So, rather than have people on benefits do community work, why can’t we just have more council jobs doing the same thing? End result is the same but without any kerfuffle.

The answer is to run the economy so we do not have millions of unemployed people.

~When tehre is a job for everyone then we don’t need the benefits

Molgrips – we could esily do this – however it would drive up the cost of labour so is not in the tories interest

High unemplyment keeps down the cost of labour and makes hire and fire easy.

it would drive up the cost of labour so is not in the tories anyone’s interest

High unemplyment keeps down the cost of labour and makes hire and fire easy. makes people unhappy, and likely to vote for ‘anyone but this lot’

makes sense now.

We need to bring in maximum pay limits for all jobs, and increase the pay for lower paid jobs with the savings, then create lots of jobs, tidying up the environmnet, careing for older people, and general non skilled jobs.

We need to somehow take empty homes back into public ownership,and charge affordable rents, reduce the council tax for the lower paid, and reduce the intrest rates on mortgages, possibly by natioanlising the banks with no compenstion for the shareholders, just the price of their shares back, large companies owning shares in Banks, should just get a small proportin back.

Roll on the socialist revolution

That sounds hideous. I’m rather pleased it’ll never happen.

High unemplyment keeps down the cost of labour and makes hire and fire easy. makes people unhappy, and likely to vote for ‘anyone but this lot’

makes sense now.

There’s no evidence that is true.

I know of one prime minister who double unemployment and yet got an increased majority.

As long as they convince voters that unemployment is not their fault, which they usually do – specially if backed up by the press, and that unemployed people should get off their arses and stop sponging, which they usually do – specially if backed up by the press, then high unemployment really isn’t a problem for governments.

In fact it keeps wages low and profits high, so really quite desirable.

Except of course that skint people can’t afford to buy goods and services, so profits are affected in the long run. But that sort of talk concerning the contradictions of capitalism is marxist stuff, so we choose to ignore it and pretend it doesn’t happen.

This is why those on benfits don’t always get much sympathy – none of the above expenditures are ‘essential’

Yeah, ‘cos they’re ALL like that.

possibly by natioanlising the banks with no compenstion for the shareholders

Love to see you try & get support for that idea.. 🙄

I haven’t had heating for 3 years… When faced with the question of £300 for a full tank of oil… or £300 for a marmot triclimate parka you are going to buy anyway… you easily realize you have electrically heated showers and the joy of the postman’s face as you accept packages. 🙂

Roll on the socialist revolution

Is`nt the Socialist evolution moving quick enough or you ?

“possibly by natioanlising the banks with no compenstion for the shareholders”

Love to see you try & get support for that idea..

Well at least you don’t think there’ll be any problem with project’s other ideas, it’s just that idea you think will cause problems. Lets run through project’s other ideas again :

“We need to bring in maximum pay limits for all jobs, and increase the pay for lower paid jobs with the savings, then create lots of jobs, tidying up the environmnet, careing for older people, and general non skilled jobs.

We need to somehow take empty homes back into public ownership,and charge affordable rents, reduce the council tax for the lower paid, and reduce the intrest rates on mortgages, possibly by natioanlising the banks with no compenstion for the shareholder……”

So we’ll leave nationalising the banks with no compensation until there’s a bit more support then.
Sounds OK to me.

BTW, how much compensation was paid to shareholders when the banks were nationalised 3 years ago – was it a lot ?

wallace1492 – Member

“TandemJeremy – Member

No luxuries at all allowed if you are unemployed – bare basics for survival only despite the fact we do not have work for millions of people”

So are fags on booze esentials? These peope, seem to do OK out of our benefits system.

I meant allowed by folk onhere – sarcasm? Wooshing over your head?

Ok I don’t think much of their priorities especially the fags. However to deny folk any luxuries at all in this day and age seems rather harsh when we have millions out of work – there simply is no job for most of the unemployed to go into if they all retrain and get skills and apply for jobs tomorrow where are all these new jobs coming from? there will still be 3 million unemployed

Surely these people cannot be happy, how can they be.
In my simple little world view the whole point of life is to pursue happiness for the family and oneself.
If there is no pursuit then there can be no appreciation.

Both my brothers have worked for 30 plus years on salaries closer to the minimum wage than I care to think,they pay into the system and have always held their own despite the fact they could have easily taken the lazy option.
Despite the fact that by having the good fortune of a university education, and the salary that often goes with that, my brothers are a great source of inspiration to me.
Lazy feckers in wales that sit on their backside funded by people who often are earning 10 to 20 k themselves is wrong.
Its also wrong that those that have paid into the system or saved a bit for a rainy day get means tested to the extreme if they ever lose thier job. The system is broken and encourages lazy irresponsible behaviour.

grum – Member
Funny how there’s never the same tabloid induced outcry about tax cheats/avoiders, wonder why?

tell that to the head of the Student Loans Company 😉

personally the best answer to some of the issues presented are to take time from those on benefits, be it on courses to become employable or some pointless activity it doesn’t matter tyhe point is that if you are getting money something is wanted in return i.e. your time

as for the benefits cap, I’ll ask the person stacking the shelves in Morrisons or working in the call centre part of my company tomorrow and see what they think of it

CHB – Its also wrong that those that have paid into the system or saved a bit for a rainy day get means tested to the extreme if they ever lose thier job.

So you want means testing for some but not others? thats the deserving and undeserving poor again?

Lazy feckers in wales that sit on their backside funded by people who often are earning 10 to 20 k themselves is wrong.

yuo are so right …shall we launch a campaign for full employment with a living wage for alll …should help out your brothers if we achieve this..you with me?

Its also wrong that those that have paid into the system or saved a bit for a rainy day get means tested to the extreme if they ever lose thier job.

6 k for a single person is more than I have set aside for a rainy day…should we give benfits to those with say 100 k in the bank?
Ps if you have paid 2 years NO then you get non means tested benefits for 6 months …but hey dont let the facts stopa good rant.

The system is broken and encourages lazy irresponsible behaviour from banlers together we could strive for full employment, a decent living wage and together we could eradicate child poverty in the 6 th richest country in the world if we just shared the wealth around a bit more equitably

FTFY

Of course we could just attack the poor and ask bankers not to take a £2 million pound bonus instead

BigN daft not is not a bad idea at first glance but it just drives wages down. i tend to agree that voluntary work should be mandatory though as a general rule
we cannot train people for jobs as their are more unemployed than jobs

However to deny folk any luxuries at all in this day and age seems rather harsh when we have millions out of work – there simply is no job for most of the unemployed to go into if they all retrain and get skills and apply for jobs tomorrow where are all these new jobs coming from? there will still be 3 million unemployed

I can’t undersatnd the logic of working people cancelling Sky subscriptions, stopping smoking and rarely going out to save money due to pay constraint and rising prices and their taxes being used to fund another families Sky package £128/ mth mobile bill and fags and booze

or is it just me? 😉

but it just drives wages down.

why? please explain why putting someone on a training course lowers wages? There are plenty of activities that could be done that will not impact wages as you will not be replacing “paid” activity. Arguably you will create jobs in the infrastructure to make it work and in the childcare services for those who have kids

i tend to agree that voluntary work should be mandatory though as a general rule
we cannot train people for jobs as their are more unemployed than jobs

strange circa 1 million EU migrants have found work recently, care to explain where they magically appeared from 😉

big_n_daft – Member

grum – Member
Funny how there’s never the same tabloid induced outcry about tax cheats/avoiders, wonder why?

“tell that to the head of the Student Loans Company”

What……the guy who was investigated by Exaro ?

Exaro, the online subscription service that investigates issues that are important to business in particular and to the public in general, but which are being inadequately covered – or ignored – by the mainstream media ?

That guy ?

Big and daft. working families will almost always be significnatly better off. I agree the priorities sound at best odd – however tobacco addiction is a very strong one and to refuse any “luxuries” to the unemployed is very harsh. we have a very low benefit level anyway compared to many countries.

“bread and circuses”?

have a read of Wigan Pier – while very outdated now and while being written in Orwells sometimes cringingly middle-class hand wringing style it still contains some good analysis of this issue and some difficult truths

yep him, the tabloid hysteria has the potential to nail a minister

Exaro would have had no impact if the big boys hadn’t picked it up, still good effort

good bit of whistleblowing going on handing it to them on a plate though

The poor? let them eat cake

yep him

Right…….have you got his email address so I can tell him ?

BTW :

the tabloid hysteria has the potential to nail a minister

Exaro would have had no impact if the big boys hadn’t picked it up, still good effort

good bit of whistleblowing going on handing it to them on a plate though

Who are these “big boys” you speak of……….the BBC and the Independent ? Seems only they are covering the story at the moment.

What tabloid are you reading big and daft ?

i as referring to free labour /working for nothing driving wages down – they will end up “working for commercial organisations for nothing so they will employ less folk or for less money- its a supply and demand thing …would some pictures help?
I could do the same if we “trained folk” as we would have mor epoel willing ot do the work etc
PS what is this mythical “training” they all need to get work? they need jobs many of them have a “profession” what they have not got is an opportunity
I work in this area ,much of what you say sounds sensible but their is no magic bullet [ it does not work].U nless we aim for full employment we will have unemployed folk and it is aprice worth paying for controlling inflation apparently.

strange circa 1 million EU migrants have found work recently, care to explain where they magically appeared from

if we only had 1 million unemployed people that would have been a devastating counter my point about there being more unemployed folk that jobs.

What tabloid are you reading big and daft ?

The Telegraph?

Not a tabloid then aracer ? So how does he know that the tabloids have covered the story ? According to him the story “had no impact if the big boys hadn’t picked it up” Apparently they’ve “picked it up” ?

And why wasn’t this story uncovered by one of the tabloid “investigative journalists” ? Seems peculiar, as grum says, tabloids don’t appear very interested in “tax cheats/avoiders”. Most bizarre 😕

I just saw this thread, read the first page and the link…..now I’m as “live and let live” as the next man, but that family is way better of than me and I work like a dog. I was on job seekers allowance at 18 for a year while I tried to get a job and have never been on it since, not even when I lost my job about 2 years ago and was truly desperate.

I’m sorry but where is the incentive to retrain, this bloke even gets his fags, telly (higher package than mine if it’s costing 60 notes a month) and booze paid for.

Not wanting to get into an argument here, but apart from the self respect, who are the mugs?

have a read of Wigan Pier – while very outdated now and while being written in Orwells sometimes cringingly middle-class hand wringing style it still contains some good analysis of this issue and some difficult truths

It’s not outdated, I think, in fact, it’s rather prescient. I don’t see much of the middle-class handwringing either – he absolutely excoriates the soi-disant…well, anyone that would use the phrase soi-disant.

Sorry for the tardy reply, just got up for work!
TJ: To some extent I do believe in the deserving and undeserving poor. Thats to say that EVERYONE should have the bare essentials of food, heating and lodgings, but if you have paid money in and been a net contributor in the past then that should count for something.
Junky et al: Decent minimum wage, definately a good thing, one of the best labour did and helped out one of by bruvs in particular (works in a care home). Would happily se it raised by 50p or £1 per hour. The idea though that the state can create full employment is deluded. We live in a global village and tribe UK (or is that tribe Engurland soon?) has to be competetive overall against other nation states. Within that over all competetiveness we can and should have a degree of redistribution of wealth, but the system is out of balance at the moment.

IMO theres another factor that works in favour of being on benefits, regardless of how much money is envolved, and thats peace of mind, if your in social housing your rent and council tax are always paid. But when you’re a low income earner in similar housing situation the two letters you fear the most is rent arrears and council tax arrears, as those two go straight to legal action. The our council are particularly bailiff happy.

To add fuel to the fire

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA9t61PuiDc[/video]

if your in social housing your rent and council tax are always paid.

well you are exempt from council tax so it is not paid as such and the rent is not always fully [rarely these days] covered by your housing benefit
Low earners are also eligible for these benefits as they can also apply to people in work.