posted or make another irrelevant egotistical response on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_dave Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 You still have explained nothing. I have asked you to explain and you dodge the issue. Now for the last time explain your justification for the removal of inalienable rights. It’s an easy question. You haven't explained anything either. Regardless of whether the issues are "vacuum sealed from one another" you still haven't addressed the OP either as a separate issue or a part of the larger issue. The question in the OP is also a simple one but you don't seem to be able to manage it, why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_dave Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 yes I do have a suggestion, I don't think the long-term employed should be forced and bullied into working for their JSA entitlement, as I would class that as discrimination to been unemployed. For instance take into consideration, a man may have worked in the steel industry most of his life, until been made redundant. That man only has the skills required for that particular kind of work and may not have many transferable skills to use within a different job. Taking into account their is not enough training and funding available within the job center, then how do you expect people to find employment elsewhere?. Considering many steel workers have been made redundant and many people in other professions. Through no fault of their own, why should they be discriminated against for not finding employment within 12 months?. You have no need to respond to my question or opinion, because you will simply contradict yourself on what I have just posted or make another irrelevant egotistical response on this thread. So your answer is no then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 I stated that I see it's not a viable option, I was simply asking the question in the OP. Therefore I don't feel I need to justify the costs, do you? I would have thought that like in any business the costs were very important and need to be taken into account, so there is a need to justify them when debating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 There are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of social enterprises and charities that will be able to put JSA claimants hours to good use in providing additional community benefit. What's so wrong about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_dave Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 I would have thought that like in any business the costs were very important and need to be taken into account, so there is a need to justify them when debating. Would you go into business with something you didn't consider a viable option? If so then they absolutely need justification. I wouldn't though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_dave Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 There are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of social enterprises and charities that will be able to put JSA claimants hours to good use in providing additional community benefit. What's so wrong about that? I don't know. I haven't had an answer to this except for that working is punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan22 Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 There are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of social enterprises and charities that will be able to put JSA claimants hours to good use in providing additional community benefit. What's so wrong about that? It's coercive. You don't defend human welfare by ignoring human rights. Just to reiterate free will good. Compulsion bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_dave Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 It's coercive. You don't defend human welfare by ignoring human rights. This changes things, I didn't realise unemployment was a human right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.