Thread: A Good Idea!

This bit of alarming news comes from "The Telegraph" I will try and post something similar from "The Guardian" next time .Why has the proportion of families where no one has ever worked doubled? – Telegraph Blogs

^Two year old article????

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

^Two year old article????

So it is , but I haven't read anything to suggest its any different today and the labour partys figures appear to confirm that its even worse ,in fact the Labour Party (socialists ) have very austere plans regarding the long term unemployed should they ever get into office Labour's compulsory jobs guarantee for the long-term unemployed | The Labour Party you are going to be made to work or lose your handout .

Don't even joke about Labour getting back into power, they are where they belong, until something worthy of opposition comes along to boot them clear into oblivion.

Originally Posted by leemo

Don't even joke about Labour getting back into power, they are where they belong, until something worthy of opposition comes along to boot them clear into oblivion.

Ukip perhaps?

Originally Posted by nigelandjan

Its a bloody stupid idea as it depraves people of work by introducing free labour into the market .

In my opinion ALL benefits should just be stopped , then there would be NO unemployment .

Are you heartless? Or just not very bright? What about disabled people who really cannot work, what about hard working people who have just been made redundant?

Do you want spastics to starve on the streets? People looking for work made to starve and live in tents?

heard one guy complaining that he would have to walk the 2 miles to the job centre cos he couldn't afford the bus ticket.

Originally Posted by flashbang

Originally Posted by nigelandjan

Its a bloody stupid idea as it depraves people of work by introducing free labour into the market .

In my opinion ALL benefits should just be stopped , then there would be NO unemployment .

Are you heartless? Or just not very bright? What about disabled people who really cannot work, what about hard working people who have just been made redundant?

Do you want spastics to starve on the streets? People looking for work made to starve and live in tents?

Just been made redundant and 3 years down the line still could not find a worthwhile job which pays more than the benefits he is already receiving for being out of work and sitting on his arse , yeah sure !

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by flashbang

Originally Posted by nigelandjan

Its a bloody stupid idea as it depraves people of work by introducing free labour into the market .

In my opinion ALL benefits should just be stopped , then there would be NO unemployment .

Are you heartless? Or just not very bright? What about disabled people who really cannot work, what about hard working people who have just been made redundant?

Do you want spastics to starve on the streets? People looking for work made to starve and live in tents?

Just been made redundant and 3 years down the line still could not find a worthwhile job which pays more than the benefits he is already receiving for being out of work and sitting on his arse , yeah sure !

Can you say that again, but in English this time? Thanks.

Did I say that? Stop putting words into my mouth. I was responding to the stupidity of scrapping ALL benefits in 2013, soon to be 2014.

In theory this new idea may well gain applause from those who are in regular work and pay taxes.

This distraction by the government in targeting voters on the back of the less advantaged in suggesting that they need to become more responsible (and to be fair, the populus fall into categories of 'all walks of life' and never a single one) is that they themselves need firstly to become more accountable whilst in office.

Saving a few million quid here and there in welfare payments whilst wasting billions of taxpayers money elsewhere in madcap schemes that apply needless pressure on the economy, i'm afraid will have no positive effect on the national debt.

When politicians start acting responsibly, then and only then will they be in a position to dictate to the electorate regarding welfare payments. One merely has to take a gander at MP's annual expenses/claims to acknowledge that it's not only the unemployed that are getting something for nothing.

The HS2 Rail scheme requires funding - The Institute of Economic Affairs estimates that it will cost more than £80 billion.

Ah yes, a mere 80 billion so lets start cutting national welfare benefits in order to fund this campaign for an improved rail network. Clearly those people in wheelchairs can sit at an assembly line for 30 hours a week in order to start the ball rolling.

Well said Mr Lick, and, Piwnoi, please stop drinking.

Originally Posted by piwanoi

This bit of alarming news comes from "The Telegraph" I will try and post something similar from "The Guardian" next time .Why has the proportion of families where no one has ever worked doubled? – Telegraph Blogs

What is alarming about this piwanoi? (apart from the headline itself)...

Here are the figures explained with a slightly different bias:

UK: workless households - The Poverty Site

Interesting points to note:

1. The same proportion of workless as 10 years ago (when did the records start?)
2. Single parents and single householder are main proportion of "workless households"
3. A household comprising one full-time student and one other working-age adult has been allocated to the 'one adult' household type.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for those who are able to work to contribute something in order to receive benefits....just as long as that something doesn't suddenly become an additional burden on the tax-payer.

One thing that I think is important is to be able to retrain skilled and semi-skilled labour into areas requiring additional manpower. A scheme where NI stamp contribution can be traded for training would be nice, whereby those who have worked and been made redundant can benefit more than those that come straight from school.

I seem to remember the moaning and groaning about unemployment benefits going on back in the late 70's. Do you have a solution in mind?

What about the crazy situation where the government plans to throw 1 billion pounds to those who really don't need it?

Families with two parents earning as much as £150,000 each will get payments up to £1,200 a child for so called help with childcare!
Families with two working parents will be offered Government help with childcare - Telegraph

Why does Cameron want to give high earners financial help but want to take it away from the poor? Crazy.

Originally Posted by Troy

Originally Posted by piwanoi

This bit of alarming news comes from "The Telegraph" I will try and post something similar from "The Guardian" next time .Why has the proportion of families where no one has ever worked doubled? – Telegraph Blogs

What is alarming about this piwanoi? (apart from the headline itself)...

Here are the figures explained with a slightly different bias:

UK: workless households - The Poverty Site

Interesting points to note:

1. The same proportion of workless as 10 years ago (when did the records start?)
2. Single parents and single householder are main proportion of "workless households"
3. A household comprising one full-time student and one other working-age adult has been allocated to the 'one adult' household type.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for those who are able to work to contribute something in order to receive benefits....just as long as that something doesn't suddenly become an additional burden on the tax-payer.

One thing that I think is important is to be able to retrain skilled and semi-skilled labour into areas requiring additional manpower. A scheme where NI stamp contribution can be traded for training would be nice, whereby those who have worked and been made redundant can benefit more than those that come straight from school.

I seem to remember the moaning and groaning about unemployment benefits going on back in the late 70's. Do you have a solution in mind?

What I wrote in my post #1 might be a good start .

According to the articles I have just read the British are "Work shy" here is just one of them Workshy Britain? the jobs are there its just that in many cases they get more in benefits so as the lady said in an earlier post "working is a mugs game"

I'm a great believer in getting long term dole bludgers to do some work for their handout.

^I agree. Most offensive to me is rewarding them for breeding. There is simply no excuse for that. They breed four or five next generation welfare recipients, and we pay them more welfare, give them more food stamps, and more free medical care for each one they drop. Simply insanity. I am 64, and have worked since I was 18 - not one month off. I worked part-time from around age ten - 18. I am still working. There is just no reason I should be funding this scum. I already pay enough to keep their 'baby-daddies' in prison.

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

^I agree. Most offensive to me is rewarding them for breeding. There is simply no excuse for that. They breed four or five next generation welfare recipients, and we pay them more welfare, give them more food stamps, and more free medical care for each one they drop. Simply insanity. I am 64, and have worked since I was 18 - not one month off. I worked part-time from around age ten - 18. I am still working. There is just no reason I should be funding this scum. I already pay enough to keep their 'baby-daddies' in prison.

Most sensible people would concur with your musings , Unfortunately !!!

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

^I agree. Most offensive to me is rewarding them for breeding. There is simply no excuse for that. They breed four or five next generation welfare recipients, and we pay them more welfare, give them more food stamps, and more free medical care for each one they drop. Simply insanity. I am 64, and have worked since I was 18 - not one month off. I worked part-time from around age ten - 18. I am still working. There is just no reason I should be funding this scum. I already pay enough to keep their 'baby-daddies' in prison.

Most sensible people would concur with your musings , Unfortunately !!!

Why 'unfortunately'?

What is alarming about this piwanoi?

Originally Posted by piwanoi

What I wrote in my post #1 might be a good start .

My short answer to this was deleted for some reason so it will have to be the long answer.....

Originally Posted by piwanoi

This bit of alarming news comes from "The Telegraph"

I was referring to this "alarming news" not the OP....and showed that since the % ne'er-do-wells has been approx the same for the last decade, it is hardly alarming.

The current Government decided to scrap the Future Jobs Fund on the grounds of saving money. However, how do you judge costs in real terms? Purely on the money spent...or do you consider the benefits to society and the side-effects?
Here is a paper describing the impacts and costs of the FJF scheme.
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...nefits_fjf.pdf

Let's jump straight to the point I'm trying to make. The scheme benefited the participants, their employers and society as a whole (see tables 5.2 pp60 and 5.3 pp 62) but cost the Exchequer (although the loss is far outweighed by the gain).

Bearing this in mind, what is the likelyhood of a scheme that will cost the Exchequer with no gain for the participant or employer and only a small gain for society as a whole...

The idea looks good on the surface but once you scratch the surface it all falls apart...