Tory scum make lying, insulting and patronising response to workfare petition

[ttosca]

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29356

It's just unbelievable. Who do they think they're talking to?

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

Because if they dont show up and you report them they will be sanctioned. Zero money for two weeks or whatever. So how do they eat? Pay the bills?

[CloudsAndTrees]

Err, no.

I responded to a poster who said she works for a volunteer centre that refuse to work with these types of schemes because it goes against what volunteering is all about. Which I agree with.

I have no desire to work with volunteers that don't want to be there, and I certainly wouldn't want people that don't want to be there coming into contact with service users that I have a responsibility for.

If you are going to have a dig at me, please at least try to follow my posts and those I was responding to properly.

[andubelievedthat]

And of course if you get your benefits stopped ,any housing benefit automatically stops too, and lordy me ,does that take months to get back on track,if at all !.the cuts that are coming this year are MASSIVE> so, lots of redundancy lots of replacement of said people with workfare, lots of benefits for redundant people,just so Diamond Dave can please? the easily pleased (squeezed) strivers.curtains drawn at 9a.m.?bring back means testing ,make em sell those curtains,that will teach them , expecting a handout !

[ssd]

signed the petition and would urge you all to do the same

[ssd]

one of the comments to the op earlier

"OP, the 80's finished over thirty years ago, perhaps it's time you moved to join the rest of us. ATM you sound like that rather odd ranty girl that no-one wanted to be too close to in the Student Union."

wow, patronising in the extreme....and many more like it

[Darkesteyes]

Not to mention the maths is wrong. The 80s finished just over 23 years ago. 24 yrs ago we were in early 1989.

[kimorama]

Very passionate debate, over a very important subject.

[Darkesteyes]

Jobcentre pressures employers to turn paid vacancies into workfare.


www.montrosereview.co.uk/news/local-headlines/jobcentre-pressure-on-employers-1-2726630

[Abitwobblynow]

It is time left wing Labour voters got their heads OUT of their arses. Who do you people really think you are? Nobody is entitled to sit and get paid for nothing, AND THEY NEVER WERE. It is a profound, human nature-distorting wrongness!

I have been unemployed, homeless and if it wasn't for the kindness of friends I would have been looking at Westminster Bridge.

Being unemployed feels horrible. You sit on your own, getting more isolated and depressed and feeling worthless. The inertia and lowering self confidence

It is MUCH BETTER to be doing something - anything, to get a sense of purpose. It is MUCH BETTER to be interacting with people, than watching Trisha on daytime TV (that dates me). Any day.

This is the right move. The universe rewards ACTION. Things comes out of other things. In the US despite the predictable screaming of lefties, workfare recipients report being much happier and fulfilled - and prefer jobs to welfare anytime.

You lefties can talk about ideology, about 'fairness' and 'what should' happen. I will talk about human nature.
And before you tell me what an evil human being I am (you couldn't get me on racism, ha ha ha!) let me tell you that I volunteer with troubled youth. And do you know what their two main problems are?

1. Lack of discipline
   
2. Lack of confidence
   

The two things that being in the workplace solves.

[Abitwobblynow]

I have warned you about this before, and will repeat this inescapable reality again:

Western society CANNOT AFFORD welfare payments which carry 40% of the unproductive population. China, India, Africa, anyone? We are sclerotic.

It was always a stupid idea. Always.

[Viviennemary]

I don't agree with places like Tesco's getting free labour. I expect there will be quite a row about this in future and maybe even compensation for the people involved. I don't think it is reasonable for a private company with shareholders to benefit from free labour. But I think it's fine for charities.

But I agree with the point that the country simply cannot sustain the welfare and benefits it is paying out.

[aufaniae]

"But I agree with the point that the country simply cannot sustain the welfare and benefits it is paying out."

Why aren't the government doing something about this then?

The policies they are bringing in will bring down benefits in the short term by simply by making people poorer. But hey will cost us more int he long-term as this will have knock on effects elsewhere. Thousands (including families and disabled people) will be made homeless when the effects of all the benefit cuts and sanctions take hold. This will cost more to society (directly through having to house homeless people in emergency accommodation, which is very expensive, and also indirectly such as through the well-documented health problems which are associated with living in insecure accommodation or being homeless).

One of the main reasons the housing benefit bill is so high is that private rents are so high. Something should be done about this (other than making people homeless!)

A program of building council housing for example would be a step in the right direction. It would drive down rents (not just for council housing, but in the private sector too - simple supply and demand). It would also create jobs, and, properly managed it would be an investment to the tax payer, not a cost at all! It would benefit everyone (except the landlords).

Creating jobs and getting the economy going would help lessen the welfare bill also. More people in jobs will of course lessen the bill, and raise tax. However the governments' policies aimed at "incentivising" people into work by threatening to make them destitute if they don't comply with Job Centre demands, simply isn;t going to work if there aren't the jobs to go into.

Are the government doing anything about job creation? No. In fact many of their plans (e.g. Mandatory Work Activity) will actually make jobs more scarce and work to drive down pay and conditions.

If they were serious about providing work experience which benefitted people then there would be some effort to provide work placements which had some kind of on-job training, or to match an individual's skills to jobs, or to not send people mopping floors when they're professionally qualified to nurse, or teach, or build houses or whatever. Or they would recognise voluntary work which people found for themselves. But none of these apply. Workfare is only meant to get people into the "habit" of getting to work. For those of us who have no problem with getting to work, the problem is finding a paid job, it's an absolute insult and waste of time.

Workfare is there to benefit big business while persecuting the poor (that is what this government is all about), make no mistake about it.

[niceguy2]

I think most rational people understand that we cannot sustain the current welfare bill. Only the usual lefty fools still think taxing the rich will solve everything like some magic wand.

But the reality is that the vast majority of our welfare bill is being spent on pensioners. So whilst it is still important to crack down on unnecessary spending and encourage people back to work. If we are serious about tackling our deficit then this can only be done by making changes to the way we care for our elderly.

And right now this government has done nothing. To be fair, all three main parties are scared shitless of the grey vote since they are very well organised, vocal and combined have the ability to make/break governments.

I nodded my head to a lot of what this article discusses: Young people have never had it so bad

Especially this sentence: If you think about the baby boom generation they lived through peace and unparalleled prosperity. You'd struggle to explain why that generation should be able to leave huge debts to the next generation.

It really saddens me that we (and our parents) have run up massive debts and leaving our kids to repay them. Whilst at the same time expecting them to care for us too. Especially when many baby boomers have final salary pensions which our kids will never ever see.

[aufaniae]

"It is MUCH BETTER to be doing something - anything, to get a sense of purpose. It is MUCH BETTER to be interacting with people, than watching Trisha on daytime TV (that dates me). Any day."

Abitwobbly now, what makes you think I was doing that last time I was unemployed? I didn't spend any time on my arse watching daytime telly, how fucking insulting. I spent my time searching for work and looking after DS. I didn't spend any time lazing about. How would stacking shelves at night on workfare have helped me? It wouldn't, it would have just got in the way of my job search.

Workfare isn't just going to apply to young, "undisciplined" kids with no work ethic. They are going to send all sorts of people on MWA, people who have professional qualifications / years of experience / a strong work ethic etc. It's not set up to be beneficial or provide training to the individual, it's beneficial to big business.

Why should experienced people like me be treated like this, especially when they have lost their jobs because we are in a recession ?!

The Tories were warned that their course of action would drive us further into recession. They didn't listen and here we are in a triple dip recession, the worst for decades. They are doing nothing about job creation as far as I can tell. Things are going to get a lot worse for everyone (except the very rich).

[Viviennemary]

But labour had thirteen years to build council houses and sort out this problem. But they didn't. They gave ever increasing subsidies to private landlords and priced lots of people who wanted to rent out of the market in those areas.

I did vote Labour last time but won't be doing again. Labour did hardly anything for young unemployed people. Apprenticeships were nigh on impossible to get during their stay in power. So I don't agree with Labour doing a better job. They had their chance and left the country practically bankrupt with their ill-thought out policies.

[aufaniae]

Vivienne, I agree that Labour didn't take the chance to sort out housing when they could and should have.

However the Tories are systematically destroying the welfare state. We are in for very dark times if we don't vote them out next time IMO.

The country is in financial dire strait because of a global recession. The key is on the name (Gordon Brown did not cause a global recession!).

We could be on our way to recovery if we had people in charge who knew a thing or two about economics. However we're now in a triple dip recession you can't blame Labour for that!

"They gave ever increasing subsidies to private landlords and priced lots of people who wanted to rent out of the market in those areas."

Yes, and the Tories are going to follow that by driving thousands (including families and the disabled) into poverty and homelessness.

I'm not an ardent Labour supporter by any means. But they were much, much less damaging that this lot. At least they were trying to make things better for ordinary working people, even if they didn't get it all right. This lot could not give two stuffs about the living or working conditions of ordinary people (even children and the disabled).

[ttosca]

They had their chance and left the country practically bankrupt with their ill-thought out policies.

Um, no they didn't.

[Abitwobblynow]

However the Tories are systematically destroying the welfare state.

This is the bit you are not getting. If Labour had got in, they would be doing the same - harder.

We cannot afford to have the welfare state. Do you get this? We CANNOT AFFORD IT.

And the way it should have been reformed - that opportunity (using oil revenues) was lost under Thatcher in the 80s. She was surprisingly soft.

[ttosca]

Abit-

You need to get a grip and put down that copy of the Daily Mail.

It is time left wing Labour voters got their heads OUT of their arses. Who do you people really think you are? Nobody is entitled to sit and get paid for nothing, AND THEY NEVER WERE. It is a profound, human nature-distorting wrongness!

This has nothing to do with voting Labour. And what kind of a question is: "Who do you people think you are?"

Nobody is entitled to sit and get paid for nothing,

It's called social security. Firstly, people contribute (pay in) when they are employed and then claim when they are unemployed. Sure, some people claim more than they have contributed, but that's what social security is about.

You might as well say we should abolish the NHS, because 'NOBODY IS ENTITLED TO GET HEALTHCARE FOR NOTHING!!!'.

There are not huge numbers of 'feckless' unemployed who live their lives on welfare benefits. If you think there are, please show the official numbers of people who are claiming long-term.

Western society CANNOT AFFORD welfare payments which carry 40% of the unproductive population. China, India, Africa, anyone? We are sclerotic.

lol. Sorry, 40% 'unproductive' population? Could you elaborate on that figure, please?

[Abitwobblynow]

40% 'unproductive' population?

The underclass, and state paper shufflers (excluding the judiciary police and army). Tax munching people who do not produce or create anything.

[ttosca]

Abit-

However the Tories are systematically destroying the welfare state.

This is the bit you are not getting. If Labour had got in, they would be doing the same - harder.

Unlikely, but irrelevant. It's wrong no matter who does it.

We cannot afford to have the welfare state. Do you get this? We CANNOT AFFORD IT.

This isn't even a coherent statement. If you think having welfare is expensive, you should see what happens when you have no welfare. You won't have an environment conducive to business with riots in the streets, poor people robbing and stealing to survive, hundreds of thousands of homeless people, etc. etc.

And the way it should have been reformed - that opportunity (using oil revenues) was lost under Thatcher in the 80s. She was surprisingly soft.

Ah yes, I see where you're coming from now. Thatcher was 'soft'. OK, Ms Trolly pants.

[ttosca]

Here's a little diagram showing the relative costs of Welfare vs. Tax evasion/avoidance:

tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2116ulg&s=6

[Abitwobblynow]

'It's wrong no matter who does it.

No, it isn't'. That is your ideology talking, espousing a belief as an innate truth.

I personally believe the welfare state to be an instrument of great evil. It is the biggest subsidiser of child abuse, it rewards bad behaviour and it undermines communities.
Go back to Beveridge's original intentions for the welfare state. It has morphed out of all proportion and needs destroying.

[ttosca]

The underclass, and state paper shufflers (excluding the judiciary police and army). Tax munching people who do not produce or create anything.

lol! I would like to see what would happen if this 40% underclass stopped working for a day.

[ttosca]

'It's wrong no matter who does it.

No, it isn't'. That is your ideology talking, espousing a belief as an innate truth.

I personally believe the welfare state to be an instrument of great evil.

Classic. :)