I hate the government

[wantanewname]

I hate the way they make so make public sector workers redundant and then infer everyone is a scrounger when there are no jobs, penalise the disabled, destroy education, librarys etc. But do nothing about the bankers, the tax evaders, destroy the morale of teachers (who have a bloody hard job for very little pay). What would I do if I lose my job? I am a single parent (yes the devil incarnate) and work for a local authority, coming up to my 2nd review in 2 years. If I do, then I'd be a benefit scrounger.

I hate the way they penalise the poor, the disabled and do nothing about the bankers and the rich who avoid tax. I'm sick of hearing about scroungers when there are NO FUCKING JOBS.

If they fail, then let's kick them out and vote for a party that can deliver growth.

Ttosca, you are the ultimate frother aren't you?

Never let what I actually said stand in the way of what you'd prefer me to have said eh?

The original statement was (and I quote) ....when there are NO FUCKING JOBS.

I responded that there are jobs, just less. You then decided to have a bit of a rant and prove to me by using the power of mathematics what I already stated. And that was that there are less jobs rather than 'no jobs'. So let me thank you for accepting that fact.

I don't think Cogito and I have blamed the victim. Where have I done so? There isn't even a victim! OP was talking theoretically since she actually still has her job and like many (myself included) are worried about whether or not we'll still have one over the next year or two.

DH and I are pensioners we have 2dc's both SN and 3 young adults with SN OK we are not poor but should this government slash DLA and incapacity benefit (we get no HB) we will be very poor. I am very scared that should this happen we may be forced to put them in residntial care and they would not get the standard of care and love they get with us. I hate this government with a vengence.

'niceguy'-

I responded that there are jobs, just less. You then decided to have a bit of a rant and prove to me by using the power of mathematics what I already stated. And that was that there are less jobs rather than 'no jobs'. So let me thank you for accepting that fact.

You miss the point spectacularly, either deliberately or unwittingly.

I responded that there are jobs, just less

This is trivially true. When someone says 'There are no fucking jobs', it's called exaggeration. If there were no open jobs, there would be no economy.

The point was that there are estimated to me hundreds of thousands of more people looking for jobs than there are jobs. It's a matter of degree. And regardless of your attempt to dismiss this as unimportant, it is exactly the point. It's always a matter of degree. There is never 0% unemployment either.

So it's nasty and disingenuous for you to say that 'of course there are jobs, there are just fewer'. That's not helpful in the slightest. You could say the same thing whether unemployment is at 5%, 10%, 25% or 50%. Which brings us to the next point:

I don't think Cogito and I have blamed the victim. Where have I done so? There isn't even a victim! OP was talking theoretically since she actually still has her job and like many (myself included) are worried about whether or not we'll still have one over the next year or two.

Yes there is a victim. The victim is the ordinary people who have lost their jobs (ie. been fired or made redundant) because of the financial crisis and the misguided 'austerity measures', either directly because of government cuts, or because the ideological cuts are stifling the economy and cutting off demand. These people - the public - are the victims.

And it is you who blame them by trying to shift responsibility on to them by saying that they should just get on their bike and try harder, or retrain for another career in order to find a job, when the financial crisis is not of their doing.

You should be criticising the financiers and the crony Capitalists who got us into this crisis, not the people who lost their jobs as a result.

claig-

No government is perfect and it would be better to have one with fewer millionaires, but let's judge them by their objectives and their aspirations for growth.

What are their objectives? To return the UK to Dickensian social conditions?

Everything we've seen from them so far has been about making it harder for the poorest to survive, let alone thrive.

As for growth, their ideologically led austerity measures are hampering growth, which is why we're about to enter the second double-dip recession for several decades. Don't take my word for it, the IMF and OECD, amongst others, who have directly stated that the austerity measures are harming growth.

"I don't think you quite understand the maths. When it is said 'there are not enough jobs', it means that:"

....blah blah blah

And since when was 1 person trying to find 1 job down to national numbers? If that person is skilled in a field where there is a shortage of skilled people, they will find a job. If the area they live in has higher employment rates (or they are prepared to relocate to that kind of area), they will find a job. If they are less selective and take a job that others are not prepared to entertain, they will find a job.

But if you want to crush the OPs spirit, make out it's totally hopeless and not worth even trying to find a job because of your silly Xs and Ys... go ahead. It's no more than I'd expect

It's a bit hard not to have your mood darkened somewhat by the fact that to find a job you have to move out of your home, leave the area you know, leave the people you have relied on as a support network, move your children out of the school they are settled in (into a poorly performing school because it's the only one with spaces), and work at a job with no prospects and no sense of enjoyment, because that's all that is going, and find you have no-one around you any more who might help with childcare arrangements in an emergency. Nobody enjoys or appreciates that - why do you think people who have been through that (or more significant upheaval - eg moving thousands of miles to another country altogether and starting again at the bottom of the heap) tend to become exceptionally eager to avoid it ever happening to their own children?

Ah ok, I see where you got confused. The suggestions that a person may need to look harder/longer for a job and maybe even retrain isn't blaming them for their predicament. People are not at fault if they are made redundant. Of course it's not.

But you confuse fault and responsibility. Just because it's not their fault they were made redundant doesn't mean it's not their responsibility to look for work.

I guess that's the difference between you & myself. I believe in personal responsibility. That it's my job to go out there, work hard, make the opportunities to succeed and provide the best i can for my family. If a curve ball knocks me over, then it's up to me to get up.

You believe it's the government's job to give me the opportunities, the right pay and it's their fault (or someone elses) if things go wrong. And therefore if it's not your fault then you are somehow excused from changing your behaviour. And if someone else is doing better than yourself then it's obviously because they're a greedy capitalist fat cat rather than someone who's just worked harder and been more lucky than you.

Not sure who you are talking to, niceguy2? I'm not confusing fault and responsibility, I'm merely pointing out it's normal to feel your mood depressed by a feeling of powerlessness - that you watched the world economy being spectacularly messed up in the last 20 years and felt powerless to stop it; and that you are now having to watch as you feel more mistakes are being made and again only have the power to affect your own situation, but only within the confines of a world order created largely by others. And if you do attempt to argue against what you disagree with, you are accused of being a trouble maker who wants a living brought to them on a plate.

Hi Rabbit, my comment was a response to Ttosca's post saying I am blaming the victim ie. the person made redundant, when it was all the nasty bankers fault etc.

Late last year I was quite down as well about the fact my company wasn't faring so well and I was in genuine fear that this year I could well be facing redundancy too. Thankfully things have picked up a little but i certainly went through the whole powerlessness and was quite down about the whole thing.

But at the same time I realised that blaming someone else for my predicament is useless. Ultimately it's down to me to pick myself up, dust myself down and go find the next job. Chances are in the current climate I wouldn't earn as much, probably be expected to do more for less and I'd have to cut my cloth accordingly.

claig, you're simply wrong to say that people in free democracies never vote for communists/socialists - look at how popular communists are in the former GDR for example. Communism as under the Soviet system was a v long way from perfect but the fact that people are still nostalgic for it should tell you something.

As someone who can be quite canny, I find it hard you can be so naive as to believe this govt is trying to help anyone other than themselves and their mates - it's blatantly obvious to anyone with half a brain that their goal is the destruction of the welfae state and everything that makes life bearable for ordinary people. They'd like to return to a Victorian system, or ideally, a medieval feudal system.

I don't fancy being a serf thanks.

'Cogito' and 'niceguy'-

And since when was 1 person trying to find 1 job down to national numbers? If that person is skilled in a field where there is a shortage of skilled people, they will find a job. If the area they live in has higher employment rates (or they are prepared to relocate to that kind of area), they will find a job. If they are less selective and take a job that others are not prepared to entertain, they will find a job.

But if you want to crush the OPs spirit, make out it's totally hopeless and not worth even trying to find a job because of your silly Xs and Ys... go ahead. It's no more than I'd expect

The problem, here, is with the attitude that people can and should just 'pick themselves up' and 'get on their bikes' and find a job. When unemployment is low, a certain amount of flexibility is possible; people can commute for a bit longer, work shorter hours, work in a job which isn't where their main skills lie.

When unemployment is very high, as it is now, firstly, you will not fill all the vacancies, no matter how flexible people are willing to be. Secondly, there is a limit to how much people can be 'flexible': I, and presumably yourself, am single and mobile, and not particularly attached in any way (except for friends) to the place I live. I could, an am, looking for jobs not just in any part of the UK, but in most parts of the world. Not everyone can do this.

Most or many people are married and in a family where both partners are working. Are you suggesting one of them relocates to the other side of the country, leaves their family and children, just to take a job which their unsuited for?

There are other reasons people can't move, either. Some people are taking care of their families in their old age. Some people have disabilities which makes it very difficult for them to do this sort of thing. And many people will simply not be suited for a particular job, even if they try to retrain. You can't ask a 50-year old woman who is an office administrator to train to lay bricks. It's absurd.

------

Ah ok, I see where you got confused. The suggestions that a person may need to look harder/longer for a job and maybe even retrain isn't blaming them for their predicament. People are not at fault if they are made redundant. Of course it's not.

But you confuse fault and responsibility. Just because it's not their fault they were made redundant doesn't mean it's not their responsibility to look for work.

I guess that's the difference between you & myself. I believe in personal responsibility. That it's my job to go out there, work hard, make the opportunities to succeed and provide the best i can for my family. If a curve ball knocks me over, then it's up to me to get up.

No, I think the difference between you and me is that you're a fantasist who lives in an ideologically painted world of your own making, as shown by your repeated fantastical assertions about running up a debt through public spending, and I don't.

You believe it's the government's job to give me the opportunities, the right pay and it's their fault (or someone elses) if things go wrong.

Err, no. But it is the government's responsibility to manage the economy. It is their responsibility to prevent things going wrong, and it's their responsibility to do everything to try to fix things when it does.

Things like pay and workers rights are definitely related to economic and political policy, and they vary greatly from country to country.

And therefore if it's not your fault then you are somehow excused from changing your behaviour.

I don't need an 'excuse' not to change my behaviour, nor do most people. Their behaviour wasn't at fault in the first place. The financial crisis was not caused by the majority of working people in this country. It was caused by city gamblers and crony Capitalists, facilitated by a hands-off approach by government.

-----

Hi Rabbit, my comment was a response to Ttosca's post saying I am blaming the victim ie. the person made redundant, when it was all the nasty bankers fault etc.

I like how you have sympathy for the bankers who caused a financial crisis which has put hundreds of thousands of people out of jobs, but not very much sympathy for the people who have lost the jobs - who need to simply 'pick themselves up'.

Damn straight, breadandbutterfly.

Yes you are right, I was overexaggerating the point to claim that people don't vote for communists in free societies. In Greeece, the far left parties now have nearly 50% of the vote and you are right about East Germany. In times of desperation, people do turn to the extremes.

I also don't like some of the things that seem to be happening with the NHS and welfare state.

I always want to comment on these threads, the right wing astro turfers always beat me to it.

Blaming the previous government on current problems,

Missing the point spectacularly.

It's the same old tripe coming from the same keyboard warriors.

I always agree with ttosca, I'm sure most people do actually. If most people think like some of these posters here, then its a downward spiral for society the UK.

ttosca said : "There are other reasons people can't move either".

I do love the way that those of you who are still lucky enough to be working believe the mantra that those who have found themselves to be unemployed should just "get on their bikes", or 'move to where a job is'.

IF you find yourselves unlucky enough to lose your employment, try finding work when every other potential employer tells you "sorry, wrong postcode", "sorry, you don't live in the immediate area for the vacancy", "sorry, you are just what we are looking for but are not prepared to wait while you move".

I have knowledge of people who have been told, not even turned down for a vacancy, but not even allowed to apply, because they live "too far away" or in the wrong postcode area. It is bloody diabolical. I know of someone who is able to search for work in 5 different counties that surround the one they live in, and is still not able to get a job in the field they are experienced in.

How do you think that feels, knowing that you would be willing to move to the other end of the country to be able to call yourself employed again, only to regularly be told that you live 10 minutes too far away, or 10 miles too far away. Employers used to be looking to employ the best people for the jobs, don't kid yourselves it's that way anymore, because it isn't. It makes you feel like there is no point in applying for jobs further afield, especially if you live within Social or Council Housing. The only realistic way to move is via exchanges, as there is no help offered to move should you be lucky enough to secure employment.

It really is not as simple as "well, there are jobs out there, people should get on their bikes or move house". It really isn't. But until you may be unfortunate enough to experience it for yourself, you won't and don't understand.

Oh, and don't even get me started on re-training.

Within which field ? You try telling the millions of over 40's and 50's who find themselves with no work through redundancy that they should forget all they have ever known and 're-train'.

Support a family with what whilst you do that ? Fresh bloody air ?

I also know someone who has discussed at length with the JC and those wonderful 'work programme' people re-training, and every answer ?

"Nah, we wouldn't let you do that, too expensive".

You cannot help yourself. And that does make you feel like crap.

I find it hard to express myself on these types of threads because I am an idealist and get frustrated with the practical stuff.

BUT here goes... I think that we have a really twisted idea of what is valuable because of our economic system and even if you believe that it does 'encourage humanity to progress' it must be very inefficient. For example the building a selling of weapons causes untold misery but it is good for growth because it contributes to GDP. Whereas breastfeeding peer support for example is undoubtedly beneficial to health and happiness and makes no contribution to the economy at all.

I don't agree that the vast majority of people are motivated by money beyond what they need to live a comfortable life.

And now they are chucking another £50bn at the banks. FFS.

And now I am just rambling and the thread has moved on

In terms of unemployment I think we need some new ideas. For example, it seems totally wrong that some people are working ridiculous hours while others are without employment.

Ramble on, Celtic !

I ramble (a lot) but sometimes I think you just have to say what you feel.....and don't worry about the thread moving on, we will get what you mean !

Thanks MrsDeeBee. I wholeheartedly agree with your posts BTW.

I wouldn't say that too loud.

'the building a selling of weapons causes untold misery'

If we didn't build Spitfires and develop radar we might possibly have lost teh Second World War. We need weapons to defend ourselves and to stop our forces being killed. A defence force enables us to progress as a society and not be conquered by an enemy force.

We have to earn money and export goods in order to buy the raw materials we need as a society in order to progress. We have to make things that other people want and are prepared to pay for. We can't decide what other people want tio buy from us, we have to respond to the market and supply demand. Other countries don't waste their money, they buy things from us that they need and we help them nu supplying them.

'I don't agree that the vast majority of people are motivated by money beyond what they need to live a comfortable life.'

I don't think that either, but some people are and there is no harm in it, just as there is no harm in collecting works of art or stamps beyond what one needs to live a comfortable life. People are interested in different things.

'I always agree with ttosca, I'm sure most people do actually. If most people think like some of these posters here, then its a downward spiral for society the UK.'

I think you are mistaken. The Sun and the Daily Mail have the highest readership figures in the country and ttosca's views are not shared by the silent majority. But everyone is entitled to their views in a free society.

But it is the government's responsibility to manage the economy.

Agreed and the last bunch spectacularly buggered that up didn't they?

It is their responsibility to prevent things going wrong Again, the last lot completely failed to prevent the banking crisis didn't they?

and it's their responsibility to do everything to try to fix things when it does.

Well Labour managed to get themselves off the hook for having to fix it. The coalition are now trying to do so. By making cuts which you may not agree with, some I also disagree with but at least they are trying. They're johnny on the spot who have to make the actual decision, whilst you sit from the comfort of your home slagging them off and denying there's even a problem in the first place.

'it seems totally wrong that some people are working ridiculous hours while others are without employment.'

The French socialists tried a job sharing scheme and tried to impose a limit on teh number of hours people could work. It has been scrapped as it did not help productivity. It is also sad that many people have to work very long hours just to make a decent wage given the low wages they are paid and these people are not in favour of well-off people telling them how many hours they are allowed to work. Many people depend on overtime to pay off their debts etc.

Also not everyone has the same skills, you can't share jobs between people of different skill levels and with different training.