chem1st Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Rubbish; she can do both, if she just goes and buys the land to build them on. Land ownership is unjust. SLAVERY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scentral Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 Well this girl certainly seems to be copping it. However, there's two sides to every story: Don't you think it would make more sense to send unqualified long term unemployed people to poundland, rather than a recent graduate who is trying to get a job? Yep but I bet they thought the grauduate would be an easier target..... Nail on head. I went through this process a couple of years ago. The JC staff are obviously under pressure to further fiddle the unemployment figures so target those seen as 'job ready'. No problem with that? Well I got pretty peed off because I had the audacity to have an education and be presentable, whereas the alkies, druggies and the incredible number of 'Ibrahims' were left totally alone. Also: 'The graduate was sucked into the scheme after attending a retail jobs ‘open day’ in the autumn at the suggestion of her Jobcentre Plus adviser, who said it would lead to a period of training and a job interview.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2085142/Cait-Reilly-Unemployed-graduate-sues-ministers-forced-work-Poundland.html#ixzz1jGimf2QE So in other words, the Jobcentre Plus (? WTF?) Adviser lied. A couple of years ago, when Poundland was the penultimate threat (A4e being the worst) by the JC staff, I knew I'd have to play along with their little game. It never came to it but, believe me, Poundland would have been grateful to see the back of me. Late? Check. Incredibly slow? Check. And where is all the stock going...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Land ownership is unjust. Land ownership by whom, is unjust? Or are you seriously suggesting that people should be allowed to build houses anywhere they please, regardless of what other people are doing in the same area and regardless of what problems it will cause? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bladesman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Well this girl certainly seems to be copping it. However, there's two sides to every story: Nail on head. I went through this process a couple of years ago. The JC staff are obviously under pressure to further fiddle the unemployment figures so target those seen as 'job ready'. No problem with that? Well I got pretty peed off because I had the audacity to have an education and be presentable, whereas the alkies, druggies and the incredible number of 'Ibrahims' were left totally alone. Also: 'The graduate was sucked into the scheme after attending a retail jobs ‘open day’ in the autumn at the suggestion of her Jobcentre Plus adviser, who said it would lead to a period of training and a job interview.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2085142/Cait-Reilly-Unemployed-graduate-sues-ministers-forced-work-Poundland.html#ixzz1jGimf2QE So in other words, the Jobcentre Plus (? WTF?) Adviser lied. A couple of years ago, when Poundland was the penultimate threat (A4e being the worst) by the JC staff, I knew I'd have to play along with their little game. It never came to it but, believe me, Poundland would have been grateful to see the back of me. Late? Check. Incredibly slow? Check. And where is all the stock going...? Id of much rather had some sort of job in Poundland than A4E. A4E = New Labours hidden unemployed statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Land ownership by whom, is unjust? Or are you seriously suggesting that people should be allowed to build houses anywhere they please, regardless of what other people are doing in the same area and regardless of what problems it will cause? If suitable plots of land are not set aside for people to be housed, yes. The law must be ignored and people must do what they have to do. When the law resembles a chocolate fireguard it should be ignored, mocked and broken. It must be destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 If suitable plots of land are not set aside for people to be housed, yes. The law must be ignored and people must do what they have to do. Okay, I'll play by your rules; I will come and demolish wherever you happen to live and build my own house there instead. Or do you actually believe there should be some laws about it after all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Okay, I'll play by your rules; I will come and demolish wherever you happen to live and build my own house there instead. Or do you actually believe there should be some laws about it after all? I haven't suggested destroying any houses, just building more and ignoring planning rules. Unused plot of land, seize it, build an house. Occupied plot of land being used for housing, keep walking till you find unused land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 If suitable plots of land are not set aside for people to be housed, yes. The law must be ignored and people must do what they have to do. When the law resembles a chocolate fireguard it should be ignored, mocked and broken. It must be destroyed. So because there's the demand for Housing, you think people should break the law and build illegally? Did I mention ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 So because there's the demand for Housing, you think people should break the law and build illegally? Did I mention ?! You think we should have homelessness imposed upon the people because of an unjust law? If you were legally obliged to jump off a cliff what would you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Well this girl certainly seems to be copping it. However, there's two sides to every story: Nail on head. I went through this process a couple of years ago. The JC staff are obviously under pressure to further fiddle the unemployment figures so target those seen as 'job ready'. No problem with that? Well I got pretty peed off because I had the audacity to have an education and be presentable, whereas the alkies, druggies and the incredible number of 'Ibrahims' were left totally alone. Also: 'The graduate was sucked into the scheme after attending a retail jobs ‘open day’ in the autumn at the suggestion of her Jobcentre Plus adviser, who said it would lead to a period of training and a job interview.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2085142/Cait-Reilly-Unemployed-graduate-sues-ministers-forced-work-Poundland.html#ixzz1jGimf2QE So in other words, the Jobcentre Plus (? WTF?) Adviser lied. A couple of years ago, when Poundland was the penultimate threat (A4e being the worst) by the JC staff, I knew I'd have to play along with their little game. It never came to it but, believe me, Poundland would have been grateful to see the back of me. Late? Check. Incredibly slow? Check. And where is all the stock going...? My Bold= What are ibrahim's, are they a new type of immigrant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.