Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#1
SCROUNGERS should be forced to take a minimum wage job or lose their benefits, a shock report demands.
It comes after figures show the number of long-term unemployed has soared to more than 400,000, the highest level since 1997.
Experts fear many workshy Brits may never get a job unless they are forced to. In the hard-hitting report, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) calls for people unemployed for more than a year to be given a minimum wage job which they must accept
The think tank says the job should last up to six months and be a maximum 30 hours a week so people have time to hunt for permanent work.
IPPR chief economist Tony Dolphin said: "The longer someone is unemployed, the less likely they are to ever return to work.
"If we're going to provide decent services for our ageing population and clear the deficit, we need people in work to maximise tax revenues."
Since the credit crunch, unemployment has risen by an incredible 49%. But the number of people jobless for more than two years is up by 114%.
The number of long-term unemployed youngsters has trebled since 2008
From the Daily Star
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#2
I think it's well worth looking at
we all know people that will never work, have no intention of working
and have no real good reason why they cant work
these are the ones that should be aimed at
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#3
A good idea in theory but would it work in practice. Would the employers want them, would they do the job properly, would employers have to create a job especially for them?
As I have said before let the elderly retire earlier IF they want to, more jobs are released and the young and others unemployed start paying their taxes instead of sponging off the rest of us.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#4
jan;
im going to move away from my lefty creditials for a mo lol
i think we need the dole for the needy only, its tro easy not to work at the moment and that needs to change.
i see it dayt in day out.
unless this changes it will hard to change peoples mind sets
the elderly retiring earlier a great idea but already pensions cant be paid for so need a cost for that
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
the major flaw in the i.p.p.r case is about maximising tax revenues.
someone on a minimum wage for 30 hours a week would not pay tax but actually receive tax credits.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
whilst the daily mail runs silly stories
how many of us could afford to spend all day and niught in the pub
(even if we wanted to)
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#7
those who work tax loopholes.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#8
I agree Keith far to many do not want to work. Part of the problem at the moment is there are not enough jobs for the genuine wanting to work unemployed never mind the scroungers.
It could also be argued that the elderly are having to work to keep the younger population on their benefits so there is no extra money going in the pot which is the whole idea behind later retirement. Swings and roundabouts maybe.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#9
jan;
i think the problem is one bigger than you indicate
there are jobs about, but its more those on the dole(sorry some on the dole)have got used to the moneyt just coming in and wont work for less than they get on the dole.
sometmes they are getting more than someone that grafts for 60/70 hours a week or mo, but they spend all day in the pub.
theres summat not quite right here.
we need a bigger shake up than ids has tinkered with and take the issue on.
there are many that can work and should be made to, or cut the benefits on a sliding scale to nil.
of course we need to protect those in REAL NEED and these need to be looked at far more closely we are shelling out £2billion a year at the last count on this which if organised better could help in other areas.
it frustrates me so much
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
#10
Keith, don't get hung up on those lefty credentials. I can't think of anything more socialist than a fair distribution of wealth and access to opportunities, and that doesn't happen by encouraging sloth. I worry that the word "scroungers" is used as a blanket term for anyone needing support, and that is degrading and humiliating for those who do not "scrounge" - let's not allow the scum to drag down the rest. But I am very comfortable that a left leaning view supports a review of the benefits system - I resent the left being seen as a scroungers haven - it is, in fact, the opposite if operated properly.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#11
It has struck me over the years that high unemployment was a Conservative goal. Anything to keep wages down. Two things have happened since, one big, one small. Small; the minimum wage. Big; influx of cheap labour through the EU.
Nevertheless, high unemployment is still AOK for those on the right, for as much as anything it gives them something to crow about. Hence the emotive terms such as 'scrounger'. One sad thing about this is that some credit is given for the use of such terms. Sad, but true.
While every effort is being made to appease the self same sector that brought us to fiscal knees, by reducing the work force drastically and replacing the work force's spending power with vague promises that the private sector is sure to flourish. Our innate British bigotry has to be pandered to, this too has worked to some advantage over the years.
One sure way of instilling confidence would be to bring back 'tax rebates' that the newly unemployed used to get and which MT put a stop to. How better could the Government display confidence in it's approach to increasing productivity and growth?
But no.
Far easier to fall back on Victorian Values; the work house, debtors prisons etc.
Tis a pity that I am firmly of the belief that it is the population that is to blame for our present sorry state, after a fashion.
Otherwise I could rail and rail against the constant burdening of the population with blame and responsibility for our current mess. All the while those who cannot duck their true culpability carry on regardless, nay, continue to profit.
If we are to pay out 'X' and get nothing for it why not then pay out '2X' and get some return?
Why does something like the minimum wage turn from a good thing into a rod for the backs of all and any, but 'us'?
The current political philosophy goes all out to invent money from money and does nothing to actually promote the making of anything else, or anything at all. Except a ruckus and a smoke screen.
"Experts fear" And why not, whoever they are. One thing for sure as far as experts and fear goes;they are carriers not sufferers.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
the minimum wage was one the greatest achievements of the reds, the only people who were against it were rogue employers.
once everyone had to pay the same rate in the lower wage sectors it meant that cheapo employers could not undercut to win contracts, this applied mainly in the security sector.
the main retailers who had previously paid below the nw minimum wage still reported large profits anyway.
#13
Now we just have to re-evaluate which jobs need minimum wage. I would suggest that to offer minimum wage to carers and support workers is one of the major contributors to the amount of known and unknown abuse experienced by service users every day.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#14
Rather than simply rant-on I took myself off to have a gander at the "simply the best" Daily Star and the IPPR think tank.
It seems that the article is little more than cobbled together hype. With selective quotations fitted in to suit the editorial line.
I am sure the paper needs more and more folk back in work even if only so that more people can gamble and ogle barely-legal teens (or young ladies with pride in their assets). Perhaps not being able to watch popular TV shows all day will create more of a hunger for puff-stories reliant on them, plenty of that to be had.
Anyway, as I tried to search the IPPR site with a few quotes from the story above and got nowhere, except that the increase in long-term unemployed seemed to be from a press release dated last May.
And finally...
As the hard working over-taxed consumers and rate payers go about their daily doings little do they realise that a little of all that they spend goes towards giving tawdry media outlets press reports to misquote...
http://www.ippr.org/about-us/how-we-are-fundedIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#15
the star is definitley and enthralling read.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/celebrity/ Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#16
Shock, horror!!
"UK banks need to focus on lending and paying back taxpayers, and should not be distracted by more regulation, the head of the British Bankers' Association has said."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14708023
Are they lending?
Do they not post huge losses...so as to not pay tax, but work to pay taxpayers back...sometime and themselves huge sums all the time?
"I know, we ran riot and left a trail of destruction in our wake, but...but do leave us free to try again....we may be getting good at it."
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#17
Keith, your post 9 is incredible, you don't have an idea about being on the dole, and should think before writing such uncomprehensible theories.
Please believe me, no-one on the dole spends all day in the pub, no-one who gets £65 a week JSA spends anything in a pub.
A report out today on Sky News shows that the number of female workers in the retail sector who are now unemployed has dramitcally risen, as many shops/chains nationwide are going into administration.
Marek, a report out a few days ago shows that a third of private sector employers, according to estimations (I can't remember whether BBC or Sky), would go around any new Government laws to employ British people by simply recruiting directly from other EU countries. (No doubt there are EU laws that allow this).
Jan, your words are offensive, about "the young and others unemployed" sponging the rest of us off".
I mean, what about the people who have lost - yes LOST their job over the past months and are now unemployed, do they become "spongers"?
To give an example, my sister, who has been working for several years full time in an office, has been informed that the company is going to go bankrupt, or to close to avoid bankruptcy.
She suspects that she might not get the redundancy (equivalent to one and a half months wages in her case) if the company goes bankrupt. She loves working, started working at the age of 14 in a restaurant.
Now, will she become, in your view, a "sponger" if she had to sign on?
Your wording is unworthy!
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#18
Alex
Lets examine parts of your post
You state inter alia
1.''....no-one who gets £65 a week JSA spends anything in a pub....'' Well I know this to be untrue I have met many a person receiving JSA spend many hours in the boozer. It could be they are depressed or simply passing the time away but to state 'no-one' is just daft.
2.''.....would go around any new Government laws to employ British people by simply recruiting directly from other EU countries..'' I don't understand this are you saying that instead of employing British people firms hire from the other EU states direct ? You must have evidence that the post was advertised in-house,locally and nationally before looking further afield but EU member are free to seek and gain employment in the UK so get use to it.
3."the young and others unemployed" sponging the rest of us off". There is hard evidence available that youngsters whose parents have a history of long term unemployment follow and in some cases are encouraged not to go to work but to 'sponge' off the state. A person on benefits qualifies for a whole host of things,free prescriptions,dental treatment,rent allowance,council tax benefit emergency loans,clothing etc. So in many cases their parents tell them NOT to work as they would lose or dramatically reduce their weekly benefit cheque.
4. Finally ,I hope your sister finds alternative employment soon and I wish her well.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#19
Alex
As if to re-enforce my post above this is an extract from todays Mail Online
When bosses of a growing business needed to fill 20 jobs in a city with more than 10,000 out of work, they thought it would be easy.
But two weeks after advertising the posts, they are astonished to have had only two applications instead of the flood they expected.
They have hit out at the lack of a work ethic shown by the unemployed, amid renewed calls yesterday for welfare reform to encourage benefit claimants into jobs.
Critics said the experience of security firm OnGuard24 in Coventry is repeated throughout the country
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#20
My younger brother has been trying for literally hundreds of jobs since he was made redundant in March. He is happy to move/work anywhere in the county to get a job.
He has had no help whatsoever from the job-Centre in Hythe (near Southampton) even when he's asked for it, they have said "we may do that for you, if you ask nicely" - can you believe that ? (you can because it's true). They help complete the benefit claim forms, but not to get a job - how mad/bad is that ?
I have written to Chris Grayling, the Employment Miinister, Ian Duncan-Smith the Minister for the Department for Works and Pensions and have had the most dismissive reply back. Not from either Minister as they don't reply, just some numpty in that department.
I wrote again giving specific examples of the uselessness of job-centre staff asking why won't they help older people (he's 58) back to work - again, another non-answer.
He was told he would get tax-credits, not job-seekers allowance (why, when he wasn't working her asked - no reply to that question); after 4 months the job-centre staff said they would have to pay back all that tax-credit money as it was a mistake to have paid them, but they still weren't going to give them any JSA. They have literally no money, so how could they pay it back ?
"You'll have to go to prison then" was the somewhat stupid answer.
There is so much wrong with the employment sector; the Ministers don't know what's actually happening in the Job-Centres, the job-centre staff seem to be absolutely incompetant and care even less about helping people.
I hope these people never end up out of work - maybe I do, they'll then see how much help they get, how useless people are and how little they care about getting people back to work.
He starts a new job next Monday in Kent; he's going to be staying with me and Jean for a while during the week and going home week-ends.
Roger