MrSmith Posted May 26, 2012 Author Share Posted May 26, 2012 And what about prisoners working, the people who you are wanting to work for benefits would love a proper job. How many unemployed get benefits of £38000 per year (£730 PW) which is what it costs to keep a single prisoner in jail? I would also have prisoners working, I'm sure they would be capable of making some of the crap that currently comes from china, and they would defiantly have to grow their own food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 neither am i claiming to know what its like to have to live on the minimum wage Yes you are make it pay to work ...........which at present the minimum wage dosnt do. How do you make such claims if you haven't had to manage a minimum wage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 I am. Working for their benefits will give them an incentive to find a full time job, but if they can't al least they will be doing something for the money they receive. And how would it be forced labour? No one would be required to do it, but it would be a condition of receiving benefits. It’s no different to me working to pay for food and accommodation, if I don’t work and wouldn’t have money. There is a potential flaw in the plan to make people work for benefits. Would it interfere with job seeking activities? It would be a nonsense for example to prevent somebody going for an interview because they were committed to some kind of benefits-related work activity. I'm not saying you are suggesting that but it may be something you hadn't thought of. The crux of it is should all job seekers be treated as workshy layabouts and forced to work (for 30 hours in one of your examples) when in a lot of cases it's likely their time would be better used actually looking for their next job. I don't understand how for JSA recipients the requirement for them to be available to attend interviews at short notice would fit in with forced work. And it's easy to see how a constant coming and going of people, and people dropping out of forced work tasks at short notice would compromise the value of the work they were being forced to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 I am. Working for their benefits will give them an incentive to find a full time job, but if they can't al least they will be doing something for the money they receive. And how would it be forced labour? No one would be required to do it, but it would be a condition of receiving benefits. It’s no different to me working to pay for food and accommodation, if I don’t work and wouldn’t have money. I would suggest, if you are able, to read some of Charles Dickens works. They may open your eyes. A simple starter would be 'A Christmas Carol' Also try, 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists' by Robert Tressell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 26, 2012 Author Share Posted May 26, 2012 There is a potential flaw in the plan to make people work for benefits. Would it interfere with job seeking activities? It would be a nonsense for example to prevent somebody going for an interview because they were committed to some kind of benefits-related work activity. I'm not saying you are suggesting that but it may be something you hadn't thought of. The crux of it is should all job seekers be treated as workshy layabouts and forced to work (for 30 hours in one of your examples) when in a lot of cases it's likely their time would be better used actually looking for their next job. I don't understand how for JSA recipients the requirement for them to be available to attend interviews at short notice would fit in with forced work. And it's easy to see how a constant coming and going of people, and people dropping out of forced work tasks at short notice would compromise the value of the work they were being forced to do. No, many people look for work whilst working full time, my son has just been made redundant, he looked for work during his notice period, his employer allowed him to take time off to go to interviews and he starts his new job 3 days after is old one finished, As part of the work for benefits program they would be given time to go to interviews and opportunities to get help from the jobcentre staff, and any of the other agencies that are currently paid to help people back to work. The only thing it would interfere with is their ability to fiddle the system, they wouldn’t have as much time to work a fiddle job and claim, and they would have less time to sit doing nothing. It would give them back some pride and experience which would make them more employable. No one would be forced to do it, they could spend all their available time looking for work, but they would be required to put some hours in if they want an hand out. I suppose one could argue that if someone as worked and contributed you several years they should be allowed some benefits without working for it. But that should apply to anyone that has never worked and it should last indefinably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 26, 2012 Author Share Posted May 26, 2012 I would suggest, if you are able, to read some of Charles Dickens works. They may open your eyes. A simple starter would be 'A Christmas Carol' Also try, 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists' by Robert Tressell Why would I want to read that again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Why would I want to read that again? Because, God help you, it may instill some human sense into you. No one is a lost cause for redemption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 26, 2012 Author Share Posted May 26, 2012 Because, God help you, it may instill some human sense into you. No one is a lost cause for redemption. ...................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 I would also have prisoners working, I'm sure they would be capable of making some of the crap that currently comes from china, and they would defiantly have to grow their own food. Unemployed people can't get allotments. Employed people can't get allotments. Land sits idle claiming agricultural subsidy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidecut Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Originally Posted by Sidecut To be quite frank with you it seems that you're wanting to return to the days of workhouses and forced labour. Why aren't you sugesting making these people work? They cost the country £4.1 Billion a year I am. Working for their benefits will give them an incentive to find a full time job, but if they can't al least they will be doing something for the money they receive. And how would it be forced labour? No one would be required to do it, but it would be a condition of receiving benefits. It’s no different to me working to pay for food and accommodation, if I don’t work and wouldn’t have money. You are misquoting me which is supposedly against forum rules, I was refering to prisoners who cost over £4.1 Billion per year when I posted "Why aren't you sugesting making these people work? " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.