Homebase let cat out of the bag about using workfare to reduce wage bills(140 Posts)
Only someone very naive could believe private firms are participating in the governments workfare scheme because they want to provide work experience for unemployed people out of the goodness of their own hearts and not as a way of reducing their wage bills by using forced labour at taxpayers expense.
But ask any of them and theyll swear the workfare people theyve taken on are extra to their requirements and are not repeat not replacing jobs they would normally have had to pay someone a proper wage to do.
Well. It looks like Homebase have accidentally let the cat out of the bag.
Heres a poster currently displayed on the wall in the managers office of Homebase Haringey which clearly shows the company is using workfare as a means to reduce their payroll costs:
This is particularly interesting, as Homebase have recently been lying to telling the public theyre not participating in workfare at all. See my previous post about that here:
Homebase are so embarrassed about using workfare theyre reduced to lying about it
Looks like Homebase just cant stop themselves telling porky pies about workfare, doesnt it?
I don't think anyone's daft enough to believe that providing placements is a humanitarian gesture. But I don't think that poster 'lets the cat out of the bag' either. If they want a store manager to take on the long-term unemployed, they have to sell in the idea - in this instance as 'free hours'. When you're managing a team of regular employees you get into a good routine and everyone knows what they're doing. So to take on various temporary staff means disruption, extra effort, diverting regular staff and can be a PITA. I bet, even with that incentive, some stores would rather not bother.
I can see how it benefits the store, what I can't quite see is how it benefits the country.
The taxpayer is paying for this and it helps stores and their "teams" and their bosses and there are free hours with no payroll costs, but how does it help the taxpayer who paid for it?
Wouldn't it be better if people filled in the potholes in roads all over the country so that the taxpayer would benefit from the "teamwork" rather than the stores?
Also will the stores pass on their cost savings to the taxpayer by reducing their prices?
It's not supposed to benefit the country. It's supposed to benefit businesses.
This is the reason there were very few temp xmas jobs around, I know poundland used workfare instead of Xmas temps.
And if the pot holes want filling, pay someone to fill them.
The pot holes certainly want filling as the disintegration of our infrastructure harms business and damages taxpayers' vehicles.
I am suggesting that rather than people working in stores and providing free hours with no payroll costs for stores, why aren't people on workfare employed in activities that help the entire community and the taxpayers who foot the bill?
That would be something like Roosevelt's New Deal when thousands of unemployed were shipped off to build dams and plant forests etc. Not sure how much of a dam someone could build during a four-week placement but, why not? Better than them sitting home watching daytime TV for another couple of years.....
The employer doesn't just get free hours of labour! The government actually pays them for each person they take on...
Yes, all the paid pot hole fillers can get laid off,so the workfare people can do their jobs for free..
There are no paid pot hoie fillers to be seen around our streets and haven't been for a long time. The country's infrastructure is in decline and it needs to be fixed for the benefit of the country.
If people are on workfare, at least let them work to help the community and country.
There are not enough pot hole fillers to go around.
If stores need 'teams', let them pay for them and let teh taxpayer gain from any workfare that is carried out rather than stores.
'The government actually pays them for each person they take on.'
ItsAll, are there any links about this?
I'm with Claig on the Pot Holes. I read somewhere that the government is putting aside money to repair the roads. My fear is that it will go the way of all the money councils are already spending on roads, into the hands of main contractors, sub contractors and then eventually some self -employed unsupervised and untrained person who bodges the job.
I have now seen the same pot hole filled 5 times, what a waste of public funds.
I think you might get a few bodged jobs if untrained workfare placements fill the pot holes
Let's train people up on workfare to gain useful skills and to help the community. Let's train people to become plumbers and builders and painters and decorators and roofers by renovating dilapidated buildings and factories and converting abandoned factories into accommodation that will all be bought and belong to the nation.
Let's pay building contractors a fee to train people up and supervise them as they are trained, but let all the profit go the nation who will own all of teh renovated properties. Then let's house the people on workfare and teh people on waiting lists in these new homes and not have to evict people from their council homes because tey cannot afford the extra bedroom supplement.
The skills that teh people on workfare will learn will be invaluable and help them to gain regular employment when teh economy eventually picks up again. I bet unemployed people would queue up to gain those skills rather than learning how to stack shelves.
'I think you might get a few bodged jobs if untrained workfare placements fill the pot holes'
It's all about training. It could be done.
Let's start building new motorways and by-passes with public money and let's train unemployed people how to do it, so that they will gain future employment in coucils and building contractors as road maintenance people.
Let's build lots of new toll roads and put people back to work and let teh tolls go back to teh nation so that we all benefit from people who travel our highways.
Let's motivate people, let's unite teh country and fire up the nation to overcome this depression and recession and let's build a better Britain for the entire nation and let's not let people languish without employment and skills or just learn how to stack shelves.
The cost of building roads would all be repaid by the tolls and the people on workfare would learn real skills.
No lets employ people directly and cut out the waste of tax payers money going to big contractors. train them, give them a living wage and supervise them.
Let's extend hospitals, let's build new schools, let's build a new airport. Let's not wait and talk about it. Let's do it now and let's train unemployed people how to do it.
Building suppliers would provide the goods and make money, engineering firms would be rolling and the whole economy would be active and there would be money in people's pockets, a trained workforce and a benefit to the taxpayer.
Let's let the stores pay for their own shelf-stacking teams, let's put people to productive work for the entire community.
I agree with the investment into a crumbling infrastructure however government funding should not be used to train people and give them welfare so that at some unspecified time in the future private businesses reap the rewards of tax payers money.
'No lets employ people directly and cut out the waste of tax payers money going to big contractors.'
But Duncan Smith, able as he is, and the civil servants haven't got the skills to run large-scale building projects. Let's let the experts run them and pay them to train and supervise people on real jobs not just on classes in colleges, and let's let all the things produced belong to the nation.
Let's train people up on workfare to gain useful skills and to help the community. Let's train people to become plumbers and builders and painters and decorators and roofers by renovating dilapidated buildings and factories and converting abandoned factories into accommodation that will all be bought and belong to the nation.
Pretty sure that theres a whole army of people already qualified in the trades who are going on workfare because there are no jobs in these areas.
Perhaps we should just fuck workfare out the window and employ people.
No lets not give tax payers money to corporations. The last thing we need is more privatisation. Lets not allow a situation where people are trained at tax payers expense on welfare, only to be employed on minimum wage zero hrs contracts in the private sector and then have to top up their money with tax credits and HB.
'Perhaps we should just fuck workfare out the window and employ people.'
But let's be realistic, that is not going to happen. New Labour sowed teh seeds of workfare by taking on some of the American ideas when they were in power and teh great and the good have decided that there will be workfare. So if there is workfare, let's at least train people up with great skills so that they can gain real employment afterwards and let's have them doing things that help the nation rather than the stores.
'No lets not give tax payers money to corporations.'
You are self-employed. If teh government hired you to train someone, they would have to pay you.
The government, able as this Coalition one is, haven't got the skills to build Olympic stadiums. Trhey had to get experts to do it.
There is nothing wrong with paying for teh services of private business to perform useful roles of training and supervising people. The product of teh labour and teh revenue from teh tolls would all belong to the government and the nation.
They tried to get "experts" to provide the security too and look what happened with that.
Yes, but I think our building giants, the type of companies who built the Channel Tunnel, really are experts. If they can't train people up and build great things, then we really are stuffed.
Let's demand excellence, let's expect the best, let's build the best and train people with the best, for the best by the best.
I agree the private sector are the best to take on building bridges and laying motorways. My father was a civil engineer in the private sector and maintained that councils employed struggling engineers. He worked for a large multi-national travelling all over the globe and most of the workers were supplied by sub-contractors. However when it comes to everyday routine maintenance work LA and tax payer are usually best served by employing directly.
have you looked into the Skye bridge fiasco Claig?
I agree I would prefer the work to be done in the public sector if we have the skills for it there.
No, I don't know about the Skye bridge.
Let's build whole new towns with homes that are entirely green and have new devices - these magnetic devices that provide almost free energy. Let's attract people to live in these towns where fuel would be esentially free instead of the fuel that has doubled since 2004 and which is still increasing and their green targets where they expect us to reduce our energy consumption by 40%.
Let's not be deindustrialised and priced out of energy and reduced in our standard of living to meet their low-growth carbon targets that will put millions into fuel poverty and make them unable to enjoy a standard of living that was the norm 20 years ago.
Let's create a new industrial revolution, let's use our creative productive engineering capacity and increase living standards for people (rather than reduce them as their green targets demand).
Let's not sit back and allow the negative thinking and doom and gloom of some of the things stated in the Green Party's 'Manifesto for a Sustainable Society' to occur.
"The quality of life of all, except for that of a very rich and powerful minority, will decline. As such problems intensify, it becomes easy for authoritarian regimes to gain control and to impose draconian solutions. It is desirable that peoples should avoid this by voluntarily taking responsible action now so that without repressive measures human numbers are eventually brought into balance."
"It should be clearly understood that the Party does not support repressive or coercive population control measures but, rather, is seeking to avoid their imposition
Let's plan for growth, let's invest for growth, let's build and train our employed, let's not stack shelves while Rome and civilization burns and we descend into a green nightmare of zero-growth, zero prospects and zero hope whiile as the Green document says the quality of life of all, except for that of a very rich and powerful minority, will decline
It's almost as if someone would prefer that to happen.
Let's support Osborne when he stood up and said something to the effect of we are not going to bankrupt Britain to "save the planet".
I'm sure that some of the rich and powerful minority mentioned in the Green document weren't happy when he said that, but the people certainly were (even the ones stacking shelves) because they saw hope and a future on the horizon.
Let's innovaye, let's create, let's get people working and building. Let's be positive and let's not accept teh doom and gloom that we are constantly sold by the rich elite and their green jesters.
Let's not accept zero growth, let's not be thrown back into a Dark Ages where they turn out our lights and our heaters and make us pay through the nose for energy with newly installed meters.
Let's have a new Enlightenment just like Voltaire and the giants of old had. Let's not let them close down our ohms and our volts and treat us as dolts.
ah, the skye bridge and the massive over investment of some 20 million pounds that went missing! plus the fact that some of the poorest people in the Britain were held hostage on the island by an american bank. George Monbiot Who runs Britain ?
But I digress, we need to stop workfare. Does anyone here know whether shell petrol stations are using workfare? Last week our local petrol station had lots of staff milling about with nothing to do. They were offering to fill the car and were going about with buckets washing all the pumps down. I questioned the staff and the manager who started stuttering and said "well, erm, we have got people, erm, well, from the usual unemployment, erm, list, well, no. not workfare, erm" and then shuffled off. I think they are but I don't know for sure.
We can train people all we like but if there are no jobs for them to progress to then whats the point?
My DP is a qualified mechanic with a specialty. He will soon be going on workfare. So what? Just ignore his years at college and serving his time and retrain him as a painter decorater? Really?
What a waste of everyones time and money.
My brother did a year of bricklaying just as the recession hit. He couldnt get a builder to give him an unpaid (!) placement to complete the course. He now works for McDonalds.
Workfare is not the answer. And either is training if there are no jobs.
Did anyone notice Osborne dropping his T's when he spoke to the super market staff in Derbyshire. Twas very funny. If you want the people to prosper Claig, we must first have democracy. The right to recall our MPs when they vote against our wishes and don't represent their constituents instead voting with their party. Here we have Nicolas Soames, lovely man but such a Tory. He saves the local maternity services and then votes with the party to privatise the local hospital he spent 15 years trying to save. doh!
Yes, it would be great to have a more representative democracy with a real PR system as the LibDems rightly wanted. But Rome was not built in a day, let's remain positive and not lose hope for it will surely happen someday.
wannabe, the Daily Mail reported today on a man with a PhD in physics who could only find work in a call centre and ended his life by jumping off a building.
We are witnessing a tragic waste of human potential and lives in our society. Teh bankers put us into this economic crisis and New Labour with their 'light touch' regulation cannot escape all blame. They left a note saying there was no money left. It was meant to be a joke, but it is not funny and has had tragic consequences for millions of people who have lost their homes and jobs.
Jobs don't grow on trees, so we must take action to create them. We need to build new roads and toll roads where the cost of building will be recopued by the revenue stream of the tolls. In the emergency with which we are faced we need to train hundreds of thousands of unemployed people in order to prepare them for an upturn.
Teh kickstart of building toll roads and local airports and fixing infrastructure will get teh wheels of our closed down factories turning, it will fire up our furnaces (and annoy the zero-growth greens and their rich masters) and it will oil the pockets of millions with pound notes and confidence and enterprise will return and people will once again have money to burn (which will yet again annoy teh zero-growth greens and their rich masters).
It will be like the revival of a heart attack victim laid out on a slab by a shot of energy that flows through teh veins of the nation like volts from a coal-fired power station (which will yet again annoy the zero-growth greens and their rich masters).
Where ther's a will, there's a way. We can allocate our resources back to growth rather than zero-growth and low growth and we can improve the lives of millions (which will yet again displease the greens and their rich masters).
Let's adopt teh motto of the Royal Air Force who in teh Second World War never gave up hope.
Per Ardua Ad Astra - Through Adversity to the Stars
Onwards and upwards.
The greens and their rich masters won't like it, but the people will love it, like birds freed from their green cage.
You are still putting money into the hands of a fascist aristo Claig, shame on you.
I am putting money in the hands of the people by giving them employment. Osborne is no fascist, he stood up to the rich elite and told them and their green jesters that he was not prepared to bankrupt Britain to "save the planet".
I only hope that he will accelerate growth and building and infrastructure improvement as soon as possible.
workfare is outrageous imo
Osborne has dubious friends, I was referring to the fact that you are putting money into the pocket of Viscount Rothermere by reading the mail.
Wow Claig, Keynsian economics? That's unusual for a fan of the DM!
So are we creating jobs or training people on workfare?
How about we create jobs and also create VOLUNTARY PAID apprenticeships and training opportunities so people can further themselves.
Workfare is reducing jobs and undermining the NMW.
I don't believe everything that the Daily Mail says.
But there are Tories who have been calling for growth and kickstart to the economy. I think Boris has been calling for the extension of a major airport.
We can't afford to just sit back and wait and keep our fingers crossed that things will turn out alright. The government has been voted in by the people and it has been entrusted with the power to act. We need action not delay.
wannabe, I don't think we can do anything about workfare. I think it has been decided on high that that will happen and New Labour even began the path towards it.
But if we are going to have it, let's make it useful to the people on workfare and to the community.
I think it is possible to both create jobs and train people on workfare with useful skils at the same time and I think that will start the economy moving.
It has got to be better than doing nothing.
> Osborne is no fascist, he stood up to the rich elite and told them and their green jesters that he was not prepared to bankrupt Britain to "save the planet".
Jesus Christ... that is one confused individual right there...
'Workfare is reducing jobs and undermining the NMW.'
I agree about that, because it is not being used as part of a growth programme, but is using current capacity in a non-growing economy.
That is why I believe we should create an entirely new area of growth funded by quantitaive easing (which should be given to large capital projects rather than banks) and this will create additional jobs and put people on workfare in these new growth areas rather than with existing employers stacking shelves for free.
We have to enlarge teh job market, we have to expand and we have to grow. We can't create employment in a zero-growth low-growth climate.
> wannabe, I don't think we can do anything about workfare. I think it has been decided on high that that will happen and New Labour even began the path towards it.
What does this even mean? What does 'decided on high'? By whom? By what process? Why can't we do anything about it? It sounds to me like you actually support it - or want to support it.
People have boycotted and shamed various workfare companies, and it is already on the verge of collapse because so many 'providers' are pulling out.
Do you have anything to contribute but proto-fascism, claig?
'What does 'decided on high'? By whom? By what process?'
I don't know, because I don't move in New Labour circles.
New Labour took on the marican ideas and began legislation which began teh move towards it. I don't know what process it was. Maybe it was the New Labour "sofa government" that we have heard about.
' Why can't we do anything about it? '
Because it is already happening and was voted in as far as I know. It is happening and I think it is futile to wish that it wasn't. I don't believe in charging at windmills like Don Quixote. I think some things cannot be changed, so I think it is best to try and modify them for teh best possible outcome.
I don't know what proto-fascism is, but do you have anything to contribute apart from insults?
I'm not a progressive, I don't know how New Labour started the process, all I know is that they did.
New Labour didn't ask me and you when they decided to start on the path to workfare, they didn't ask me and you when they brought in the Climate Act, they didn't ask me and you when they decided to "save the planet" for us, they didn't ask me and you, they never do.
Some nuts support UKIP, some even vote UKIP, this gets Scameron on the run. He comes out and says "lets tackle immigration" what we have to do is put an equal amount of pressure on labour for them to come out and condemn workfare. We need to nudge labour to the left. We need to be unequivocal, you want our votes, you represent us.
I would have said "Climate Act! Oi! No!" and the Harry Enfield character might possibly have agreed. But alas they never asked us, that would mess up their plans and only create fuss.
It's called a representative democracy. You vote them in and they do what they please. I don't really understand it, but from what I can make out, that's what New Labour was all about.
That's why people say "plus ca change..."
Yes, and the tories are all ears.
They don't ask us because they don't represent us. They represent the interests of capitalists. What we need to do is remind them that they are only going to get behind the wheel if we give them the keys.
Labour unfortunately are in a very precarious position because they have been co-opted to the right. They fear losing the benevolence of a global cabal of tax dodging corporations and the investment they believe we need. Thatcher released the equivalent to a deadly virus over the globe, something that has turned on us, will ultimately bankrupt nation states incl us and labour have little power to stop it. Its like sleeping with the enemy. They appease the global capitalists and beg for their favour.
> Because it is already happening and was voted in as far as I know. It is happening and I think it is futile to wish that it wasn't. I don't believe in charging at windmills like Don Quixote.
This is meaningless. Just because is already happening doesn't mean it can't be changed. If this were not true, all progress would be impossible.
> I think some things cannot be changed, so I think it is best to try and modify them for teh best possible outcome.
Why is this one of those things? We already have evidence protests, boycotts and shaming are having a large effect on workfare, as many charities and companies which have been targeted have pulled out.
So your resignation is not borne out of reality (not surprising). Perhaps you should ask yourself whether you really do object to workfare at all.
> I don't know what proto-fascism is, but do you have anything to contribute apart from insults?
Proto = early, latent, developing.
Your ideas are very close to fascist, I'm afraid: the disdain for 'intellectuals', 'progressives', and rhetoric directed at the 'elite' - even though you have no idea who they really are. Meanwhile you unwittingly support the real 'elite' - the rich and ruling class in power - whilst you criticise environmentalists and other left-wing or liberal organisations. Your political ideas are a total inversion of reality.
You support the Daily Mail which is a fascist newpaper which has repeatedly supported fascists (The Blackshirts and Le Pen) in the past and which uses hateful, nasty rhetoric to criticise 'the other', which basically includes anyone who isn't middle-class, white, conservative, and heterosexual.
You support the Tories, who could not be more detached and unrepresentative of the UK as a whole. They all overwhelming also rich, white, males -- many of whom inherited millions and have never worked a day in their lives. And whilst they make poor people poorer and put people on workfare to make them work for free, they spend hundreds of thousands in Parliamentary expenses on champage, and have recently come out as wanting £30K payrise.
Meanwhile you keep talking about 'The People'. You have no idea who 'the people' are. They are not represented by The Tories or the Daily Hatred.
You are seriously misguided. Seriously.
'Just because is already happening doesn't mean it can't be changed.'
I agree with you there, the poll tax was changed. But we all make different judgements and different beliefs. You probably believe in climate catastrophe, I don't. I don't think workfare will be changed because I think it was decided on high by New Labour and the Tories (whereas the poll tax did not have Labour support and even many Tories disagreed with Thatcher on it). I could be wrong, but that is the way I see it. But I am not stopping you opposing it if you think you can change it.
'So your resignation is not borne out of reality'
It is borne out of my understanding of reality, just as I don't think that the rich eleiet will end their climate change and zero-growth policies easily unless they are exposeed by more Climategates in teh future, but I doubt that will happen, so what will be will be.
'Your ideas are very close to fascist, I'm afraid: the disdain for 'intellectuals', 'progressives', and rhetoric directed at the 'elite' - even though you have no idea who they really are.'
No I am not a fascist because unlike you I believe in democracy and I like to hear all views - be that Guardian or Daily Mail. I believe in the will of teh people (just like teh American founding fathers) and not in "sofa government" by Oxbridge elites who do not represent the people.
Justr because you have not yet understood that environmentalists are puppets of teh rich elite and that the Club of Rome who commissioned teh 'Limits to Growth' report that kickstarted the worldwide green low-growth zero-grwoth movement net on what I think was a Rockefeller estate in Italy, but I can't remember exactly and would need to look it up, doesn't mean that you will not one day understand teh truth.
The Daily Mail is not a fascist paper. it is teh world's leading online paper and named teh Stephen Lawrence killers and is against teh BNP. So you can try and smear good Daily Mail journalists and millions of good readers worldwide, but it only shows the desperation of your arguments.
'[The Tories] They all overwhelming also rich, white, males -- many of whom inherited millions and have never worked a day in their lives.
Where do you get this stuff from? The Socialist Worker's Party magazine?
Thatcher was a middle class white woman and worked for a living. She was also our one and only female Prime Minister, David Davis grew up in a single parent home on a council estate and stood for leader of the Tory party. John Major left school at 16 and was the son of a circus entertainer. What are you on about? They were not all Oxbridge PPEs.
' You have no idea who 'the people' are'
I beg to differ. The people in their masses but the Daily Mail and teh Sun. You and your Socialist Worker buddies do not represent teh majority of teh people. I respect all people and all views, but as a democrat, I respect teh wishes of the majority and don't look down on them or the paper that they choose to read which is known as teh people's paper and proudly bears that name.
History of the founding fathers and the constitution.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UUKj-7_9rU an elite bunch of wealthy people who tried to limit democracy.
Mini, I am not an expert on American history, but I have heard some of the American Cosntitution being read out and it is one of teh world's finest documents that freed teh people from tyranny and unrepresentative government. The American Revolution was the unfolding of teh historical process that led to the freeing of teh human spirit from oligarchical rule and was supported by teh French who had had their own revolution to free the people.
America is a great country founded on noble principles and ideals and freedom of thought and expression is enshrined in their great constitution. It is one of teh shining documents of world history and teh human spirit.
But I will listen to teh Marxist view and see what they say about it.
Rockefeller, and who was he? capitalist or worker?
American history is fascinating, they kill their presidents, invade other countries, drop air bases all over the globe, undermine other governments, control the top 20 corporations, extract tribute from the poorest regions. America looks at the the rest of the world, points to the ground and says "your standing on my oil"
that should be 50*, sorry must get back to work.
Rockefeller was a capitalist and Stalin was a communists. They were both elites in their respective socities. Neither was a worker.
I am with the people, with the workers, with the Daily Mail readers against the elites who do not represent the people and who want to inflict zero-growth and low-growth and population control on the people of the earth under their climate change scam in order to maintain power and control in their oligarchical system of elte control.
That is why I read teh Daily Mail, widely known as the people's paper and the paper of the "squeezed middle" who are "sqiueezed" by the elite.
The American founding fathers didn't do any of that. America was born from noble ideas and principles.
I defy you to keep a dry eye when listening to the great words of their National Anthem - land of the brave and home of the free. Magnificent stuff. It is even better than a Daily Mail editorial and that is saying something!
> I am with the people, with the workers, with the Daily Mail readers against the elites who do not represent the people
No, you're just confused.
If you don't believe me, then I am sure you will believe the Greens in their document 'Manifesto for a Sustainable Society'. Theyare telling you straight.
"The quality of life of all, except for that of a very rich and powerful minority will decline. As such problems intensify, it becomes easy for authoritarian regimes to gain control and to impose draconian solutions. It is desirable that peoples should avoid this by voluntarily taking responsible action now so that without repressive measures human numbers are eventually brought into balance."
"It should be clearly understood that the Party does not support repressive or coercive population control measures but, rather, is seeking to avoid their imposition
They seem to be under no doubt. The message is change your ways or you will be forced to. Their solution, if I understand it rightly, is change voluntarily or the elite with an authoritarian regime will force you with draconian measures.
They don't think it can be stopped, they think it is inevitable. Do what the elite says or they will force you seems to be the message.
Unlike the greens and the elite, I am with the Daily Mail and the Telegraph's Christopher Booker and teh Daily Mail reader who all know this is a scam and scare tactic used to force us to change our ways.
'"The quality of life of all, except for that of a very rich and powerful minority will decline'
Why in this awful terrible save the planet catastrophe that will befall teh earth according to teh greens, will this tiny rich minority be unaffected, while the good Daily Mail reader will be "squeezed" yet again?
I think it is because this tiny minority is in charge and are doing the squeezing. And instead opposing this tiny minority and calling their bluff, the greens seem to believe it all and are the messengers who seenm to say do whatthey say or they will do it for you.
No offence Claig, but I havent a fucking clue what you are on about.
The Daily Mail is vile. It was vile long before this week. If you are with them then IMO you are a lost cause.
Claig, have you heard of Webster Tarple, I know you are aware of malthus. You see I have listened and read Tarple, I am aware of the neo-malthusians who are a bunch of academics who claim that humanity is a blot on the world and that population will reach an unsustainable level, resources will run scarce, modern farming methods are harming bio-diversity etc,...
Where to start with this Companies like Monsanto wage war upon other nations, this is done by undermining their governments using CIA and various economic tactics, with the full backing of the U.S government. Monsanto is a huge corporation involved in petro chemicals, fertilizers, GM crops and modern farming methods. Monsanto along with others have stripped the U.S, depleted soil and now bees are shipped in lorries all over the US because these chemicals are harming bio-diversity. As with oil the U.S government acts as broker, facilitator that will allow the imperialist aspirations of these corporations to exploit other countries. They do this through foreign policy, trade policies, lending, IMF, FED WTO etc and air bases all over the globe that threaten the security of other nations, whilst bankrupting the American State itself.
Tarple claims that Obamas science Tzar is a neo-malthusian who follows Paul Ehrlich's ideas. Can you see that in this case there is a contradiction btw these two camps?
Back in the 1940s a few academic economists who subscribed to the idea of liberal economic free market capitalism managed to get funding from wealthy backers to set up a think tank. Mount peralin society. The reason that the wealthy elite coughed up the dollars is because the "thinkers" generate ideas that fit with the agenda of the capitalist class. It isn't a case of the elite being thinkers. The elite are the capitalist class who fund the thinkers to think what is commercially desirable. In this case, the thinkers were paid to spread the neo-liberal orthodoxy throughout the universities. Look up the chicago school. Investigate neo-liberal theory and Margeret Thatcher's advisor Keith Joseph
"Thatcher began to attend lunches regularly at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), a think tank founded by the poultry magnate Antony Fisher, a disciple of Friedrich von Hayek; she had been visiting the IEA and reading its publications since the early 1960s. There she was influenced by the ideas of Ralph Harris and Arthur Seldon, and she became the face of the ideological movement opposing the welfare state. Keynesian economics, they believed, was weakening Britain. The institute's pamphlets proposed less government, lower taxes, and more freedom for business and consumers" wiki
Although capitalists work as a class to further their own interests as a group there remains a great deal of competition over ideas and competition to gain the upper hand commercially. Not all "thinkers" think in terms of ideas and theory that will further the commercial interests of the corporate capitalist class. neo-malthusians have the backing of some very wealthy people?????? the nexus btw corporate capital and finance capital isn't as clear cut as one might think. The further up the ladder one looks it may come down to some individual finance capitalists who lets face it will play off one idea against another, one business against another and so on. In doing so they get very rich. They lend to both sides in a war as the ultimate example of this.
Workfare is a bastard, slave invention of the U.S, another import like foodbanks that we could do without.
Yes, Webster Tarpley, a very very clever man. He is a socailist but not in the sense of Tony Blair. He is a Roosevelt type socialist but he doesn't belive in scams like global warming and understands that there is an oligarchical aristocratic elite that pulls teh strings of puppets.
'Tarple claims that Obamas science Tzar is a neo-malthusian who follows Paul Ehrlich's ideas. Can you see that in this case there is a contradiction btw these two camps? '
Yes, I know. Have you read about him? Do you know about his book with Ehrlich, called "Human Ecology"? Do you know some of teh things it says?
Fox News did a great article on it.
I don't know what you mean about the contradiction.
Mini, now you are on teh right track. YTes I know all that and every self-respecting conspiracy theorist knows all that.
But the real ruling elite is teh Neo-Malthusian elite. Climate change is their policy and every government on earthh and every puppet on earth follows their policy and they have some political parties who push the message for them and fool naive eager young socialists into falling for it and working against the interests of the people and the Daily Mail reader.
Capitlaism is just one system used by teh elite. Communism is another system. Read Gerorge Orwell, a genius and socialist, to understand that teh elite controls both. It is about power and control for teh elite - not isms. They don't care which system they are in as long as they are in charge.
Every conspiracy theorist lnows that they use teh Hegelian dialectic to create opposing systems which in reality work together to provide a synthesis from teh thesis and antithesis. Orwell told us that the systems work together to control the people.
Orwell told us "hope lies with teh proles" and the Daily Mail reader for they have not fallen for teh scams of teh oligarchs, unlike teh naive earnest young leftwingers who work unwittingly for them.
Capitalism and rip-off finance and stock market scams and banking crashes are not the ultimate purpose of teh elite, they are only stepping stones towards their Neo-Malthusian goal.
Yes I follow Fox news, I have even listened to that loon American Alex Jones.
They are locating the problem in the wrong place.
Lots of people believe that Alex Jones works for the elite. Lots of what he says makes sense but then he deliberately ruins it all by going over the top.
The capitalist created communism. They supported it against Hitler who wanted to destroy it. They armed it, they funded Lenin and Trotsky and Wall Street funded Trotsky. They created communism as the opponent of capitalism. They were two parts of the Hegelian dialectic and both systems frightened their populations with scares about the other system.
We didn't have a global warming agenda when we discovered steam claig, nor when the peasants revolted, nor when children as young as five worked in factories and we created racism as a rational excuse for colonies and slave labour. We didn't have a science devoted to climate change when our banks became trusts with imperialist aspirations, or when we we set up the east india company, colonised america and stood by whilst the poor drank gin and chinese died of opium. What we had was the birth of capitalism.
Many conspiracy theorists believe that the ultimate goal of the Neo-Malthusian elite is a socialist one world government and that capitalism is just a temporary stepping stone used as part of the Hegelian dialectic. A socialist one world government is the type of thing that Marx predicted. But the elite don't believe any of that bullshit, they use whatever they need to control people.
The CEOs are not the elite, the puppets are not the elite. The elite are the Neo-Malthusians who control both hands in the card game, who play both sides of the Hegelian dialectic in order to form the synthesis which many believe is the socialist one world government.
And many believe that the green document is right when it says talks about a possible authoritarian regime that will take draconan measures.
They will probably say, as Orwell predicted, that Big Brother Loves You and they are only doing to "save the planet" for little old you.
Alex jones is all over the internet along with other "nationalist zealots and survivalists" conspiracy theories abound, they even interview these people on main stream U.S news channels.
Do you think they would interview me? no because I am a marxist. Of course they wouldn't.
What was going on with McCarthyism? were they going after conspiracy theorists because they had uncovered the evil plot? no, they went after communists.
Social and political power is wealth. Wealth is social and political power. Undermine wealth and these people have no power. Undermine private property and the stranglehold of finance and corporate power and these people have no conduit for their "plan" (and that plan has nothing to do with green meanies) and that plan has everything to do with perpetuating their wealth and power.
Marx turned hegel on its head.
Glad to see I'm not the only person outside the Hebrides that knows about the Skye bridge travesty!
'We didn't have a global warming agenda when we discovered steam'
They hadn't thought the scam up then. But at the time the elite had their Reverend Malthus and teh message is the same as it was then. Only now they are much more sophisticated and capital is global and communication and mass media is instant.
OK Claig, YOU work for less than NMW then. Unless YOU are willing to do so to 'rebuild our Country' then why the FUCK should anybody else?!
'Alex jones is all over the internet along with other "nationalist zealots and survivalists" conspiracy theories abound, they even interview these people on main stream U.S news channels.'
That is exactly why many people say he works for the system. There are other conspiracy theorists that they won't interview, but they always have Alex Jones on.
'Do you think they would interview me? no because I am a marxist. Of course they wouldn't.'
Of course they would. Marxists are in most university departments. Eric Hobsbawn is a national treasure and Marxist intellectuals are the intellectual elite. They are more likely to interview a Marxist than a representive of the people and the people's paper - a Daiily Mail journalist.
'OK Claig, YOU work for less than NMW then. Unless YOU are willing to do so to 'rebuild our Country' then why the FUCK should anybody else?!'
Don't blame me, I didn't create teh policy. New Labour began the process and Iain Duncan Smith implemented it. It is happening now. People are doing it. There is nothing I can do about it. No one asked my opinion. But since it is happening, I think people should gain real skills by doing things that help teh community rather than stores to stack shelves.
A fair day's pay for a fair days work.
Which workfare isn't. If you were to work 40 hours for your £71 JSA, that comes out as just under £1.78 / hr.
When you consider that NMW is £6.19 / hr, people on Workfare are underpaid by £4.41 / hr.
Or that they are being paid less than 29% of the minimum that their labour is worth.
Would YOU agree to being paid just 29% of your current salary? No? Then you have no choice but to admit that workfare is wrong!
Because if it would be wrong for YOU to devalue your labour by working for just 29% of what that labour should be worth, then it is ALSO wrong to expect those currently unemployed to devalue their labour by working for just 29% of the MINIMUM that their labour should be worth.
Unless you have a rained argument to that, then case closed, workfare is wrong!
Rained = reasoned.
I would prefer that they gave people on workfare the minimum wage. But what I think doesn't count. I think they should scrap the Climate Act, but they won't do it.
YOU gain some of those skills then, Claig.
Because most of these people on workfare ARE trained and experienced in their previous employment areas.
Why do they need to be exploited either for big business OR for 'public good', when those jobs could be given to them as paid jobs?!
If the job is there, and needs doing, then PAY SOMEONE to do that job. Or don't expect it done.
Surely THAT is the 'free market' that the Tories seem to hold in such high regard?
It will NEVER be a 'free market' as long as some sections of Society are being exploited.
Are you always so defeatist, Claig, or only about policies that you agree with?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gylKoWi6n4o Marx's Dialectic, this guy explains very clearly the difference btw Hegel and Marx's dialectic. Hegels dialectic is to do with the conciousness of the mind, which has no material basis.
"do babies think?"
A Hegelian would say yes they do, they think from day one and what they think is projected onto the world around them and that thought is reflected back at them. Nothing changes except their perceptions. We are shaped by our perceptions.
A Marxist would argue that if you put a baby in a darkened room it would form no thoughts because we only form thoughts from what we see/hear and perceive around us, we then reflect that thinking back into the world around us. In this way we shape the world around us.
Because it is quite a difficult concept to grasp, it has made it very easy for loons to misinterpret the difference btw Hegel and Marx.
CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs so right, it isn't a free market because governments intervene and stack the odds in the favour of their pay master benefactors. Socialism for bankers fascism for workers.
I am not defeatist, I am a realist.
'YOU gain some of those skills then, Claig'
But I am not on workfare, so why do I need to gain some of those skills?
'Why do they need to be exploited either for big business OR for 'public good', when those jobs could be given to them as paid jobs?!'
Ask Iain Duncan Smith, I don't know. There are no jobs available with those skills or they would be doing them.
'If the job is there, and needs doing, then PAY SOMEONE to do that job. Or don't expect it done.'
I presume teh job doesn't need doing which is why the poster that ttosca linked to was to convince managers to use people on workfare.
'Surely THAT is the 'free market' that the Tories seem to hold in such high regard?'
As I understand it, these jobs have been created as a form of training scheme and Iain Duncan Smith has been in charge of this policy which aims to help unemployed people get back to work and get some training. It is not that there are lots of vacancies but that they have been created to help people. That seems to be the intention.
'It will NEVER be a 'free market' as long as some sections of Society are being exploited.'
These jobs are not in teh market. They have been created as temporary posts for teh purpose of training. That is not the free market. That is big state socialism and state intervention with the help of big business, which is maybe why New Labour were teh ones who began teh process. I wonder if teh copied it from leftwing Clinton as well, or was it from Bush?
'it isn't a free market because governments intervene and stack the odds in the favour of their pay master benefactors. Socialism for bankers fascism for workers.'
Exactly it is socialism and state intervention.
'A Marxist would argue that if you put a baby in a darkened room it would form no thoughts because we only form thoughts from what we see/hear and perceive around us, we then reflect that thinking back into the world around us. In this way we shape the world around us.'
But that is rubbish and Hegel is right. A baby would experience fear and begin to cry and feel hunger, so of course it is thinking and conscious just as Hegel said. A baby is alive so it thinks. It doesn't need light to think, just as a person blind from birth can think and feel and be conscious.
Marx is a materialist and that is why he is wrong.
The baby can not effect a change in its circumstances or the environment around it.
Of course babies feel hunger, do you think that babies "think" with fully formed vocabulary in their head though. Of course they don't. Children learn language because we speak to them.
Marx turned Hegel on his head alright. Marx would have fitted in well in Alice in Wonderland with his mate the Mad Hatter.
All this nonsense about Hegel being some evil mastermind is nuts. The only reason the conspiracy theorists get away with it is because so few people can read Hegel without going insane.
'do you think that babies "think" with fully formed vocabulary in their head though. Of course they don't. Children learn language because we speak to them.'
The baby thinks and feels and makes sounds which have intention. It won't learn to speak English without any contact, but it is still conscious and would form thoughts.
So you think Hegel is correct then , in which case what is your problem?
the whole basis of this NWO craparolla is the Hegelian dialect, now you say Hegel is right. What, so the Hegelians are not evil doers afterall.
'All this nonsense about Hegel being some evil mastermind is nuts.'
Of course it is nits. He wasn't a mastermind, he was an idiot.
But it doesn't think in mother tongue does it claig??????
Sorry, I like Hegel, I meant Marx was an idiot. Hegel is a genius and one of teh great philosophers of humanity. Marx isn't.
That just smacks of hard cheese Claig
'But it doesn't think in mother tongue does it claig??????'
No but from what you quoted of Marx, he did not mention mother tongue, unless he has changed the goalposts.
Hegel is not evil, he is a genius.
The New World Order uses Hegel's ideas because he is a genius. But what they use his ideas for has nothing to do with Hegel.
Do babies have fully formed thoughts, yes or no?
Do you know it had never occurred to me that Hegel was wrong until I encountered Marx, now why is that? well that would be because we only question things as we encounter them. We can not think about something that doesn't actually exist for us.
If they have enough jobs to hand out for workfare, they have enough to pay those workers a wage.
Maybe this is why there are next to no jobs going in my area.
If workfare was scrapped, there will be more paid jobs to go around. Yes we know they still get money through benefits, but £53 a week is no where near the nmw.
Its wrong on all levels.
Marx wasn't interested in babies, that is my example because it is quite a good way to examine the difference in the two dialectic methods.
'Do babies have fully formed thoughts, yes or no? '
What is a fully formed thought because from whast I have heard of Marx, he never had one?
Have you got the actual quote from Marx because first you daid thought and now it is fully formed thought?
pumpkin you are right. These workfare jobs prevent peopel getting real jobs or working overtime if there are any real vacancies at all.
That is why workfare should be done in newly created public sector jobs created afresh for workfare schemes such as new road builds etc.
No babies do not have fully formed thoughts using mother tongue unless they understand language. Does anyone have fully formed thoughts? no because our thoughts are constantly shaped by everything that we hear/see/feel and perceive around us, so all thinking is a dialectic btw man and his environment, in this way we change what we think but we also change our environment, it is a dialectic.
but it shouldn't be workfare, surely it should paid employment at a living wage claig?
'n this way we change what we think but we also change our environment'
But how can we change our environment by thought alone. The environment is material. Surely we would need to act phsically to change it?
'but it shouldn't be workfare, surely it should paid employment at a living wage claig?'
Yes I agree. I am not in favour of workfare. I am just a realist and believe that nothing I say or think will change Iain Duncan Smith's mind.
We can not act without thinking. We can not think without acting or without something acting upon us. We can not act upon our environment without firstly being aware of it.
Worker becomes conscious of his exploitation through his lived experience. Without consciousness he can not act to overcome this exploitation.
I disagree, we can change things. In the 30's the communist league took to the streets, radicalised the workers (those who had work) material deprivation makes people act. Roosevelt acted to save the capitalists by getting them to dig deeper into their pockets, through progressive taxation he raised the money to invest in capital expenditure which funded, schools, roads.........more people in work means greater labour power so that wages can not be undermined and from 1945-1975 (ish) labour and unions were in a strong bargaining position, high levels of employment, rising wages, rising productivity, creation of the welfare state, house building, NHS in the UK, similar trajectory and economic policy. When Thatcher adopted the "thinkers" ideas and implemented neo-liberal policy, unemployment rose, weakened labour bargaining, devalued labour, stagnating wages, rising profits and huge wealth inequality to the same levels we had before the depression in the 30s
The only thing that can save capitalism is the workers, and they must fight for better wages, progressive tax, redistribution and capital investment that creates employment etc,
This is what the Daily Mail thought of Jewish immigrants around the Nazi era (1938):
This is the Daily Mail openly supporting fascists in 2012:
Just so you know that you are supporting fascists, claig. On your conscience be it.
if you look here you'll even see a nice pic of Rothermere smoozing up to Hitler.
ttosca, I weasn't around in the 1930s. I read the Daily Mail now and it is not fascist.
The article saying vote Le Pen is by one of its commentators, it doesn't reflect the views of the paper. The Mail has or has had all sorts of commentaors from Janet Street Porter to Suzanne Moore and they wouldn't write for a fascist paper. The Dasily Mail has all sorts of opinions and views from left and right.
Paul Dacre was apparently a good mate with Gordon Brown.
Calling the Daily Mail fascist gives socialist workers a worse name than they already have.
With Hitler in power, Lord Rothermere publically declared his renewed support. Writing in The Daily Mail on 10th July, 1933, he praised Hitler's new regime which had stopped Germany 'rapidly falling under the control of its alien elements' - Jewish people - and urging 'all British young men and women to study closely the progress of the Nazi regime in Germany'. Adolf Hitler in a letter to Lord Rothermere on 7th December, 1933 relayed his thanks to Rothermere for 'the wise and beneficial public support' the Daily Mail had given him so far.
Mini, the first line of that article mentions that Nick Cohen writes for teh Daily Mail. He is Jewish and used to write for teh Guardian and maybe still does (I don't know). He would not write for a fascist paper.
These attacks on the people's paper are so desperate that they give socialists a worse name than New Labour left them with.
> ttosca, I weasn't around in the 1930s. I read the Daily Mail now and it is not fascist.
It cannot openly be fascist because it would be shut down.
> The article saying vote Le Pen is by one of its commentators, it doesn't reflect the views of the paper.
Oh but it does, and its rhetoric hasn't really changed very much since 1938. Replace "German Jews Pouring In To This Country" with "Immigrants Pouring In To This Country" and you have every other Daily Mail headline for the past 10 years.
Put bluntly, no other newspaper would even think of publishing such a headline - columnist or not. Not even the Torygraph would publish a headline saying "The only responsible vote is for Le Pen".
> The Mail has or has had all sorts of commentaors from Janet Street Porter to Suzanne Moore and they wouldn't write for a fascist paper. The Dasily Mail has all sorts of opinions and views from left and right.
Why wouldn't they?
> Paul Dacre was apparently a good mate with Gordon Brown.
> Mini, the first line of that article mentions that Nick Cohen writes for teh Daily Mail. He is Jewish and used to write for teh Guardian and maybe still does (I don't know). He would not write for a fascist paper.
Ha! Nick Cohen supported the Iraq war - and still does. He's not exactly the paradigm of an ethical person.
But the jobs WERE there, Claig. Until governments of ALL colours decided to start offering indentured people (I am hesitant to use the word I really want as I have been told before on debates that it is too emotive...) to do work for free.
Which undermined the lower end of the job market.
A few years ago, every year my local supermarket would take on Temporary staff over the Christmas period, and keep a sizeable percentage of them on afterwards.
There has not been ANY seasonal jobs available, OR permanent ones, in my local two Tesco stores for over 14 months.
There are staff that had worked there, been made redundant, then 6 months later BEEN MADE TO DO THE EXACT SAME JOB on workfare.
(I spoke to a lad who had worked the dairy section for 18 months before being made redundant, only to be sent BACK to the same store, to work, yes, you guessed it, the dairy section, just 6 months later.)
If this ISN'T exploitation, then I can't think what is!
't the jobs WERE there, Claig. Until governments of ALL colours '
good point, I agree with you. I am not in favour of it.
The job WAS there, it NEEDED doing, the lad was already trained to do it, had been doing it FOR A FAIR WAGE.
What possible use was that 'training program' to someone who had already done that self same job for 18 months?!
It is nothing but indenture - 'working for food, clothing and a roof over your head'.
God, it's impossible to have a rational discussion with someone who can't see the irrationality of this!!
I said I am not in favour of it. I think they should be paid minimum wage.
I also think they should scrap the Climate Act. But they do as they please.
"Yet in the summer of 1939, Rothermere was still appealing to Hitler not to provoke a war, saying that Britain and Nazi Germany must remain at peace. "Our two great Nordic countries should pursue resolutely a policy of appeasement for, whatever anyone may say, our two great countries should be the leaders of the world," he told Joachim von Ribbentrop, Hitler's foreign minister, on July 7 1939"
What does this mean? well it is because of capitalist imperialism.
"He assured Hitler that the British government had "no policy which involves the encirclement of Germany, and that no British government could exist which embraced such a policy"
The term encirclement doesn't relate to troops but to imperialism, where by Britain, France and Germany were the industrialised power houses of the world. They not only exported goods, they controlled colonies for the appropriation of natural resources and cheap labour. They exported capital (finance capital) across the globe to exploit new markets and Rothermere being a capitalist was appealing to Hitler because he had commercial interests that would be effected by the break up of this tea party.
1) The concentration of production and capital developed to such an extent it creates monopolies.
2) The merging of bank capital with corporate capital= finance capital or financial oligarchy
3) The export of capital, which becomes important and is different to commodity export because it exploits other markets and doesn't actually benefit the country that is furthering the imperialist endevour.
4) Formation of international monopoly which share the worlds resources and markets amongst themselves
5)Territorial division of the world amongst the industrialised nations
Points 1-5 were not written yesterday but equally apply to today. They were written in 1917 by lenin and they make clear why the likes of Rothermere were keen to make deals with Hitler.
As a new home owner, I know where not to shop now, thank you for posting.
Whilst people are on workfare they are not actively seeking employment. They are not earning a living wage, or contributing to N.I which helps pay for NHS, pensions, maternity leave, the basic infrastructure that helps make this a good country to live in. .
Who shops in Homebase? Ordinary people, not millionaires, they profit from us, so hit them where it hurts.
I copied the poster to my fb page and tagged all my friends.
Are you going to persist in reading the mail claig?
I am still trying to find out if shell are using workfare.
MiniTheMinx your posts, as always, cut to the heart of the matter and give a very clear idea of where it is all going wrong.
Hopefully the message will start reaching further and deeper, as we, the people, face more hardship, due to the political and corporate elites wish to develop an easily controlled underclass, with which to fatten themselves.
For me, the recent Banksy scandel is a wonderful illustration.
Banksy does an art piece that critiques our capitalist/ imperialist system.
This is in a public place, very central to working class Londerners, which then one night, gets removed and shipped over to California, where it is to be auctioned. The outcry prevents the auctioning, but the piece is sitting in a warehouse in California, waiting for the furory to die down, then it, stolen goods, will be sold, making a profit for god knows.who and leaving the people of Wood Green bereft.
Because it didn't matter about removing it fron them, because, they, us, we, the people, count for nothing as far as the powerful wealthy people are concerned.
'Are you going to persist in reading the mail claig?'
I am a seeker of the truth, so of course I will continue to read the Mail.
There is a cracking article in the Mail today called "The Great Recycling Con".
It is classic Daily Mail. None of it is news to the Daily Mail reader, they are already well aware of the con tricks of the progressives and of "sofa government", but this article just embellishes their knowledge on this topic.
There is a picture of nine bins per household by a writer who is called "Social Affairs Correspondent".
The comments of the Daily Mail reader below the article are toxic, they are positively fuming about this con trick.
This is classic Daily Mail and the reason that it is known as the people's paper and is beloved by the people and hated by the progressives.
One astute comment of a Daily Mail reader is the pithy, succint line
"You just can't trust anyone these days can you?"
Brilliant. That is why we read the people's paper, for nuggets like that. There is no other paper like it on the planet, which is why it is the world's leading online paper.
Blimey Couthy, Tesco clearly have no shame.
Saying that i don't know why it surprises me as Tesco took on my dh for a paid seasonal role, when he applied, but in the Job Advertisement failed to mention or state of was only a 10 day position !!!
He then had to take the job as he got it, they stopped our jsa immediately the week before he started, yet he didn't receive his wages until a month later. Our hb was also stopped straight away.
So for a whole month we couldn't pay any rent and lived of the child tax credits & maintenance. We went overdrawn by £300 in this time to pay all our utility bills.
Was a very worrying time, and what sucks is that Tesco promised there was a chance of a permanent job for dh when the 10 days had passed and guess what they offered him a bloody job alrite!!!- a fucking 8hr a week position, which of course he couldn't accept as we couldn't have supported our family on that, as you have to do 24hrs plus to obtain working tax cred or any help with hb etc.
They finally restarted our claim of jsa and hb, after a month
MaggieMaggieMaggieMcGill Thank you, I didn't know about Banksy, must google and do some reading. I feel very strongly about the democratisation of art and culture. Too much of our culture is now stolen from us and sold back to us, either that or it is generated in an effort to obscure the truth.
Homebase criticised over work experience claims
Leaked internal document appears to promote the use of unpaid jobseekers to reduce company payroll costs
Two days before the start of the Easter bank holiday, nearby Finsbury Park jobcentre tweeted that it had successfully placed 21 people in the Haringey store to gain experience. The tweet was later deleted
Oh how handy. Two days before the biggest decorating holiday of the year.
I am about to attempt decorating for the very first time (DHs health wont allow him to do it) we are discussing me making a start in May [gulp] Because of this and my own experiences of workfare in the past i know where we WONT be buying materials from.
Couthy that story about the young lad on the dairy counter absolutely disgusts me.
Also if you want to make claimants to work on the roads they HAVE to be waged otherwise they are being treated like a prison change gang.
Sorry i meant prison chain gang.
Join the discussion
Please login first.