The post you are reporting:
Ross, localism is not necessarily reliant on funding from the State.
To the contrary it would indeed fund the local administration. An adequate tax paid to councils from local productivity would make Government grants for council budgets become obsolete.
So local Government would depend on a functional local economy. This would spur them on to greater efforts to make sure the people living within the administrative boundaries are able to find work. Especially if the Council had to foot the JSA bill.
In my plans, the Job Centre staff would transfer to the local economic board. Their job would be to say: "there are (for example) 100 jobs going at the Salad factory in September, 40 at the box factory and 25 in various other places. Choose the one more suitable for you and be there at 9 am 1st September"
To then say "No!" would not automatically entitle one to sign on for another week. It would take some good explaining and justification to simply "sign on". But in the knowledge that, the following week, a "yes" is expected.
But there would be training opportunities for people in need of experience and encouragement, and this training would take place to an extent within the work-place.
All local businesses would by law be required to offer their jobs through the local economic board.
Only, and only, if no-one local is available or capable of a job that has been offered, would the job be offered in the neighbouring districts, and if then no-one is available there either, it'd be offered county-wide, then nationwide, and only as a last resort to other countries.
Because Local Government would be responsible for paying JSA, they'd soon be making sure that unemployed people get encouraged into work, and wouldn't take any nonsense from local employers employing "only people from other countries", as this attitude not only would come under discrimination, but would also cost the local Government, and ultimately the local tax-payer, a lot of money to pay JSA to their own unemployed people.
Within a year, we'd have possibly 2.7 million unemployed people working, even if only part-time, but working. Only straight-forward discipline can bring our Country on the right track, and the knowledge that the local administrative area is accountable for their own unemployed, and not "the bank of England" printing every so often £50 billion of digital money called Quantitative Easing.
But let it be said, there would need be an introductory phase, and a period of training courses to actually acquaint people with work that, for the last 15 years at least, has been considered a no-go area for anyone speaking English.
This EU nonsense of "mi casa es tu casa" has to stop! We can't afford it! We can't afford to give millions of jobs, and the relevant wages, and the ensuing benefits and - later on - pensions, to everyone and all their family members who come over here "to get a job", while taking full advantage of our education and health system, and contributing peanuts by way of tax on their "minimum wage".
Once a town Community becomes accountable and financially responsible for their own unemployed, only then will this nonsense come to an end. Clearly we'll be leaving the EU in order to achieve this.
And until this comes about, we'll just all have to suffer the financial burden of an impossible system that is kept going only through Quantitative Easing money-printing, which, however, risks imploding our economy overnight, as the money will eventually become worthless.
When that happens, it usually happens all over a sudden. It just needs the share-markets to collapse! A chain reaction would ensue. It's happened before, such as in 1929, and it has been theorised that that event was what led to the Second World War.