Voluntary work or lose benefits

[Marjoriew]

Government intend to cut benefits of claimants on JSA who refuse to do voluntary work of 30 hours a week over a 4-week period.
Benefits could be stopped for up to 3 months if claimants refuse to comply.

cory - no, THEY should decide they can't afford to have children... people do that all the time - of all my uni friends, no-one had a child until they could responsibly provide for it.

I fail to see how that is such an alien (let alone "immoral") concept!

lowrib - preferably option 1...if option 2, it's my problem how exactly? So we should just subsidise feckless w*nkers impregnating young women left, right and centre, should we??

and the children of this situation??

Stop feeding it, all.

"preferably option 1...if option 2, it's my problem how exactly? So we should just subsidise feckless w*nkers impregnating young women left, right and centre, should we??"

Right, children living in poverty, where do you think this will lead?

What do you think will happen to the crime rates?

You know what ..i promised myself I would stay off this thread and look at me..FFS

BTP - resorting to abuse, like you have, indicates you know you're on shaky ground.

Bless.

And how is my DP a 'feckless wanker'? He works hard, does an essential job (providing food for hospital patients), is a good father, is setting a good example to our dc WRT going out to work to get your money. It's not his fault that society at large (and his tightwad employers) don't reward that financially in the same way that it should be valued.

SumfingNew Mon 08-Nov-10 00:24:40
"cory - no, THEY should decide they can't afford to have children... people do that all the time - of all my uni friends, no-one had a child until they could responsibly provide for it."

"until they can afford it" presupposes that we actually expect or want everybody to be progressing out of the low paid jobs. But we don't - because there are so many of those jobs that need doing and not enough high paid jobs to go rounds. The kind of society we have depends on a hierarchy with a few jobs at the top, a fairly substantial middle and a big mass at the bottom of jobs which do not offer much scope for progression. So pretending that it is possible for everybody to move up the pyramid seems pretty dishonest to me.

SumfingNew Dear pot, meet kettle.

I think that DP's job providing hospital patients with food is worth waaaaay more than I was getting as an on-site architect. Yet my previous income was over twice his at entry level. And would right now be more than 3/4 times his income if I was still able to go onto a building site. TBH I know personally which is the more essential job, and it isn't the one I was doing!

kaloki - "What do you think will happen to the crime rates?"

Very patronising to everyone in "poverty", don't you think?

"Ah, bless, they can't help themselves - they have to commit crime..it's in their 'nature'! They're poor!".

The Left shows its true self as always - hating anyone that shows initiative, self-respect, responsibility, honesty. The Left prefers that we all suckle on the bloated teat of (borrowed) State funds.

Abuse...

I was in the same situation as your uni friends, Sumfing- I had no money but an education which meant I could reasonably expect to earn a living wage one day. So I could afford to wait- and I did wait for quite a long time. But what about the thousands who have not been able to get into university, who have not even been able to get decent GCSEs, who can only do unskilled work- deferring childrearing is not going to get them a well paid job, is it?

I'm off to bed now, have to be up at 7am, to do DP's lunch for work and to take the DC to school. You know, those things that people in receipt of any benefits don't do, as they don't look after their dc and give them a 'non-parental upbringing'...

cory - no, it's not...but it will stop them from bringing children into the world for which they can't provide!

Loudlass - have a from me...and, by the way, tell your DP to make his own fecking lunch.

BTP - sleep well, my dear, sleep well.

Sumfing just to let you know..nothing stops procreation my dear..

Mumcentreplus - I don't want to stop "procreation".

Just the state-subsidised form!

Sleep well...

SumfingNew Mon 08-Nov-10 00:34:26
"cory - no, it's not...but it will stop them from bringing children into the world for which they can't provide!"

In other words, only people with expectations of high wages are to reproduce. Good job for me that my grandparents and greatgrandparents didn't know this. And that someone spotted the talent of both my father and my maternal grandfather and helped them (yes, gave them money!) to access a good education and have a chance to do well in life. You, I take it, would have been more for the Dean Swift solution.

cory - you think it's right/fair/sensible that the only stratum of society that thinks twice about whether it is the right time to bring a child into the world is the "middle class"?

That those at the very bottom of the pack don't give it a moment's thought because more kids = more money/bigger place to live?

Do you have shares in some company that farms chav kids?

"Very patronising to everyone in "poverty", don't you think?"

If you prefer to look at it that way.

Most of us however can see that if there is no money to be had legitimately, then you are left with few other options but crime. And it wouldn't be entirely surprising that a child brought up in a part of society given no help whatsoever by the state, left without hope, isn't going to be quite so interested in obeying rules set in place by the privileged.

Not all will think like this, but enough. And there are enough countries that show evidence of this.