NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6187169.stm
I'm not actually sure what to think of this.
I'm thinking Labour has effectively become the Conservative party,and we now pretty much have a moderate right-wing government.(Very moderate,that is,still pretty centrist.).
However,I can't help but partly agree.These people have been on benefits since the late '90s.They can work,but simply won't.That's far too lazy.But I don't think making people suddenly poorer will help-it'll just aggravate them,and will probably lose Labour a lot of votes.
People's thoughts and opinions?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6187169.stm
I'm not actually sure what to think of this.
I'm thinking Labour has effectively become the Conservative party,and we now pretty much have a moderate right-wing government.(Very moderate,that is,still pretty centrist.).
However,I can't help but partly agree.These people have been on benefits since the late '90s.They can work,but simply won't.That's far too lazy.But I don't think making people suddenly poorer will help-it'll just aggravate them,and will probably lose Labour a lot of votes.
People's thoughts and opinions?
There's no point in cutting benefits when there's no jobs available, and when many jobs are being taken up as a result of net inward migration.

I think Labour has made the situation very difficult. With the increase in benefits available (good thing) it is now very difficult to get a job that keeps you at the same income level, especially where child care costs have to be factored in.
I feel genuinely sorry for the 'real' poor in this country as they are put in the same category as the lazy skivers who seem to be able to run a car, smoke and drink whilst not having to get out of bed on a morning and work

Feck them. Give them coupons instead of money the lazy feckers. I work my arse off so those bums can get up when they like and do what they like. I personaly know people that cream the system and do very well from it, it makes me sick. Cunts. :upyours:

The genuine poor can still be looked after but these idle bums should get jack sheet.

Feck them. Give them coupons instead of money the lazy feckers. I work my arse off so those bums can get up when they like and do what they like. I personaly know people that cream the system and do very well from it, it makes me sick. Cunts. :upyours:

The genuine poor can still be looked after but these idle bums should get jack sheet.

Unfortunately,it's quite hard to distinguish between the "real poor" and the "lazy bums."I agree with you,I just think it's logistically impossible.You're always going to get some lazy idiot who can't be arsed to work and claims benefits under false pretences.

I was on Jobseeker's Allowance once. I would have LOVED to have got a job instead (I found it hard to manage on about £40 a week, though I'd probably find it much easier now). But I was determined not to get stuck in a dead-end job - which is what the Jobcentre (now called Jobcentre Plus) were pressuring me to do - every two weeks I had to go to an appointment at the Jobcentre and show a form that I was supposed to have filled in with lists of jobs I'd applied for. Jobs that I actually wanted, the Jobcentre didn't seem to want to help me with - I had no experience and they didn't find any way (or even try for that matter) of offering me training. If I hadn't filled in fake stuff on the form and found ways around the system, I would almost certainly be stuck in Macdonald's now, despite being vegan.

I managed to, through a certain legal thing I found, claim Income Support instead of Jobseekers Allowance, which meant making going to college easier (if I'd claimed Jobseeker's allowance still, rather than allowing me to do this and continue my course of education and eventually out of benefits, I would still have to be 'available for work' and 'actively seeking work' which could mean loads of college study down the drain).

I was put on a "New Deal" 'scheme' where the computers were incredibly slow dial=up computers (and there were hardly any) and I had to be in from early morning (about 9:30 I think) till evening (about 5pm I think) leaving me with virtually no time for sorting out things related to my future - eg. further study, actually looking for long-term work, etc., and in addition the staff had no idea what they were doing and the place was completely unstructured - I specifically remember a time I made the effort to directly ask for direct help with finding direct work - they told me to look through a phone book at stuff that had nothing to do with what I'd asked. In short, it was a waste of mine time and the taxpayer's time, for the purpose of fucking up my future. Luckily I found a way of winging my way around it so I could sort out uni stuff, but I'm sure many others have not been so fortunate.

I'm now at university and am soon to start work (I've also had other jobs, and have been supported by a Student Loan - which is effectively a LOAN that I receive for doing a lot of work so that when I graduate I can contribute to the country in some form).

In addition, if someone got a job and it didn't work out, they could have to wait three weeks (that was the usual period when I claimed) before they got a decision, during which time all they MAY be able to claim is a Crisis Loan which THE DSS (as it was called at that time) THEMSELVES TOLD ME that whatever amount is asked for, they always deliberately give less, based on no logic whatsoever apart from them saving money. So you could ask for £20 to get you through the week and end up with a tenner.

In short, Jobseeker's Allowance is good for two things: feeding you and ruining your future - regardless of whether you want to leave it and get a job or not. If you stay on it, it can ruin your future, and if you leave it, it can ruin your future - potentially even more than staying on it.

So effectively,Labour is threatening to take away an already badly run benefits system in the hope that people will suddenly go out and get a job?(I think that's what you're saying.).
Anyway.Thanks for the first hand insight,'tis always helpful.

Iam Glad iam now on DLA and IS only for the fact is that they mess you about too much on JSA firstly they send you on some woorking for work scheeme nearly every 6 months or so thne after a year they throw you on new deal that does bugger all apart form get the person off the unemployment list yet still have them being paid for being unemployed oohh having to do the basic skill test every three moths and if your fial that go on basic english or maths course even if you laready did the corse you stil have to d it agian , some poipel manage to milk it and ont get sent anyway but by and larage you end up on some 8 to 12 week course that once or twice depending on the set that you go and d jobsearch which consists of sending off dozen of speck letters to even companies that you wouldnt work for and the like

Iam Glad iam now on DLA and IS only for the fact is that they mess you about too much on JSA firstly they send you on some woorking for work scheeme nearly every 6 months or so thne after a year they throw you on new deal that does bugger all apart form get the person off the unemployment list yet still have them being paid for being unemployed oohh having to do the basic skill test every three moths and if your fial that go on basic english or maths course even if you laready did the corse you stil have to d it agian , some poipel manage to milk it and ont get sent anyway but by and larage you end up on some 8 to 12 week course that once or twice depending on the set that you go and d jobsearch which consists of sending off dozen of speck letters to even companies that you wouldnt work for and the like

Thank-you!

There's no point in cutting benefits when there's no jobs available, and when many jobs are being taken up as a result of net inward migration.

I too have mixed feelings. On the one hand the ammount of bennift cheating that goes on is ludicrus. I actulay dissagree with the last part of wehat you said. There are in fact plenty of jobs going. If new immigrants are getting jobs, then so can anybody.

People's thoughts and opinions?

Explain the Britisch Welfare system first please.
Are these benefits only for people that can in principle work, but have no job despite there being jobs available ? As in: do people who honestly cannot work (e.g. due to illness) get another set of benefits ?

If so, this seems fair.

Explain the Britisch Welfare system first please.
Are these benefits only for people that can in principle work, but have no job despite there being jobs available ? As in: do people who honestly cannot work (e.g. due to illness) get another set of benefits ?

If so, this seems fair.

yeah there are many beinfits, unemployment benifits, sickness benifits, social benifits.

I had to be in from early morning (about 9:30 I think) till evening (about 5pm I think) leaving me with virtually no time for sorting out things related to my future - eg. further study, actually looking for long-term work, etc.

9.30, jeez, that is soooo early and must have been real tough.

I'm sorry I don't buy it. I was homeless and worked at Fords emptying bins at night so I could go to college during the day. I eventually got a cheap £30 a week room. Then worked weekends in clubs. I worked damn hard, lived on potatoes for years and done some crumby jobs to get where I am today.

I now work 37.5hrs a week, hot food every day, clothes on my back, some good health and three house in two countries. Nobody gave it to me, I worked damn hard and pay sh1t loads of taxes so these bums can have an easy life.

If you can't be arsed to work why should we be arsed to give you money. If you can prove you are so stupid to be unemployable then the government should make you clean streets a couple of days a week for your benefit.

Good to see the UK is moving back towards liberty...

It will make moore people poorer and the ones who really are looking for a job and can't find one will be punished. I especially don't think that it will motivate people to find a job, It will work the other way around. Btw, how much money do you get when youre unemployed in England?

It will make moore people poorer and the ones who really are looking for a job and can't find one will be punished. I especially don't think that it will motivate people to find a job, It will work the other way around. Btw, how much money do you get when youre unemployed in England?

Depends on your circumstance, it could be anywhere between £40 - £200+. The average is about £70 a week.

And you're right, if you're given money for free, why work???

It will make moore people poorer and the ones who really are looking for a job and can't find one will be punished. I especially don't think that it will motivate people to find a job, It will work the other way around. Btw, how much money do you get when youre unemployed in England?

The norm for a single person is around £45 per week. I think it will make people go out and seek work. As I say there are in fact plenty of jobs to go around. Yes of course we have some people who for whatever reason cannot find employment, and we need to look after thoses that can't help them selves. It is getting harder though to distinguish between this people and the lazy bastard.

Depends on your circumstance, it could be anywhere between £40 - £200+. The average is about £70 a week.

And you're right, if you're given money for free, why work???

I think that you should receive benefits if you can proove that you are searching for a job. If you can't find one but can proove that you've searched, you should of course get benefits but it you refuse to take a job then youre benefits should be cut.

£70 isn't much at all btw.

Haha, oh yes, JSA sucks to high hell. The advice was awful or nonexistant. I think they kept telling me to join the army. Of the jobs that I managed to find myself - through newspapers and the internet (not their crummy machines) - I was told repeatedly that I was overqualified or wouldn't stay around in the job long enough to worth training. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

After about a 5-6 weeks or so I had lost momentum. So I started making up jobs that I had applied for. I then began to find out that if you didn't offer to show them this list them they wouldn't ask to see it. So I went in at the arranged time everyfortnight and got my booklet signed. If there's one thing the Job Centre teaches you, it is how to work the system.

I think that you should receive benefits if you can proove that you are searching for a job. If you can't find one but can proove that you've searched, you should of course get benefits but it you refuse to take a job then youre benefits should be cut.

I think a grading scale would be reasonable for that last point. If you just got unemployed, have a decent education and then get offered a minimal wage job with no career prospects refusing it would be acceptable (and wise) in my opinion.
But if you have been unemployed for several years one should no longer be picky.

I think a grading scale would be reasonable for that last point. If you just got unemployed, have a decent education and then get offered a minimal wage job with no career prospects refusing it would be acceptable (and wise) in my opinion.
But if you have been unemployed for several years one should no longer be picky.

Agreed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6187169.stm
I'm not actually sure what to think of this.
I'm thinking Labour has effectively become the Conservative party,<stop>

And how long did it take you to figure that out?

It hasn't mucked up the system that badly.

All you have to do is replace "Labour" with "Conservatives" and "Cameron" with "Blair" (and vice versa). Then it fits perfectly.:confused:

I was told repeatedly that I was overqualified or wouldn't stay around in the job long enough to worth training.

How can you be overqualified to do something?
As long as not lacking in other areas, there is no reason why a graduate could not clean!

How can you be overqualified to do something?
As long as not lacking in other areas, there is no reason why a graduate could not clean!I think I worded my post badly. The guy just didn't think I would hand around in the job long enough to worth hiring. There was nothing I could really do to convince him. He was probably one of the reasons why I got the confidence to go back to university. I'd dropped out of university a few months back because of depression and my performance had sunk to rock bottom.

How can you be overqualified to do something?
As long as not lacking in other areas, there is no reason why a graduate could not clean!

From the view point of an employeer, if your over quelified it means that once a decent job comes along you'll be out. so easyer for them not to hire you but wait for somebody else.

9.30, jeez, that is soooo early and must have been real tough.

I'm sorry I don't buy it. I was homeless and worked at Fords emptying bins at night so I could go to college during the day. I eventually got a cheap £30 a week room. Then worked weekends in clubs. I worked damn hard, lived on potatoes for years and done some crumby jobs to get where I am today.

I now work 37.5hrs a week, hot food every day, clothes on my back, some good health and three house in two countries. Nobody gave it to me, I worked damn hard and pay sh1t loads of taxes so these bums can have an easy life.

If you can't be arsed to work why should we be arsed to give you money. If you can prove you are so stupid to be unemployable then the government should make you clean streets a couple of days a week for your benefit.


1. I'm not complaining that it was toucgh to get to New Deal - it was very easy. But it left very little time for actually looking for long-term work, as the time spent in New Deal, due to near-useless computers and outdated information, was unproductive.

Did you actually bother reading what I write or did you just automatically think "oh he was on benefits once, must be a lazy bastard" then ignorantly skip over virtually all of what I said? It would appear to be the latter.

To re-emphasise, I wanted to work, and I made sure I, without doing anything illegal, 'worked the system' so to speak so that I could go to university (for which, contrary to pupular belief, students do not get free money for - they get a loan which must be paid back and which is for (in the case of most courses) working dam hard (and many students also take part in voluntary work, as I have done myself) so that a person can eventually controbute to the country in some way) so that I will be able to get a high-paid job (for which I will pay tax for the next lot of students) and controbute to society, meaning I will be able to support my family financially with my wages instead of ending up stuck in somewhere like MadDonalds where I would have to get buy with the help of MORe benefits. In short I wanted to work but sorted out my future so that it wouldn't be ruined, instead of immediately ruining it by getting stuck in a dead-end job.

NOW ACTUALLY READ THE REST OF WHAT I FUCKING WROTE.

Depends on your circumstance, it could be anywhere between £40 - £200+. The average is about £70 a week.

And you're right, if you're given money for free, why work???

It's around £40 average for under 20-somethings

I too have mixed feelings. On the one hand the ammount of bennift cheating that goes on is ludicrus. I actulay dissagree with the last part of wehat you said. There are in fact plenty of jobs going. If new immigrants are getting jobs, then so can anybody.
The problem is, many, although not all, migrants will work for lower wages than British workers, making ire more difficult for British workers to compete.

Good to see the UK is moving back towards liberty...
What on earth does this have anything to do with liberty?

Depends on your circumstance, it could be anywhere between £40 - £200+. The average is about £70 a week.

And you're right, if you're given money for free, why work???

Because the average monthly rent on a flat is 350 to 500 pound.

Good, the welfare system needs rolling back to minimal levels to return society to how it was.

Good, the welfare system needs rolling back to minimal levels to return society to how it was.
How it was when?

Did you actually bother reading what I write or did you just automatically think "oh he was on benefits once, must be a lazy bastard" then ignorantly skip over virtually all of what I said? It would appear to be the latter.

To re-emphasise, I wanted to work, and I made sure I, without doing anything illegal, 'worked the system' so to speak so that I could go to university (for which, contrary to pupular belief, students do not get free money for - they get a loan which must be paid back and which is for (in the case of most courses) working dam hard (and many students also take part in voluntary work, as I have done myself) so that a person can eventually controbute to the country in some way) so that I will be able to get a high-paid job (for which I will pay tax for the next lot of students) and controbute to society, meaning I will be able to support my family financially with my wages instead of ending up stuck in somewhere like MadDonalds where I would have to get buy with the help of MORe benefits. In short I wanted to work but sorted out my future so that it wouldn't be ruined, instead of immediately ruining it by getting stuck in a dead-end job.

NOW ACTUALLY READ THE REST OF WHAT I FUCKING WROTE.

I did, the bit where you said 9.30 was early told me you were a lazy fucktard.

This garbage tells me you're just another one of those lazy Uni fuckwits.

PMSL

How it was when?

When there was a solid family structure in society and people wern't going out to beat up old people and 14 year olds to get their next fix. The welfare system is the number one cause for the breakdown of the family, in olden times women needed a man when they were expecting a child, it gave the father sense of responsibility. Nowadays, a 17 year old can get up the duff with some drop out chav whos got six other kids. The girl will get a house and a nice benefit package.

Role back the system, so you can reward people for getting married, legalise gay marriage, the works just as long as a child can grow up in a stable background with two loving parents.

I did, the bit where you said 9.30 was early told me you were a lazy fucktard.

This garbage tells me you're just another one of those lazy Uni fuckwits.

PMSL
Hint: flaming doesn't make a good argument.

Role back the system, so you can reward people for getting married, legalise gay marriage, the works just as long as a child can grow up in a stable background with two loving parents.

While marriage is demographically sound, it is also ethically objectionable for people like me. I consider any government's insistence that I have to sign forms and pay more taxes in order to live with someone, or go through long proceedings and even more money should I want to leave, a particularly stupid idea.

When there was a solid family structure in society and people wern't going out to beat up old people and 14 year olds to get their next fix.
So, are you seriously saying that crime, drugs, and beatings didn't happen when divorce was illegal, women had no domestic rights and there was no safety net whatsoever?

The welfare system is the number one cause for the breakdown of the family, in olden times women needed a man when they were expecting a child, it gave the father sense of responsibility. Nowadays, a 17 year old can get up the duff with some drop out chav whos got six other kids. The girl will get a house and a nice benefit package.
While in some rare cases there might be a small amount of truth in that, most of the 'housing' kept for benefits near where I live is nowhere near 'nice' by any standard.

Role back the system, so you can reward people for getting married, legalise gay marriage, the works just as long as a child can grow up in a stable background with two loving parents.
Nothing wrong with that, but changing the benefits system won't make any change to that, as long as divorce is legal and easy.

While marriage is demographically sound, it is also ethically objectionable for people like me. I consider any government's insistence that I have to sign forms and pay more taxes in order to live with someone, or go through long proceedings and even more money should I want to leave, a particularly stupid idea.

Well if I had my way, there would be no tax.

Well if I had my way, there would be no tax.

How would the government be able to defend its people from foreign aggression, or conduct trade agreements, without funds to buy weapons or contact other nations? How would it even function without some kind of inwards cash flow? Are you suggesting a privatised government?

Anarcho-capitalism is a very poorly thought out belief.

I am indeed an econonic libertarian, I do belive in privatisation on a massive level extending to the opening of the market to the military and the police.

Well if I had my way, there would be no tax.
Health?
Police?
Paying government officials inc. ambassadors, civil servants, etc?
Fire service?
Roads?
Armies?
Research?
Education?

I am indeed an econonic libertarian, I do belive in privatisation on a massive level extending to the opening of the market to the military and the police.

What's there to ensure that the private sector will actually remain loyal to the nation or act in the interests of the country? If someone else pays them to attack the nation they're supposedly serving, they'd do it, to maximise profits. How do you propose we ensure corporate loyalty for essential services (roads, healthcare, water, gas, military, police, fire department etc.)? Tax breaks and commercial welfare? If so, where's the money for that going to come from? Why would it automatically be more advantageous for them to serve this nation than another one?

The market would regulate itself, the need for government control in this day and age is no longer needed. People can look after themselves.

The market would regulate itself, the need for government control in this day and age is no longer needed. People can look after themselves.

Most people can't. Meet some real people and you'll see for yourself.

Besides, since when will corporations act in the best interests of the citizens? For them to do that there needs to be something regulating them. Like, you know, a government. Otherwise, they'll be able to do practically anything they want and likely end up not providing the best possible goods and services to citizens, and becoming more of a corporate oligarchy that chokes the free market and leaves the average citizen as poorly off as she would have been under a big government.

The market would regulate itself, the need for government control in this day and age is no longer needed. People can look after themselves.There is a word for people like you, and that word is - naïve.

Hint: flaming doesn't make a good argument.

OK, any person can work. The problem seems to be they think the job is beneath them or they can live for doing nothing. Neither is an excuse.

Students think because they are students, they are immune from work. You can still work when in education, I did it from the age of twelve (paper round) until I was 21 (emptying bins, bars, private work), I was in full time education throughout.

People are lazy, me included. But if you want something from life, you have to work hard. Don't moan if you have no money, you can always earn a few extra £££.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6187169.stm
I'm not actually sure what to think of this.
I'm thinking Labour has effectively become the Conservative party,and we now pretty much have a moderate right-wing government.(Very moderate,that is,still pretty centrist.).
However,I can't help but partly agree.These people have been on benefits since the late '90s.They can work,but simply won't.That's far too lazy.But I don't think making people suddenly poorer will help-it'll just aggravate them,and will probably lose Labour a lot of votes.
People's thoughts and opinions?

It's a shame that the same government that you have counted on to keep you fed, clothed, and well for all these years would renege on it's commitment to the malingerers. If anything, I'd expect to see a healthy tax increase on the wealthy, so that these sainted poor can continue to live in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

OK, any person can work. The problem seems to be they think the job is beneath them or they can live for doing nothing. Neither is an excuse.
Of course. But if there is no work available from a lack of jobs, to too many people with the wrong qualifications for the job market, there must be some sort of safety net. There is not a job for every person on this earth, if there were then we wouldn't be having thsi argument.

Students think because they are students, they are immune from work. You can still work when in education, I did it from the age of twelve (paper round) until I was 21 (emptying bins, bars, private work), I was in full time education throughout.
Only so many newsagents, so many bars, and so many bins, and plenty who aren't students want those jobs too. Plus, I'm going to be studying for medicine at uni next year, and after a taster course and speaking to tutors and students, can tell you with complete confidence that having a job is ill advised if you want to pass the medical course.

People are lazy, me included. But if you want something from life, you have to work hard. Don't moan if you have no money, you can always earn a few extra £££.
I really wish life were that easy and simple. :(

I did, the bit where you said 9.30 was early told me you were a lazy fucktard.

This garbage tells me you're just another one of those lazy Uni fuckwits.

PMSL

Well although I may swear every so often, at least I can put together a better response than THAT. Looks like education was good for something.

But as you've automatically already made a biased judgement of me, it's pointless for me to continue writing any further to explain myself again when you have clearly decided to ignore all views that do not fit with your own.

To everyone else: before you start to believe any of the rubbish spouted by Chingie about "uni students don't work" etc, please read what I actually wrote. If students didn't work then most would be surviving on less than £40 a week (which is a loan remember) out of which they still have to somehow pay for books and equipment.