# Goodbye 'New Deal', Hello 'Welfare to Work'



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Looks as if today will be a turning point in the benefits system.

It's all change as the government launched their new 'Welfare to Work' programme yesterday.

BBC News - Government's welfare to work scheme launched

Under the deal, the unemployed will be handed over to private companies for a period of 2 years where they will be sent to work for their benefits whilst being helped to find a paying job.

Those aged under 25 will be handed over after 9 months claiming, those aged over 25 will be handed over after 12 months.

Combine this with the fact that once a child reaches the age of 7 the parent goes onto JSA it looks as though the next 12 months are going to be very interesting.

Yesterday morning on TV, David Cameron said people need to stop having so many kids if they can't afford them as the state will no longer be paying out.

David Cameron: Families have children 'before they can afford it' | Mail Online

There seems to be a lot of discussion on the news comments sections today about whether this will work, but I think it will. The reason for that is for the last 3 weeks we've had a young lady sent to us by the job centre to work for her benefits (she does 26 hours a week for 8 weeks). I'm so impressed with her that I think I will be offering her a full time job next month. It just seems that she hasn't really been given a chance before now.

What are your thoughts on the new benefit reforms?


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

Im with you, I think it will work. It may not be perfect but its better than the way things were before......


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

I think it will be good for the ones who are genuinely looking for work, willing to work hard and prove themselves.

Sadly i think there will also be an amount of energy wasted on behalf of companies who get sent the people who have absolutely zero interest in work...


----------



## theevos5 (Dec 24, 2009)

I agree totally,and approve of him wanting to change the values of the workshy,my son and his girlfriend both working at 21 have just had to pay 6 months rent in advance to secure a flat,if they didn't work they would have had it handed to them on a platehow can that be right?


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

There isn't much detail there so I will hold judgment, I like the principles, just not sure on the methods


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

classixuk it's brilliant that you've been able to give this girl an opportunity that she wouldn't of had  
And I really hope more people will be given the same opportunities by other employers.

I definately think it's a step in the right direction, being out of work for an extended period of time can make it very difficult to get back into work.

I have 2 reservations:
Employers who just take on a series of these people with no intention of helping them develop skills for the benefot to them.
Employee's who really don't want to work who waste employers time, money and resources.
Although I think these will be in the minority.

And it'll be interesting to see the results - hopefully it'll really make a difference.

On another note has anyone seen Fairy JobMother? I wonder if people will get this level of coaching as well?


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

New Deal wasn't working so something had to be done.

Years ago there was a similar scheme where people went to work on YOP schemes ( youth Opportunity placements) where they did a full time job and were paid £25 PW ( back in the 80's).

A lot of problems did arise when they government stopped apprenticeships where people learned a skill/trade.

This scheme will work in areas whereby the industries have gained the contracts and those areas that have not secured contracts from the Gov what happens there?

Depends also on what work placements are on offer and matching them to right candidates.

Sure some companies will also see it as cheap labour and could abuse it.

On the plus side it will provide good work ethics and work based skills, encouragement and motivation and sure some will secure jobs from it.

Need to look more but just off to eat large fry-up hubby has just cooked so will come back and see what develops this thread had had.:001_smile:


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

I think its great... When i was out of work its easy to get into a pattern of "wake up late...turn on pc...look for job....watch day time tv....tidy up...feel sorry for yourself... Walk the dog.... Apply for a job....go bed"

Seriously after a while you feel so low...feeling so low going for interviews was not a good combination. Some people will never get up and out without the opportunity i think its a great idea.

Those who can't be bothered will soon realise what working for money feels like and if they don't comply or actually put in the effort their benefits should be stopped!!


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Fleur said:


> classixuk it's brilliant that you've been able to give this girl an opportunity that she wouldn't of had
> And I really hope more people will be given the same opportunities by other employers.
> 
> I definately think it's a step in the right direction, being out of work for an extended period of time can make it very difficult to get back into work.
> ...


Yes Fleur. The girl is working out really well. She always turns up with her hair immaculate, make-up on, clothes ironed, body free of odours and with a great big smile too. That's ehm...unusual for the young people I usually see.  She's great with people too, and understands that it's all about the customer and not about the staff. Again, that's unusual with young people.

You mentioned both "employers" or "employees" who could waste eachothers time. I know that as an employer I was checked out first to make sure I had the basics such as insurance etc. and that the premises were adequate. The lady who came to see me also 'interviewed' me about what it was I could offer the unemployed person, as well as what types of jobs/hours they could expect to do.

She also made it clear to me that if the candidates I was sent messed me around or didn't act as a regular employee would during the 8 weeks that they would lose their benefits.

And finally, yes, I watched the Fairy Jobmother. It's a great show, isn't it?



Buster's Mummy said:


> I think its great... When i was out of work its easy to get into a pattern of "wake up late...turn on pc...look for job....watch day time tv....tidy up...feel sorry for yourself... Walk the dog.... Apply for a job....go bed"
> 
> Seriously after a while you feel so low...feeling so low going for interviews was not a good combination. Some people will never get up and out without the opportunity i think its a great idea.
> 
> Those who can't be bothered will soon realise what working for money feels like and if they don't comply or actually put in the effort their benefits should be stopped!!


That's what's going to be happening BM. All benefits will be stopped for a period of up to 3 years. This includes council tax benefit/housing benefit etc.


----------



## RockRomantic (Apr 29, 2009)

I maybe a bit thick here but what would happen if the person making the claim was already doing volunteer work?


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Great idea. I know they have a scheme now where if you're off work for 6 months they put you in a placement for 3 months but you have to go to interviews and actually turn up . We had someone in our work on it rarely turned up but just filled out the time sheet himself. It wasn't until they called the manager at the end that he got in trouble. This new scheme if it's more closely monitored is a good idea


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

I don't qualify for JSA, and i'm really struggling to get a job  I actually don't qualify for any benefits at all so this makes me sad. I think it's a good idea though.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

ballybee said:


> I don't qualify for JSA, and i'm really struggling to get a job  I actually don't qualify for any benefits at all so this makes me sad. I think it's a good idea though.


That seems really odd BallyBee. I thought everyone was entitled to JSA when out of work. Have you checked with the DWP website? Why don't you qualify for any benefits at all?


----------



## Gilly and Jess (Mar 12, 2011)

I kind of think this is a good reform but also a bad one.

I'm in a sticky situation where I have a genuine spinal problem which has meant that I couldn't work for many years now. I am absolutely bored rigid and would love to work, but the fact that I can render myself supine for weeks just by cleaning my teeth makes me a VERY unreliable employee. However, in the past, the DSS have deemed me fit for work and kicked me off the sickness benefits I received. I have always been put back on them because my GP has said I am NOT fit for work. 

I had a review of my benefit this year, which said that I met all requirements for receiving sickness benefit, and I did not need to attend a medical. I've just received ANOTHER form through the post to fill in, for the same reasons....review of your benefit......wtf?? I've already done it, but it seems because the government want to review everyone I have to do it again.

SO! I'm pre-empting their kicking me off the sick now, and I began a work placement scheme 6 weeks ago, whereby I work somewhere in a job I can handle for an extra £15 a week. I have trouble walking and standing on my feet for long periods, yet I can't sit for long either.....my placement? I'm helping in a conference centre whereby I'm required to help set up rooms for conferences, with tea/coffee/cups/saucers/sugar/milk, help out with buffet lunches, refresh all the drinks etc, and generally be on my feet for hours on end in a day!!! I'm going to be useless by the end of it, I can hardly walk as it is!

You'd think if they want to help people back to work they'd at least find a placement suitable to their disabilities!!


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

This is going to really hit people with mental ilness and the disabled. I understand the current climate for despising scroungers, but I know a young lady with bi-polar who is struggling to survive, and a friend with breast cancer was refused the extra £20 sickness benefit even though her lymph glands had been removed and she was on strong medication and forbidden to raise her arm. She is now heavily in debt. 
I`m afraid I remember the last conservative regime and the warning - don`t get ill, don`t get old, don`t get unemployed. 
Still, as long as the bankers get their bonus eh?


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> This is going to really hit people with mental ilness and the disabled. I understand the current climate for despising scroungers, but I know a young lady with bi-polar who is struggling to survive, and a friend with breast cancer was refused the extra £20 sickness benefit even though her lymph glands had been removed and she was on strong medication and forbidden to raise her arm. She is now heavily in debt.
> I`m afraid I remember the last conservative regime and the warning - don`t get ill, don`t get old, don`t get unemployed.
> Still, as long as the bankers get their bonus eh?


I actually think it will leave more money in the pot for the ill, the old and the disabled.

What do the bankers have to do with benefits?


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

classixuk said:


> That seems really odd BallyBee. I thought everyone was entitled to JSA when out of work. Have you checked with the DWP website? Why don't you qualify for any benefits at all?


JSA is only given if you have anough NI to qualify. So anyone out of work for any length of time loses it. You then have to apply for Income Support, which is means tested.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

classixuk said:


> That seems really odd BallyBee. I thought everyone was entitled to JSA when out of work. Have you checked with the DWP website? Why don't you qualify for any benefits at all?


I don't qualify because i don't have enough N.I from working and i haven't worked long enough to go based on income. I checked all this at the start of the year i can't get any benefits whatsoever  i'm desperate for a job but really struggling to even get any reply from potential jobs which is just rude IMO :cryin:


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> JSA is only given if you have anough NI to qualify. So anyone out of work for any length of time loses it. You then have to apply for Income Support, which is means tested.


yup....i don't qualify for either according to my local job centre as the only 2 jobs i've had one was before i was old enough to be taxed and the other job only lasted 6 weeks(xmas job) so didn't get taxed much).


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

classixuk said:


> I actually think it will leave more money in the pot for the ill, the old and the disabled.
> 
> What do the bankers have to do with benefits?


I`m sorry I confused you. 
It will not leave `more money in the pot`. The initiative, along with other recent benefit changes is meant to save money. The fact that less money will be available to pay for the old sick or disabled is a consequence of massive mismanagement of the finances of the country, and triggered by the Banking Crisis. Remember bailing out the banks? The Bankers who caused that crisis are still in place and still pulling in Million-pound bonus payments. 
David Cameron admits defeat over bankers' bonuses - Telegraph
BBC News - Disabled people and carers face &#039;Â£9bn welfare cut&#039;


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Bankers are OT of course but the banking crisis happened under the oh so wonderful Labour not the Conservatives


----------



## XxZoexX (Sep 8, 2010)

Havent had chance to read all they replys yet but i think its a good idea as i think alot of people just need that push, and once they realise they can do it it raises there confidence enough to realise they can work. Of course you'll still have some shirkers but they should be weeded out


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

ballybee said:


> yup....i don't qualify for either according to my local job centre as the only 2 jobs i've had one was before i was old enough to be taxed and the other job only lasted 6 weeks(xmas job) so didn't get taxed much).


I thought you could get income based JSA if you haven't paid enough contributions? Or do you have a rich partner or something?



ClaireandDaisy said:


> I`m sorry I confused you.
> It will not leave `more money in the pot`. The initiative, along with other recent benefit changes is meant to save money. The fact that less money will be available to pay for the old sick or disabled is a consequence of massive mismanagement of the finances of the country, and triggered by the Banking Crisis. Remember bailing out the banks? The Bankers who caused that crisis are still in place and still pulling in Million-pound bonus payments.
> David Cameron admits defeat over bankers' bonuses - Telegraph
> BBC News - Disabled people and carers face 'Â£9bn welfare cut'


I see where you are coming from, but that disaster happened under Labour, and it was their mismanagement that lead to the banking bailout.

The reason we are needing to make savings now is to lower the deficit and eventually begin repaying the debt. This = security for future generations.

The benefits problem was around before the bankers were bailed out. They can't be blamed for the work-shy.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

I do agree people that are genuinely disabled need more help. My friend's dad is diabetic, 10% vision, half of one kidney working after two transplants yet they still said he was fit to work.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

classixuk said:


> I thought you could get income based JSA if you haven't paid enough contributions? Or do you have a rich partner or something?
> 
> I see where you are coming from, but that disaster happened under Labour, and it was their mismanagement that lead to the banking bailout.
> 
> ...


He's not rich but he works full time


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

ballybee said:


> He's not rich but he works full time


That explains it then. 

For a second I imagined that you were a young single person with no form of income, but it turns out you get just as many cuddles as the rest of us.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Sounds good but tbh i dont care how they do it as long as its fair and the genuines ones are ok and the lazy scrougers are stopped money is stopped for every child you have above 3 that should stop the ones that confuse breeding with an occupation and hopefully things should look up,the number of immigrants entering the country is limited as well.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

ballybee said:


> I don't qualify because i don't have enough N.I from working and i haven't worked long enough to go based on income. I checked all this at the start of the year i can't get any benefits whatsoever  i'm desperate for a job but really struggling to even get any reply from potential jobs which is just rude IMO :cryin:


Can you not get disability living allowance? You might be able to with a doctor's back up. I know a girl who I have been teaching to drive who actually gets that at the lower rate, though basically she is just not very bright. There is nothing wrong with her whatsoever. She might need help with paying bills and such, but so do a lot of people.

My son, who was born brain damaged, only gets the lowest rate, which annoys me as he cannot look after himself at all.

I think you should at least try for DLA.

As to the government's new rules, I think generally they will be a good thing, just so long as they apply to every healthy person in the country.


----------



## Lavenderb (Jan 27, 2009)

Please excuse me classix as I havent had a chance to read the whole thread yet, but on my recent meeting at the job centre I was told that the JSA now applies to single parents whose youngest child is now 5 (school age). They have lowered the age from 7. So its going to affect a hell of a lot more.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

gr33neyes said:


> Please excuse me classix as I havent had a chance to read the whole thread yet, but on my recent meeting at the job centre I was told that the JSA now applies to single parents whose youngest child is now 5 (school age). They have lowered the age from 7. So its going to affect a hell of a lot more.


Really? That's great news!

Looks as if they really are going to get Britain working again.

I just hope after it's all sorted out that Labour don't come back and start buying votes again.


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

I totally agree with this and am sure it will work. 

They should of done it a long time ago, there are far too many families not working and they still having kids that they cannot afford.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> Can you not get disability living allowance? You might be able to with a doctor's back up. I know a girl who I have been teaching to drive who actually gets that at the lower rate, though basically she is just not very bright. There is nothing wrong with her whatsoever. She might need help with paying bills and such, but so do a lot of people.
> 
> My son, who was born brain damaged, only gets the lowest rate, which annoys me as he cannot look after himself at all.
> 
> ...


I'm not disabled though? and i don't rent my own place i rent a room from my OH's parents while we save up to move out.

I don't want to cheat the system by saying i'm disabled, even if it's not that big a deal to most people and it really gets on my wick that i'm willing to work but don't get support while looking for it the thought of doing that doesn't sit well with me.

My OH's parents are cheating the benefit system and it makes me feel sick as the only reason they don't work is because their lazy but the mum says she's a carer(their "disabled"(learning and speech difficulties) is in school 5 days a week) and the dad is on incapacity benefits as apparently he suffers from PTSD and anxiety but in reality he's a horrible alcoholic that stays up until 6am, gets up at 2pm and then gets depressed because they never have any money(they spend roughly £140 a week on beer and take money off my OH other than rent, plus they ring up massive phone bills and expect him to pay them as they can't).


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

classixuk said:


> Looks as if today will be a turning point in the benefits system.
> 
> It's all change as the government launched their new 'Welfare to Work' programme yesterday.
> 
> ...


More than half the people who are currently implementing Flexible New Deal
are going to be made unemployed by this change - the main contract holders are giving a fraction of the money to the new sub contractors which in turn will mean that each claimant will get so much less help than is currently available  to be honest the only winners here will be the main providers who are being given a shed load of money by the government to get Welfare to Work up and running.


----------



## SashaXx (Sep 3, 2010)

I do wonder how this will work for a single mum with 3 kids? How would she get a job that fits in with school hours that pays enough for childcare etc Considering she probably has no qualifications?


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

classixuk said:


> Really? That's great news!
> 
> Looks as if they really are going to get Britain working again.
> 
> I just hope after it's all sorted out that Labour don't come back and start buying votes again.


Do you work for FND? or any other agency that is actually dealing with getting people back to work?


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Changes said:


> More than half the people who are currently implementing Flexible New Deal
> are going to be made unemployed by this change - the main contract holders are giving a fraction of the money to the new sub contractors which in turn will mean that each claimant will get so much less help than is currently available  to be honest the only winners here will be the main providers who are being given a shed load of money by the government to get Welfare to Work up and running.


That's happening everywhere though. For instance, in the provision of training and further education for young adults, it is now impossible to get a contract with the government to access the funding if your funding requirements are for less than £500K per annum. You will need to approach an existing contractor and apply to them to be your managing agent.

This streamlines the costs of the treasury as they are dealing with far fewer companies when it comes to administration and measuring performance.

Yes, the winners will be the main providers, but the tax-payer will also win too as they are not supporting as many 'employees' to deliver the programs.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

SashaXx said:


> I do wonder how this will work for a single mum with 3 kids? How would she get a job that fits in with school hours that pays enough for childcare etc Considering she probably has no qualifications?


She will probably be offered work as a cleaner or something similar that only requires 2 or 3 hours work per day. The rest would be made up from some type of tax credit.



Changes said:


> Do you work for FND? or any other agency that is actually dealing with getting people back to work?


LOL. No, I don't.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

The "Wisconsin" plan?

Back in the 80's, Wisconsin rolled out the first idea's on doing this.

Clinton made it a Federal Law in the late 90's 


For the most part, and according to studies, the recipients often ended up making higher wages (how could they not) but there are pitfalls. One in particular that wouldn't be a concern for you lot in the UK but is here; health care.

Another of the concerns was child care while the parent was working.
Transportation to and from the jobs.
Another is loss of subsidies for federal housing because they now have income, albeit low.

But, by far the biggest problem in my mind, and according to national studies, is that welfare recipients generally turn into the working poor.

A few make it, given the structure is in place to school or train, to good jobs.
There's always the exception to the rule, I suppose.

My largest concern in all this is that it's becoming a class warfare type situation where the haves are vs the have nots...but it's not the REAL haves that are affected.
It's the working stiffs, you and I that qualify to call ourselves that, being pitted against those on the gov't dole.

So, in the end, what we will have is a slew of people no longer on the dole (yay? they arent eating our tax dollars, right?  and have joined us in the work force.
Where are all these jobs going to come from? Will the glut of man power further reduce pay that's already ridiculously low?
By and large, these people are going to be a clearinghouse of cheap labor to massive companies. (No offense to you Classix. I'm sure you are a good and decent man. You carry yourself very well on here so I can only surmise you'd be the same as an employer)

My point here isn't about who works and who receives benefits.

My point is why, given all the resources that our nations have, and all the money wasted on war machines, propping up other gov'ts, kick backs to already fat cats with-in the system, outrageous write offs for the same...

why is it with all that cash....we can't find the means to make sure the opportunity is there for everyone who wants it and is motivated can have a guaranteed higher education?

Wouldn't providing the means to make the best of yourself, if not financially able to do so on your own, be a better idea than tossing low paying jobs at them with the threat of work or else, be better over all in the end for not only self esteem reasons but the long term feasibility of our respective nations?


/whinge


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

ballybee said:


> I'm not disabled though? and i don't rent my own place i rent a room from my OH's parents while we save up to move out.
> 
> I don't want to cheat the system by saying i'm disabled, even if it's not that big a deal to most people and it really gets on my wick that i'm willing to work but don't get support while looking for it the thought of doing that doesn't sit well with me.
> 
> My OH's parents are cheating the benefit system and it makes me feel sick as the only reason they don't work is because their lazy but the mum says she's a carer(their "disabled"(learning and speech difficulties) is in school 5 days a week) and the dad is on incapacity benefits as apparently he suffers from PTSD and anxiety but in reality he's a horrible alcoholic that stays up until 6am, gets up at 2pm and then gets depressed because they never have any money(they spend roughly £140 a week on beer and take money off my OH other than rent, plus they ring up massive phone bills and expect him to pay them as they can't).


You don't have to be actually disabled to get DLA at the lowest rate. If you have difficulty walking or need help with certain things, you are entitled to DLA. My son is, obviously, mentally disabled and entitled but lots of people get it who simply cannot do certain things. It is not cheating and is certainly worth looking into if you cannot work because of your health problems.

It is not much and doesn't affect any other benefits at all. Having said that, I have nerve damage in my spine and like you, I cannot stand for long, I cannot stretch and I cannot bend for more than two seconds! But they turned me down. It is still worth looking into.


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Name one scheme dreamed up by a politician that hasn't cost billions and that worked.

The ground nut fiasco 1950s

'Zeta' free electricity from wave power 1950s

Suez..1950s Anthony Eden

Selective employment tax, and Kowtowing to the unions...Harold Wilson

Joining the EEC...Ted Heath

The destruction of our fishing industry...Heath

Poll tax...Thatcher

The destruction of our mining industry and 500,000 jobs... Heseltine and Thatcher

The destruction of our manufacturing base...basing our entire economy on the City and Bankers...Thatcher

The Dome...dreamed up by Heseltine and completed by Labour

The Iraq war...Blair

Running the country into hundreds of billions of debt..Blair/Brown

Tax credits...A bureaucratic system of rebates so complicated it's riddled with overpayments, fiddles, and cock ups...Brown

And that's just a handful...Run the country?...They couldn't run a tap.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Bandy said:


> ...
> By and large, these people are going to be a clearinghouse of cheap labor to massive companies. (No offense to you Classix. I'm sure you are a good and decent man. You carry yourself very well on here so I can only surmise you'd be the same as an employer)


Thanks Bandy. I can't be too bad as I've had some staff stay with me for up to 8 years at a time. But saying that, I am sure you could find one or two who would say I was the worst boss ever. 

Yes, some of these people will end up being a "clearinghouse of cheap labor to massive companies", but at least it's a start. Sometimes, some of the unemployed here in the UK are unemployed in the first place because their aspirations and opinions of themselves, and their abilities, are way out of kilter with the realities of their skills.





Bandy said:


> why is it with all that cash....we can't find the means to make sure the opportunity is there for everyone who wants it and is motivated can have a guaranteed higher education?
> 
> Wouldn't providing the means to make the best of yourself, if not financially able to do so on your own, be a better idea than tossing low paying jobs at them with the threat of work or else, be better over all in the end for not only self esteem reasons but the long term feasibility of our respective nations?
> 
> /whinge


We used to have that here in the UK up until 1997 when the working classes voted in Labour - 'a party for the working classes', whose first move was to begin charging thousands of pounds for university education! Before that, bright kids were able to go to university for free.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

poohdog said:


> Name one scheme dreamed up by a politician that hasn't cost billions and that worked.
> 
> The ground nut fiasco 1950s
> 
> ...


LOL! Funniest Post Of The Day!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> Thanks Bandy. I can't be too bad as I've had some staff stay with me for up to 8 years at a time. But saying that, I am sure you could find one or two who would say I was the worst boss ever.


Some will complain about having nothing to complain about too. 



classixuk said:


> Yes, some of these people will end up being a "clearinghouse of cheap labor to massive companies", but at least it's a start. Sometimes, some of the unemployed here in the UK are unemployed in the first place because their aspirations and opinions of themselves, and their abilities, are way out of kilter with the realities of their skills.


We do get a "welfare mentality" when generations have been brought up without having to learn that they need to earn their way.
I have referred to this in the recent past as modern day slavery.
They are kept in the meagerest of conditions, are an endless resource for recruitment for the military industry (ever looked up % of those that have volunteered based on socio-economical status?) etc etc....
What did people do before welfare anyway? Rhetorical question..



classixuk said:


> We used to have that here in the UK up until 1997 when the working classes voted in Labour - 'a party for the working classes', whose first move was to begin charging thousands of pounds for university education! Before that, bright kids were able to go to university for free.


Now that gives me pause.
Quite a swing there. From helping people become productive members of society able to earn more and therefor pay more taxes to keep the country and it's infrastructure in tip top.....to a plethora of cheap labor being *made* to work.

Again, I'm not for welfare at all.
Just the seeming ideals behind the initiative, who really stands to gain, and the obvious swing in mentality about whose needs are being served is more along my lines of thinking.

:glare:


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Bandy said:


> They are kept in the meagerest of conditions, are an endless resource for recruitment for the military industry (ever looked up % of those that have volunteered based on socio-economical status?) etc etc....
> :glare:


Cannon Fodder is very important Bandy.

500 years ago Queen Elizabeth herself lead an army against the Spanish Armada. I'm quite sure when she returned victorious that someone in the court pointed out that the loss of a cholera pox marked nobody would have been a more acceptable loss had the tide turned the other way.

No other monarch or leader has lead an army since.



Bandy said:


> Now that gives me pause.
> Quite a swing there. From helping people become productive members of society able to earn more and therefor pay more taxes to keep the country and it's infrastructure in tip top.....to a plethora of cheap labor being *made* to work.
> 
> :glare:


This what happens here. We used to have 'Yuppies' in the 80's - Young Urban Professionals. Nowadays we have 'NEET's' - Not in Education, Employment or Training.

Perhaps your theory is correct?


----------



## sailor (Feb 5, 2010)

(not read through all posts, sorry if this is a repeat of someone elses post/idea)

There should be a cap on benefits, similar to that of a minimum wage.

If people on bebefits were to get housing benefits and council tax benefits and then paid a maximum/equivelant to 40 hours on minimum wage.
They wouldnt be reproducing while on benefits, because it wouldn`t be worth it to them.

There are people who are having babies just to secure council property and benefits, because its easy and you get more money.

I know a lady who has never worked and she pops out a baby every few years. 
She gets her housing benefit, council tax benefit, 7 lots of child benefit ( I think it is roughly £10/£15 per week per child), then child tax credit (roughly £50 per week per child) and then her income support (roughly £60 per week)

so thats ....

£70 child benefit a week
£350 child tax vredit a week
£60 income support a week
£480 a week + free rent/tax.

She would need £600 a week atleast for her to even think she was better off in work  and to beable to provide for her babies she has selfishly brought into this world.


Will she ever get that much on a minimum wage full time job to support her children ??? NO !!! so will she be going to work when her youngest is in full time school ?? I very muich doubt it... more like pop out another sprog to avoid having to go onto jobseekers.

I say cap benefits to be the same as minimum wage in a full time job. There shouldn`t be no incentive to have more children while on benefits :nono:


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> No other monarch or leader has lead an army since.


I wish Obama et al were made to be on the front lines. Wonder how many nations we'd "help" then? 



classixuk said:


> This what happens here. We used to have 'Yuppies' in the 80's - Young Urban Professionals. Nowadays we have 'NEET's' - Not in Education, Employment or Training.
> 
> Perhaps your theory is correct?


Same here with the Yuppie's. Hadn't heard the term NEETS till now.
My theory, though not very developed, concerns globalization. 
The >>corporotacracy<< that is overtly replacing Republics and Democracies is alarming.

Not so much really that it's happening as to how blindly people accept it.

When will people wake up and question where they find themselves and the actual conditions around them as opposed to what the talking heads on the magic moving picture box tells them is so?

We are raped by the Corporations and then told when their gambling, that they knew HAD to fail at some point, goes south, we MUST bail them out otherwise chaos will ensue.
If you look around the world, you see 3rd world countries being exploited for resources; both natural and living.
Take a look closer to home and we see our respective countries being lead into upheaval because of supposed class war fare and economic hard ships.

Add in mass migration, both legal and illegal (oft times with a blind eye turned by the gov't) and all the problems that brings with strife, both cultural and economic.

I see something far more to this than a simple plan to put people to work.
What I see, if left unchecked, is a means to have a mass populace of have nots, at the whim of the few that have, without the social safety nets we take for granted now.

Color me cynical, but the harder I look, the more of this I see.
In my own country they are looking at hitting the weakest of the weak. The elderly.
They are talking now about cutting the benefits massively on health care and subsistence.

There is only so much money in the world because of natural resources that can be used as collateral.

Does it not make sense that as they reap the benefits of the less fortunate and put more to work for lower wages, that eventually you will have a mass work force that has to work for lower pay because of the amount of people that money has to be spread to?

The people vote for the party that says what they agree with.

Corporations pay whatever party is in at the time to give them leniency.
That is the heart of the problem and if left unaddressed will ultimately be the noose around our necks.

wow...where did THAT rant come from?


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

sailor said:


> I say cap benefits to be the same as minimum wage in a full time job. There shouldn`t be no incentive to have more children while on benefits :nono:


I agree with this...but.
You're gonna have the bleeding heart do gooders screamin we're not doing enough for the poor unfortunate children that aren't being properly cared for due to limited funds.

At one point, the state of California proposed sterilizing women after the 3rd child (while on welfare) to "cap the costs"

Ya shoulda seen the fall out from THAT one....


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Bandy said:


> I wish Obama et al were made to be on the front lines. Wonder how many nations we'd "help" then?
> 
> Same here with the Yuppie's. Hadn't heard the term NEETS till now.
> My theory, though not very developed, concerns globalization.
> ...


LOL. I was just waiting for you to begin talking about FIAT money and the vacuum behind it where gold used to sit, and then we'd really be in for a long thread. 

It's interesting that you can see so far ahead and try to work out what's happening. My own personal theory is that whatever our bosses' name, the only thing we will need to worry about is learning how to say 'Thank you Sir' in Chinese.


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

i can see lots of pros and cons, and guess we wontknow for sure until its been given time..

my experience though.. at 15 started a yts.. £28 a week, barely covered my busfares never mind my rent etc (will this scheme be giving free bus passes?)

had an abundance of different jobs, some paid well, others not so much.. then i became ill and split with my husband. Because I own my own home, im not entitled to a lot of benefits. Im still arguing about some.. and tax credits say i have to pay back a heck of a lot as they made a mistake! hmm not my fault!!

Id love to work, ive been doing on bits of voluntary online, i find it hard to go out. Ive been under pathways who couldnt help. Despite my gp and jobcentre adviser saying i couldnt work, i failed my medical by someone who saw me for 2 hours and wouldnt look at any letters from my surgeons or photos !?! So, would this benefit me? 

Im sick opf the refugee system and the people who just dont want to work! they seem top be the ones that can (where i live anyway) afford to drink and go out all the time! even if i wanted to, i couldnt afford to!

My partner then lost his job.. and with it the beautiful home we were all going to be living in happy ever after.. trying to get a job that means he can afford the rent on his new place (we dont live together, cant do so atm, and believe me, its a cheap house and not somewhere you would really choose) is very difficult.

We have both never had to really worry about money before and the past year has been hell...I only hope that for us and people like us, they is going to be a change for the better. 

Not everyone on benefits wants to be, and i dont even tell people as im so ashamed.. even though we have paid our taxes.

Its not as easy as people think, and you dont get as much money either. My home is falling to bits, but as i own it i cant get help, but private rent has gone down too.. the average house here is £650a month but the lha is £425? thats going to effect both people looking for homes and those who rent theirs out.

Sorry for long post and rant, but i really hope this works cos the government really needs to something.. and quick! (and dont give me crap for the amount of pets i own.. lol)

tori x


----------



## tjk (Sep 1, 2010)

sorry if this has been answered i havent read through all the posts what will happen to those of us with disabled children? or those who care full time for a disabled person ?? it shouldnt realy affect me as i hope to be working by then but just curious


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

Bandy said:


> I agree with this...but.
> You're gonna have the bleeding heart do gooders screamin we're not doing enough for the poor unfortunate children that aren't being properly cared for due to limited funds.
> 
> At one point, the state of California proposed sterilizing women after the 3rd child (while on welfare) to "cap the costs"
> ...


Haha..sterilizing is a bit extreme.....would certainly solve the problem of cutting costs though...

Shame about the _major _human rights implications!

Sadly the state of the benefits system is in an awful mess and no solution will fix it properly, as it is a state of mind for alot of people.

I know someone who has never worked. He has never accepted responsibility for this, its ALWAYS "someone elses" fault.. when it really is just down to his attitude and misplaced pickiness over type of work!

The really sad thing now is that the huge unemployment figures also consist of experianced and educated people now. Uni graduates who cant find work after 4 or 5 yrs studying and working, victims of redundancy who cant find work... how will the system help those people? Or will they end up pushed into jobs they arent qualified to do, wasting all their hard work...


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Savahl said:


> Haha..sterilizing is a bit extreme.....would certainly solve the problem of cutting costs though...
> 
> Shame about the _major _human rights implications!
> 
> ...


Probably the latter.

Unfortunately, the last 10 years has seen a massive increase in kids with degrees in IT or media studies. They get into a lot of debt and spend a lot of time studying only to find that whilst wages have been increasing year on year in the UK, IT jobs etc. have been moved abroad where the labour force is cheaper.

That's why the government is so determined to get young people back into apprenticeships etc. We need real skills if we are to compete.


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Savahl said:


> The really sad thing now is that the huge unemployment figures also consist of experianced and educated people now. Uni graduates who cant find work after 4 or 5 yrs studying and working, victims of redundancy who cant find work... how will the system help those people? Or will they end up pushed into jobs they arent qualified to do, wasting all their hard work...


I went for a job and was told i was over qualified?!? apparantly even though it was a job i really wanted and would have loved, their thoughts were that i would leave if something better came along!

sometimes you dont get a chance.

Since leaving my last job i have done a load of college courses, i needed to keep my brain active, and was also good to get out! now this may have backfired on me.. x


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

mstori said:


> I went for a job and was told i was over qualified?!? apparantly even though it was a job i really wanted and would have loved, their thoughts were that i would leave if something better came along!
> 
> sometimes you dont get a chance.
> 
> Since leaving my last job i have done a load of college courses, i needed to keep my brain active, and was also good to get out! now this may have backfired on me.. x


Perhaps you need to start lieing on your CV and leaving some stuff out?


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

classixuk said:


> Probably the latter.
> 
> Unfortunately, the last 10 years has seen a massive increase in kids with degrees in IT or media studies. They get into a lot of debt and spend a lot of time studying only to find that whilst wages have been increasing year on year in the UK, IT jobs etc. have been moved abroad where the labour force is cheaper.
> 
> That's why the government is so determined to get young people back into apprenticeships etc. We need real skills if we are to compete.


I do think that apprenticeships being neglected in the last 15 yrs has been criminal.

It was the best thing i ever done, and firmly believe i am better off now because i took that route, but i got a lot of grief for it. Any academically talented kid was pushed to uni (so were those that wernt), but as I had good grades my teachers at a-level were mortified that I didnt go to uni. I was pushed and pressured towards uni, and i believe it was due to the way schools were marked in the league tables. But i stood my ground and it worked out.

Now we have a severe lack of young professionals with vocational backgrounds - resulting in managers who have NO clue what their skilled labour are doing on a technical level, making them rubbish technical managers basically. They are all graduates with no real life technical experiance, fast tracked into management; too inexperianced to do their job effectively.

Not to mention the kids who are pressured to go to uni, pick any old course (mainly soft subjects) which have minimum specialist job opportunities - so you have thousands of graduates in industries where realistically there are only a handful of vacancies every year.

/rant


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Savahl said:


> I do think that apprenticeships being neglected in the last 15 yrs has been criminal.
> 
> It was the best thing i ever done, and firmly believe i am better off now because i took that route, but i got a lot of grief for it. Any academically talented kid was pushed to uni (so were those that wernt), but as I had good grades my teachers at a-level were mortified that I didnt go to uni. I was pushed and pressured towards uni, and i believe it was due to the way schools were marked in the league tables. But i stood my ground and it worked out.
> 
> ...


I cant remember the exact name, but i heard that some comps are going to be turning into "academys" where kids get to do things like car maintenance and get a gcse/nvq type of qualification. So they get practical based skills, and not just textbook.. i know what i mean but my brain isnt engaging today lol

also.. at school we didnt even learn how to change a plug, but were taught r.e... learnt french and german, but not sign language.. shouldnt we need to communicate with everyone from our own country before learning another?

this scheme can only work as far as i can see, if schooling changes also x


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

mstori said:


> I cant remember the exact name, but i heard that some comps are going to be turning into "academys" where kids get to do things like car maintenance and get a gcse/nvq type of qualification. So they get practical based skills, and not just textbook.. i know what i mean but my brain isnt engaging today lol
> 
> also.. at school we didnt even learn how to change a plug, but were taught r.e... learnt french and german, but not sign language.. shouldnt we need to communicate with everyone from our own country before learning another?
> 
> this scheme can only work as far as i can see, if schooling changes also x


From what i can gather when apprenticeships were common before, alot of workplaces were their own training centres... or several companies in local areas had training centres for their apprentices. I know the company i worked for did... its a shame things changed really!

Vocational subjects arent for everyone, but nor are academic...i think there needs to be a balance, or greater choice when GCSE choices are made; which i believe is already begining to happen over the last 5 yrs or something.

I do think languages are important for everyone, we need to communicate internationally. Im looking at learning german or italian for professional devlopment reasons, and im in a vocational field. Plus, it helps when going on holiday  The dutch learn like 4 languages at school, so there is no reason why we shouldnt learn one or two.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> LOL. I was just waiting for you to begin talking about FIAT money and the vacuum behind it where gold used to sit, and then we'd really be in for a long thread.


Don't even get me started on THAT subject 



classixuk said:


> It's interesting that you can see so far ahead and try to work out what's happening. My own personal theory is that whatever our bosses' name, the only thing we will need to worry about is learning how to say 'Thank you Sir' in Chinese.


Honestly?

I see regional unions (as exemplified by the E.U, the S.American Union, The African Union. the proposed North American Union, Eurasian Union etc) being ultimately made into a one world system.

The lines have already been crossed by corporations as has been seen by the recent banking and insurance fall outs. Countries around the world were hit and hit hard by the faulty endeavors of a few.

What I fear more than learning Chinese is what will become of people as a whole when they lose their individuality and pride for their homeland when it all falls under one flag.

Will we become the _human_ race and live in harmony exploring space?
Or will we become sheeple that are lead by the nose by our next great leader?

Yeah...sometimes I think a bit too deep.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> Probably the latter.
> 
> Unfortunately, the last 10 years has seen a massive increase in kids with degrees in IT or media studies. They get into a lot of debt and spend a lot of time studying only to find that whilst wages have been increasing year on year in the UK, IT jobs etc. have been moved abroad where the labour force is cheaper.
> 
> That's why the government is so determined to get young people back into apprenticeships etc. We need real skills if we are to compete.


Here, along with outsourcing is the problem of HB1 visas.

We bring in talented young graduates from countries where expected pay is far less and put them to work because "qualified personnel just can't be found coming out of American Institutions"
:blink::blink:

Yeah...pass me some more of the media kool aid please....


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Savahl said:


> The dutch learn like 4 languages at school, so there is no reason why we shouldnt learn one or two.


I agree with everything you said, but the quoted bit reminded me of a joke I heard.

What do you call a person that speaks 3 languages?

Tri lingual.

What do you call a person that speaks 2 languages?

Bi lingual

What do you call a person that speaks 1 language?

American :lol:

ahem...

I'll be in the corner over there ------->>>


----------



## Gilly and Jess (Mar 12, 2011)

SashaXx said:


> I do wonder how this will work for a single mum with 3 kids? How would she get a job that fits in with school hours that pays enough for childcare etc Considering she probably has no qualifications?


I'm a single mum to TWO kids, I'd look for part time work so that I can get hours as close to school hours as possible, and claim working tax credit alongside my wages. I'd pay more out in rent and council tax, however, so I'd not be THAT much better off for working anyway, but the job centre take the view that even if you're only £10 a week better off, you're better off and you should take the job. Which means I'd be doing around 16 hours a week or more, for £10 a week......do the math!

Slave labour was meant to have been outlawed!

They do however pay for childcare if your children are not able to take care of themselves whilst you're at work, and the payment is made direct to a child minder who's registered so that the money can't be squandered/paid to family members....

Oh, and I may be a single mum but I left school with 9 GCEs/CSEs and I'm also qualified in ICT to City and Guilds level 3 and Sage Computerised Accounts to level 2............we're not all thick and single mums by choice....


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Savahl said:


> From what i can gather when apprenticeships were common before, alot of workplaces were their own training centres... or several companies in local areas had training centres for their apprentices. I know the company i worked for did... its a shame things changed really!
> 
> Vocational subjects arent for everyone, but nor are academic...i think there needs to be a balance, or greater choice when GCSE choices are made; which i believe is already begining to happen over the last 5 yrs or something.
> 
> I do think languages are important for everyone, we need to communicate internationally. Im looking at learning german or italian for professional devlopment reasons, and im in a vocational field. Plus, it helps when going on holiday  The dutch learn like 4 languages at school, so there is no reason why we shouldnt learn one or two.


I do agree with you, i just feel there are some things we should be taught first. Where I live you dont do languages until comp, when all studies show the younger you learn the quicker and easier it is. My friends 2 year old has been brought up learning english and french and can speak both as good as the other.

When i did my gcse choices there wasnt a lot of help. Something like an 20 minute talk with an adviser. I was 13! who really knows what they want to be at 13! Why not do as other countries, and have leaving age at say 18 ( i was 15 due to my bd being august) or even later. Teaching in general needs an overhaul..

the general state of the country is a mix of financial recline, its gone downhill with lack of jobs and foreign imports and children leaving school confused as to what to do with their lives. Put in the mix, leaving uni with qualifications but no life experience, redundancies and people not being able to do the only job they ever have (shipbuilders etc).

The mix is bound to have a drastic effect, so I hope that there is a good outcome to the proposed plans, but will have to wait and see.. x


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Gilly and Jess said:


> I'm a single mum to TWO kids, I'd look for part time work so that I can get hours as close to school hours as possible, and claim working tax credit alongside my wages. I'd pay more out in rent and council tax, however, so I'd not be THAT much better off for working anyway, but the job centre take the view that even if you're only £10 a week better off, you're better off and you should take the job. Which means I'd be doing around 16 hours a week or more, for £10 a week......do the math!
> 
> Slave labour was meant to have been outlawed!
> 
> ...


Even if a you can get a childminder, there are times like when your child is sick, that cant be avoided. My friend lost her job last year after her 2 kids got chicken pox and couldnt go to the childminder. She needed to take time off, and they "let her go" she hadnt worked at the company long enough to gain "rights" but then had a battle with getting benefits as she had "lost her job" and they were trying to make her wait 6 weeks, as they do if you have been sacked 

Id rather it was changed to family members being able to be paid as childminder ( i know a lot of people who have done childminders course so they can) i would feel better leaving my kids, especially if really young, with someone i trusted.. if that person was unemployed, then wouldnt that kill 2 birds with 1 stone? x


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

mstori said:


> the general state of the country is a mix of financial recline, its gone downhill with lack of jobs and foreign imports and children leaving school confused as to what to do with their lives. Put in the mix, leaving uni with qualifications but no life experience, redundancies and people not being able to do the only job they ever have (shipbuilders etc).
> 
> The mix is bound to have a drastic effect, so I hope that there is a good outcome to the proposed plans, but will have to wait and see.. x


One question.

Do you think the state of affairs just happened?


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Bandy said:


> One question.
> 
> Do you think the state of affairs just happened?


of course not, but thats the whole issue isnt it, which is what i was trying to say if i could get it into words.. there isnt a quick fix.. things have never really improved... and now its worse.. you cant fix decades of problems overnight. and dont get me started on immigration :tongue_smilie:


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

Bandy said:


> One question.
> 
> Do you think the state of affairs just happened?


This is exactly it. Our problems go back probably 20 odd years, they have been develooping over years and years... It wont be easy to fix!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

mstori said:


> of course not, but thats the whole issue isnt it, which is what i was trying to say if i could get it into words.. there isnt a quick fix.. *things have never really improved... and now its worse.*. and dont get me started on immigration :tongue_smilie:





Savahl said:


> This is exactly it. Our problems go back probably 20 odd years, *they have been develooping over years and years*... It wont be easy to fix!


YAY!!!
*clappy hands*

Next question.

Do you think anything is being done to correct this "problem"?


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Bandy said:


> YAY!!!
> *clappy hands*
> 
> Next question.
> ...


hopefully? 

I dont know, will have to see how things progress with the new proposals. I really hope so. i dread to think what it will be like when my kids leave school if things havent changed. maybe we need more "real" people in parliment. Not people who do not know what its like in the "real world"


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

Bandy said:


> YAY!!!
> *clappy hands*
> 
> Next question.
> ...


It depends what you see as the "problem" 

The high unemployment? ..... no. Factories are still closing and moving abroad. There is no reason for companies to manufacture in the UK anymore, and there are no incentives for them to do so.

The lack of skilled labour.... maybe, there is a push for apprenticeships etc; but with all our industry vanishing, where will they work?

The dependance on the benefits systems...... Theyv been trying and failing, its very hard to change a mindset!


----------



## SashaXx (Sep 3, 2010)

Gilly and Jess said:


> I'm a single mum to TWO kids, I'd look for part time work so that I can get hours as close to school hours as possible, and claim working tax credit alongside my wages. I'd pay more out in rent and council tax, however, so I'd not be THAT much better off for working anyway, but the job centre take the view that even if you're only £10 a week better off, you're better off and you should take the job. Which means I'd be doing around 16 hours a week or more, for £10 a week......do the math!
> 
> Slave labour was meant to have been outlawed!
> 
> ...


I'm a single mum of 3 BUT I don't have no qualifications due to the fact I didn't get to finish school or college due to death of family members and being homeless


----------



## mstori (May 22, 2009)

Savahl said:


> It depends what you see as the "problem"
> 
> The high unemployment? ..... no. Factories are still closing and moving abroad. There is no reason for companies to manufacture in the UK anymore, and there are no incentives for them to do so.
> 
> ...


what worries me is if everyone did apprenticeships, there are still not enough jobs, so where do we go? i have 2 friends leaving the country this month alone to get a job  (just to add, they have jobs set up.. 1 will be teaching english in korea and another is a midwife and her husband an electrician and they are re-locating to australia)


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Savahl said:


> It depends what you see as the "problem"


That, my dear, was the point of the question. 



Savahl said:


> The high unemployment?
> The lack of skilled labour
> 
> The dependance on the benefits systems


These are the symptoms of the problem 



Savahl said:


> its very hard to change a mindset!


It's far easier to perpetuate it though. 

Do you honestly think that given the pool of knowledge in our respective govt's ...that IF things weren't satisfactory to the powers that be and IF the general welfare of the commoner was the priority, things couldn't be fixed... post-haste?


----------



## Mumbles (Apr 17, 2011)

The issue is that the government give out too much in benefits, its has already been said on here, it would only make me 10 pound a week better off so why should i bother and thats the issue. The only way people are going to have the incentive to go to work is the make them better off, benefits should never be higher than what someone is getting on minimum wage so the government should should cut down benefit.


----------



## Gilly and Jess (Mar 12, 2011)

SashaXx said:


> I'm a single mum of 3 BUT I don't have no qualifications due to the fact I didn't get to finish school or college due to death of family members and being homeless


That was my point, sorry if I came across different.......I was alluding to the fact that single mums seem to be labelled as layabout ne'er-do-wells who breed like rabbits and sit on their backsides all day because that's the way they want it..yes, there are some like that, but for those who want to work, there's no real incentive. What you make with one hand, they take off you with the other, so where's the point in even bothering??

I've made my mind up, if I get offered a job, I have to be at LEAST £50 a week better off after I've paid the extra rent and council tax or I'm not doing it. I'm on income support, they can't FORCE me back into work if I'm going to be worse off....... SURELY??


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

Gilly and Jess said:


> *I'm a single mum to TWO kids, I'd look for part time work so that I can get hours as close to school hours as possible, and claim working tax credit alongside my wages. I'd pay more out in rent and council tax, however, so I'd not be THAT much better off for working anyway, but the job centre take the view that even if you're only £10 a week better off, you're better off and you should take the job. Which means I'd be doing around 16 hours a week or more, for £10 a week......do the math!*Slave labour was meant to have been outlawed!
> 
> They do however pay for childcare if your children are not able to take care of themselves whilst you're at work, and the payment is made direct to a child minder who's registered so that the money can't be squandered/paid to family members....
> 
> Oh, and I may be a single mum but I left school with 9 GCEs/CSEs and I'm also qualified in ICT to City and Guilds level 3 and Sage Computerised Accounts to level 2............we're not all thick and single mums by choice....


If I had the choice of working and earning or claiming and my money/lifestylewas the same either way I would still work. Its all about self respect. Thats my 'math' on it anyway.


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

I honestly think if you can get a job and its equal to what benefits you claim you should HAVE to take it!! Benefits are there for when you cant work/cant find work not to be weighed up against working.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Gilly and Jess said:


> I'm a single mum to TWO kids, I'd look for part time work so that I can get hours as close to school hours as possible, and claim working tax credit alongside my wages. I'd pay more out in rent and council tax, however, so I'd not be THAT much better off for working anyway, but the job centre take the view that even if you're only £10 a week better off, you're better off and you should take the job. Which means I'd be doing around 16 hours a week or more, for £10 a week......do the math!
> 
> Slave labour was meant to have been outlawed!
> 
> ...


I am sure nobody thinks that way, do they?

You have just said, though, what I have never understood about this daft system. They are prepared to pay a childminder so that mum can go to work - wouldn't they be better giving that money or some of it to mum so she can stay at home with her kids? They have to be better off with their mother, than with some stranger who doesn't really care about them. Doesn't that make more sense?

I was fortunate enough to be with my children from the moment they were born, but I dread to think what my son would be like had I left him with a childminder. It took about fifteen years for him to learn colours - I am not exaggerating - of constant repetition; stuff like "get the green one, the same colour as the grass". Nobody else would have bothered, would they? It would have been easier to get the item themselves.


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

newfiesmum said:


> I am sure nobody thinks that way, do they?
> 
> You have just said, though, what I have never understood about this daft system. They are prepared to pay a childminder so that mum can go to work - wouldn't they be better giving that money or some of it to mum so she can stay at home with her kids? They have to be better off with their mother, than with some stranger who doesn't really care about them. Doesn't that make more sense?
> 
> .


My children go to nursery because I have to work where they are taught things(even the same ones follow a learning plan) and were cared for very very well i woud go as far as saying loved by the staff. Childminders do a great job and most very much care about the children in there care.

I think parents should be helped to stay at home when the kids are small but the assistance should be cut back the older the kids get and when they go full time school it should be stopped


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

ClaireLouise said:


> My children go to nursery because I have to work where they are taught things(even the same ones follow a learning plan) and were cared for very very well i woud go as far as saying loved by the staff. Childminders do a great job and most very much care about the children in there care.
> 
> I think parents should be helped to stay at home when the kids are small but the assistance should be cut back the older the kids get and when they go full time school it should be stopped


I wasn't suggesting that you would dump your kids on to just anyone, or that anyone else would, but small children particularly need their mothers, in my opinion. So, to pay childminders when they could help mums stay home with their pre-school children is bizarre in my opinion.


----------



## Mum2Alfie (Jan 4, 2010)

Love it!! Sounds good! It will work! Dont think it has ever been done like that and I think its a great idea! Thats my brother and sister sorted!


----------



## MissShelley (May 9, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> I am sure nobody thinks that way, do they?
> 
> You have just said, though, what I have never understood about this daft system. They are prepared to pay a childminder so that mum can go to work - wouldn't they be better giving that money or some of it to mum so she can stay at home with her kids? They have to be better off with their mother, than with some stranger who doesn't really care about them. Doesn't that make more sense?
> *
> I was fortunate enough to be with my children from the moment they were born, but I dread to think what my son would be like had I left him with a childminder. It took about fifteen years for him to learn colours - I am not exaggerating - of constant repetition; stuff like "get the green one, the same colour as the grass". Nobody else would have bothered, would they? * It would have been easier to get the item themselves.


If you didn't send your children to a childcarer then how do you they don't care???

How long ago was that? The early years curriculum was implemented nearly 20 years ago ( can't remember the name, but it was when I was new to childcare ) And the EYFS was implemented a few years ago., back to the less structured child led play which is what we used to have before government funding..Childminders also have to follow that same curriculum as part as that early years care, which tracks children from birth. And there is no way of not doing it, as Ofsted keep track of what they aren't or are not doing. Believe me I have recognised and helped nurture each childs potential in my care, it's amazing to see these children develop, and be part of helping them develop.

I'm a Nursery Nurse and I love the little people in my care! The children I look after are treated how I would want my own children to be treated.

To the OP sorry for going off topic


----------



## tjk (Sep 1, 2010)

Gilly and Jess said:


> I've made my mind up, if I get offered a job, I have to be at LEAST £50 a week better off after I've paid the extra rent and council tax or I'm not doing it. I'm on income support, they can't FORCE me back into work if I'm going to be worse off....... SURELY??


i think they can you know 
my mum had to, and thats like ten years ago she was ten pound worse off going to work but my sis was in full time school so she had to work now she gets 90 a week plus tax credit thingy every year they say she is intilted to so much housing benefit then half way through the year they change theyre mind she is in so much debt now its crazy she was never in debt when she was on income support its mad


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

MissShelley said:


> If you didn't send your children to a childcarer then how do you they don't care???
> 
> How long ago was that? The early years curriculum was implemented nearly 20 years ago ( can't remember the name, but it was when I was new to childcare ) And the EYFS was implemented a few years ago., back to the less structured child led play which is what we used to have before government funding..Childminders also have to follow that same curriculum as part as that early years care, which tracks children from birth. And there is no way of not doing it, as Ofsted keep track of what they aren't or are not doing. Believe me I have recognised and helped nurture each childs potential in my care, it's amazing to see these children develop, and be part of helping them develop.
> 
> ...


I fully agree.

Tilly has gone to nursery since she was 18months old. Never once has she said she didnt want to go, she is loved by all the staff, she has started to learn french (she is 3 now), The staff do above and beyond there job. My mum is ill and the staff have given me their personal number and said if anything happened to my mum regardless of the time I could contact them and they would sit with the kids so we could get to mum( wouldnt ask them to but the offer is lovely). They have had the kids longer than ive paid for and have had them at short notice when we have had problem,,,,,, they all deserve a medal. I would rather be at home with them but they are BETTER off at nursery being with other kids and learning things as a group. Not to mention the fact the love it.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

MissShelley said:


> If you didn't send your children to a childcarer then how do you they don't care???
> 
> How long ago was that? The early years curriculum was implemented nearly 20 years ago ( can't remember the name, but it was when I was new to childcare ) And the EYFS was implemented a few years ago., back to the less structured child led play which is what we used to have before government funding..Childminders also have to follow that same curriculum as part as that early years care, which tracks children from birth. And there is no way of not doing it, as Ofsted keep track of what they aren't or are not doing. Believe me I have recognised and helped nurture each childs potential in my care, it's amazing to see these children develop, and be part of helping them develop.
> 
> ...


I don't know what an early years curriculum is. My youngest child is now 34, so that is how long ago it was that I had my children. However, when I agreed to look after my grandaughter when my daughter went back to work 13 years ago, there was a registered child minder person who kept harrassing me to let her "give me a break" (damned cheek) and look after her. Her house was so filthy I would not have left my dogs there.

I am not having a go at anyone, and I am sure that you do a great job, but I still think young children are better off with their mothers. Nobody can care about your own children as much as you do.


----------



## Irish Setter Gal (Mar 17, 2011)

newfiesmum said:


> I am not having a go at anyone, and I am sure that you do a great job, but I still think young children are better off with their mothers. Nobody can care about your own children as much as you do.


Couldn't agree more but not everybody has the luxury of choice.

[Sorry OP but gone off topic a little]

OP - think your company have a great ethos :001_smile:and fantastic for your company that the scheme has been able to provide you with what sounds a great opportunity to 'road test' a potential new employee


----------



## MissShelley (May 9, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> I don't know what an early years curriculum is. My youngest child is now 34, so that is how long ago it was that I had my children. However, when I agreed to look after my grandaughter when my daughter went back to work 13 years ago, there was a registered child minder person who kept harrassing me to let her "give me a break" (damned cheek) and look after her. Her house was so filthy I would not have left my dogs there.
> 
> I am not having a go at anyone, and I am sure that you do a great job, but I still think young children are better off with their mothers. Nobody can care about your own children as much as you do.


No I know you weren't, and sorry if I across as defensive. That childminder shouldn't be in childcare if she feels like that  They aren't all like that, I know some wonderful ones 

And yep, I'm sure lots of Mummies would love to stay at home with the children, but unfortunately they can't. Me included, hence the fact that's the reason I do the job I do, so I could spend more time with them without hampering their own needs, and I was very lucky to see them in a whole new light, from a practitioners perspective, I believe it's important for a child to develop a life away from Mum ( kids need a break from home humdrum as well ) to become confident well adjusted people, not afraid of independence and to develop socially..

Both my boys started pre-school at two, and their learning just accelerated, both bright, Luke knew all his colours and could count to 100 at 2 and a half, could recognise his name and followed print in books, at five he was reading stories, and as soon as he could write he was writing poems and stories of his own. Michael just enjoyed the social interaction.


----------



## Gilly and Jess (Mar 12, 2011)

They can't make anyone work if they wouldn't be better of for it, I know that for a fact. That's why the government have (quite rightly) realised they have to make it so that you're worse off on benefits. 

I'm quite keen on working, to be honest, I'm sick to death of vegetating. But I just hope that if it goes wrong for me and I end up back in hospital and having surgeries that they'll reinstate my benefits without my having to wait whilst they find lost/missed/not submitted/forgotten/other stupid excuse paperwork......and don't take ten weeks over it like they did with my mate, who went off benefit to become self employed, then discovered she had breast cancer and had to stop doing it. Eleven weeks she went without money because they kept screwing up her claim, and she has two kids to take care of and rent to pay.....

I agreed to this work placement thing I'm doing, for a 13 week period, so that I could test myself and see if I AM fit for work, and they agreed to pay me an extra £15 a week for doing it. I am currently owed 6 weeks worth of that £15.......


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

classixuk said:


> Perhaps they're all Catholics?


It is comments like this that are totally uncalled for...

You have no idea about how unfair Welfare to Work will be for the most vulnerable in our society.

After reading the comment about *All Catholics* I am done with this thread


----------



## Myanimalmadhouse (Mar 6, 2011)

Wait theyve changed it to youngest child being 5? YES!!! 4 YEARS of looking for a job and being turned down (if im lucky, usually you just have to pressume its a no as they dont bother!!!!!) and now they are just going to GIVE me one??? FANTASTIC!!!!!!

Im a single mum of 2 and always had a job - sometimes even as many as 3 at a time since I was 15! I was back at full time when when my eldest was 11 weeks old. When I got pregnant with my youngest - who happens to be 5 now  I had some real problems with the pregnancy and the company was being taken over at the same time so that was that I was one of the first to go from the "restructure".

Now bearing in mind I'm actually a qualified Legal Secretary and at one point was considered highly prized in the temping agency world - literally finished one job on any day and they would have a new one set up for the following day!!

I am now considered "not worthy" of even a job at Mcdonalds - yes MCDONALDS!!!!! I have applied for anything and everything and im either over qualified/under qualified/no recent experience 

GIVE ME A JOB PLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSEEEEEEEE
Doing what - I dont care!
Doing shifts - I dont care!
Ending up with less money at the end of the week - I DONT CARE!!!!

As long as I have enough to manage I really dont care! 
I finally decided to go into training to do a higher lvl pet care course and guess what - they wont fund it so have to save up myself if I want to get anywhere!
I'm starting to get back on a direction, being as there seems to be no one who is prepared to give me a chance at work - yet I see so many drongo's get through job after job after job  that I am now trying to start my own business - is the government gonna help me start up? Nope already asked if they will help me learn book keeping etc and they wont!

So yeah, if the government wants to give me a job cleaning out the sewers on a night shift for less money than I get on benefits - I'll do it and I'll love it as I'll have pride doing it!!!


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Changes said:


> It is comments like this that are totally uncalled for...
> 
> You have no idea about how unfair Welfare to Work will be for the most vulnerable in our society.
> 
> After reading the comment about *All Catholics* I am done with this thread


Crikey. Touchy?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> I'm a single mum to TWO kids, I'd look for part time work so that I can get hours as close to school hours as possible, and claim working tax credit alongside my wages. I'd pay more out in rent and council tax, however, so I'd not be THAT much better off for working anyway, but the job centre take the view that even if you're only £10 a week better off, you're better off and you should take the job. Which means I'd be doing around 16 hours a week or more, for £10 a week......do the math!
> 
> Slave labour was meant to have been outlawed!


But it's ok for us tax payers to pay you, pay for your rent and maintain your children for doing nothing?

To many seem to think that living off the state is a right.

You wouldn't be doing 16 hours for £10 - that's just the way you see it because of the money you get given for nothing. Maybe if you looked at it as earning your way in life instead of being given it you would see it differently.

Believe it or not, I passionately believe in having a welfare system that supports those who need it during times when they need it, but I get sick of attitudes that say it's not worth working because you'll only get £10 more than you get given for doing nothing! What about your sense of pride, achievement and setting an example to your children about responsibility and work ethic?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> its has already been said on here, it would only make me 10 pound a week better off so why should i bother and thats the issue.


Why should you bother?

Well, why should we bother to pay you? pay your rent/rates/electricity/gas/food? With attitudes like that I often wonder.

What about a sense of pride, a sense of responsibility to yourself and your children?


----------



## Gilly and Jess (Mar 12, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> But it's ok for us tax payers to pay you, pay for your rent and maintain your children for doing nothing?
> 
> To many seem to think that living off the state is a right.
> 
> ...


I have a sense of pride. I worked before I damaged my spine, I was working for the National Health Service as a nurse when I damaged my spine, through no fault of my own, and 3 operations later I'm still struggling to get on my feet properly. I teach my children responsibility every day, my eldest is currently struggling financially through an apprenticeship to make something of himself, he can see that a life on benefits is not good!

Please don't think for a moment that you've paid for my benefits all of my life, I HAVE WORKED and paid my tax and national insurance just the same as you have, I WANT TO WORK, but you find me an employer who'll take on the likes of me, (who could be off work at the drop of a hat because I've bent down to pick something up off the floor ) over someone who has no health problems at all and I'll be a happy person!!

I do so hate when people state they pay for me, I paid my way when I could! I didn't ask for 3 discs to press on my spinal column causing crippling pain for the last ten years. :cryin: if £10 went further these days we wouldn't mind only earning that, it barely buys a bag of groceries for anyone anymore does it?!!


----------



## tjk (Sep 1, 2010)

rocco33 id love to know if you have ever been on benefits?

i can understand 'you tax payers' getting irate when people are on the fiddle pretend to be disabled ect 
but you dont know everybodies situation how they ended up on benefits how they feel about being on benefits you are lumping everyone who has kids and who happens to be on benefits as lazy buggars that expect houndouts not everyone is like that


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

It is about time this country have a government that had the guts to say enoughs enough!
It is time to pull the plug on those that see having child after child as a free meal ticket.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Not everyone who is on benefits is just a scrounger looking for a free handout. People who have worked their whole lives have ended up on it recently through no fault of their own and then can't get another job despite applying for everything going. Money should go to helping them get a job as well as getting the genuinely lazy off their backsides and doing something productive for the first time in their lives.

I was lucky I lost my last job got this one within two weeks interview consisted of can you work a computer and work on the phone. When can you start? Most people aren't that lucky


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2011)

tjk said:


> rocco33 id love to know if you have ever been on benefits?
> 
> i can understand 'you tax payers' getting irate when people are on the fiddle pretend to be disabled ect
> but you dont know everybodies situation how they ended up on benefits how they feel about being on benefits you are lumping everyone who has kids and who happens to be on benefits as lazy buggars that expect houndouts not everyone is like that


Not everyone no! there will ALWAYS be genuine cases! But there are many that see have kids,getting a house rent paid and doing naff all as an occupation!


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

ballybee said:


> yup....i don't qualify for either according to my local job centre as the only 2 jobs i've had one was before i was old enough to be taxed and the other job only lasted 6 weeks(xmas job) so didn't get taxed much).


Jeebus. You just made me realise I'm glad I'm not young anymore


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> but you dont know everybodies situation how they ended up on benefits how they feel about being on benefits you are lumping everyone who has kids and who happens to be on benefits as lazy buggars that expect houndouts not everyone is like that


No, if you read my post I said I passionately believe in benefits being there for those who need it. I certainly don't think everyone one benefits are lazy buggars, whether they have children or not. What I hate is the attitude that they can't be bothered to work because they get as much on benefits.

I have been a single mother for most of my children's life when my ex husband walked out leaving me with (unknown to me) debts and I nearly lost my home. I worked hard, and yes, sometimes I would have been better off on benefits but I brought those children into the world and they were my responsibility to continue bringing them up. It wasn't easy and and still isn't even though they are both at university now. I fully understand the difficulties. It is the attitudes I have a problem with. And there are far too many who have that attitude.


----------



## HelloKittyHannah (Nov 18, 2010)

I think it's a great idea.
I've been on benefits as a single Mum up until a couple of months ago and never understood why people weren't forced to come off them once their child was in school full time 
I've seen people abusing the system (someone suggested I should have another child to get another 5 years without work )
I obviously COULD have worked before now, but I never planned to be a single Mum and I'll be damned if I was going to be robbed of my childrens early years by sticking them with a childminder just because my ex cheated on me, they spend so much time in school as it is 

But anyway, send the dossers to work and HOPEFULLY they will use any saved money to help those that really need it (though most likely it'll be spent on £25 light bulbs and political banquets that cost £1000 a head  )


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

classixuk said:


> Perhaps they're all Catholics?


How fecking dare you? I'm from a *huge* family and my dad has paid more in taxes than most people have ever earned. The biggest lesson I learned from my fertile catholic parents was that you pay your own way in life. Watch your mouth.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

rocco33 said:


> No, if you read my post I said I passionately believe in benefits being there for those who need it. I certainly don't think everyone one benefits are lazy buggars, whether they have children or not. What I hate is the attitude that they can't be bothered to work because they get as much on benefits.
> 
> I have been a single mother for most of my children's life when my ex husband walked out leaving me with (unknown to me) debts and I nearly lost my home. I worked hard, and yes, sometimes I would have been better off on benefits but I brought those children into the world and they were my responsibility to continue bringing them up. It wasn't easy and and still isn't even though they are both at university now. I fully understand the difficulties. It is the attitudes I have a problem with. And there are far too many who have that attitude.


THIS^^^

It's the ones that wanna sit on their back sides and not actually hunt for a job because life as they need it covered by the sweat of others that are the bane of the system.
Those are the ones I'd expect to see made to work.

If you're of sound body, get off your duff and earn your way.


----------



## tjk (Sep 1, 2010)

rocco33 said:


> No, if you read my post I said I passionately believe in benefits being there for those who need it. I certainly don't think everyone one benefits are lazy buggars, whether they have children or not. What I hate is the attitude that they can't be bothered to work because they get as much on benefits.
> 
> I have been a single mother for most of my children's life when my ex husband walked out leaving me with (unknown to me) debts and I nearly lost my home. I worked hard, and yes, sometimes I would have been better off on benefits but I brought those children into the world and they were my responsibility to continue bringing them up. It wasn't easy and and still isn't even though they are both at university now. I fully understand the difficulties. It is the attitudes I have a problem with. And there are far too many who have that attitude.


oh i see what you mean thanks clarifying, i also was left in your situation except i lost my home and almost the kids too im still paying off the debt five years later  ( didnt know either )

also even tho im on benefits and have alot of children i would much rather earn my money and know that I paid for this or that and to be honest i wouldnt care if i had less money as long as bills are paid kids and pets are fed thats all that matters 
i agree with the theory of the scheme just have to wait and see if it works


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

myshkin said:


> How fecking dare you? I'm from a *huge* family and my dad has paid more in taxes than most people have ever earned. The biggest lesson I learned from my fertile catholic parents was that you pay your own way in life. Watch your mouth.


You're also very sensitive.

Say 10 Hail Marys and 3 Rosaries every night for your outburst!

Bloody hell...if you're truly a Catholic you will have seen worse, such as sitting in a room with a dead body for 3 days. Lighten up.


----------



## tjk (Sep 1, 2010)

also just out of curiosity does this scheme pay for taxis or is that the old one?? i know of a bloke that is healthy no kids single no mental illness been on jsa for few years now they have got him a job STILL pay all benifits plus his cabs plus he keeps his wages now where is the sense in THAT?


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*For now i'll hold on to my thoughts and opinions.For a start i've yet to see this goverment get anything right,and i feel those that NEED the benifit system will be the very people hurt the most.*


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

Changes said:


> Do you work for FND? or any other agency that is actually dealing with getting people back to work?


He/She works for themself & has had someone doing 26 hours work a week for their benefit money, even though he has said he'll give them the job at the end.

I often wonder why people like this don't just employ the person as soon they realise that the person is suitable for the job.

I think its a bit of a power trip & a way of undervaluing others & of course theres the fact that no money is coming out of his pocket.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> It is about time this country have a government that had the guts to say enoughs enough!
> It is time to pull the plug on those that see having child after child as a free meal ticket.


I agree here 100% thats why ive always said it should be capped.


----------



## jessiegirl (Apr 24, 2009)

i agree with cameron about waiting to have kids and waiting to get married etc..... people these days just want everything now and sod the cost for later

what about us hard working singletons who dont want kids but have to pay for other peoples!! its out of order


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

jessiegirl said:


> i agree with cameron about waiting to have kids and waiting to get married etc..... people these days just want everything now and sod the cost for later
> 
> what about us hard working singletons who dont want kids but have to pay for other peoples!! its out of order


I agree with you, you pay into the education system the nhs that enables children to 16 free prescriptions and then you are expected to contribute to the parents as well without any choice, i can understand the frustration of many like you.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

classixuk said:


> You're also very sensitive.
> 
> Say 10 Hail Marys and 3 Rosaries every night for your outburst!
> 
> Bloody hell...*if you're truly a Catholic* you will have seen worse, such as sitting in a room with a dead body for 3 days. Lighten up.


I'm not. My parents are. And I object to the way you've linked large families, and therefore my parents to lazy people who expect the state to fund their many offspring. So while you're busy insulting my hard working parents with your lazy assumptions I won't be lightening up.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

myshkin said:


> I'm not. My parents are. And I object to the way you've linked large families, and therefore my parents to lazy people who expect the state to fund their many offspring. So while you're busy insulting my hard working parents with your lazy assumptions I won't be lightening up.


I am RC...so are mine..and majority of Gibraltar..what it has to do with living on benefits?
I never did ..none of mine either?

By the way..I have large family and I am stay-at-home mum at the moment....

And as I am on my way to my Sunday mass..will say a little prayer on intention of us all ...


----------



## Scrubs (Jun 11, 2011)

Simples, bring back National Service.


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

classixuk said:


> You're also very sensitive.
> 
> Say 10 Hail Marys and 3 Rosaries every night for your outburst!
> 
> Bloody hell...if you're truly a Catholic you will have seen worse, such as sitting in a room with a dead body for 3 days. Lighten up.


I know I said I was done with this thread but... Who the hell do you think you are!! How dare you speak like this to another member of these forums, you have NO Right...


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

There is a mass swave of unemployed people that I would never want within 100 meters of me never mind to employ. Good luck to those that don't fit in to this category but I can't see the scheme being massively successful for the many.


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

Roobster2010 said:


> He/She works for themselves & has had someone doing 26 hours work a week for their benefit money, even though he has said he'll give them the job at the end.
> 
> I often wonder why people like this don't just employ the person as soon they realise that the person is suitable for the job.
> 
> I think its a bit of a power trip & a way of undervaluing others & of course there's the fact that no money is coming out of his pocket.


I totally agree with you.  x


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Scrubs said:


> Simples, bring back National Service.


You seriously wannagive em guns to play with


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> I agree with you, you pay into the education system the nhs that enables children to 16 free prescriptions and then you are expected to contribute to the parents as well without any choice, i can understand the frustration of many like you.


Don't forget schooling! And medical treatment besides the prescriptions, and in many of these cases the cost of support (by that I mean support to make sure you aredoing things right NOT finacial support)
then theres the family allowance andwhat other grants they chuck at you nowadays. And the subsidised child care , free school meals,etc etc etc -oh dear! wish I'd never started this one!!


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Don't forget schooling! And medical treatment besides the prescriptions, and in many of these cases the cost of support (by that I mean support to make sure you aredoing things right NOT finacial support)
> then theres the family allowance andwhat other grants they chuck at you nowadays. And the subsidised child care , free school meals,etc etc etc -oh dear! wish I'd never started this one!!


Cant blame some of em when you look what a lucrative business having half a dozen kids is.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> Cant blame some of em when you look what a lucrative business having half a dozen kids is.


Shame I am beyond child bearing age May have been tempted to join em Not on your bloody life!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

When you include rent being paid, council tax being paid and other allowances, they can easily get handouts which total more than the average wage of around £25,000 a year.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

rocco33 said:


> When you include rent being paid, council tax being paid and other allowances, they can easily get handouts which total more than the average wage of around £25,000 a year.


I havent read the whole thread.

It makes me angry just to think about lazy people getting handouts.. esp the 'disabled' .... you know the ones.. i have a bad back i cant work... but i can clean my car like a contortionist and get into positions a 21year old couldnt and lift heavy objects


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

Scrubs said:


> Simples, bring back National Service.


Some unemployed people are in their 50's. Some are single mothers. Are you suggesting that national service is the answer for them? 
As for the youngsters. Why should we send our kids out to do national service, whilst millions of foreigners are given free licence to dip in and out of the country, taking local jobs as they please? As for community service, it is a punishment for criminals, so what sense would there be in making it mandatory for youngsters?


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Shame I am beyond child bearing age May have been tempted to join em Not on your bloody life!


Wouldnt do for me either.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Don't forget schooling! And medical treatment besides the prescriptions, and in many of these cases the cost of support (by that I mean support to make sure you aredoing things right NOT finacial support)
> then theres the family allowance andwhat other grants they chuck at you nowadays. And the subsidised child care , free school meals,etc etc etc -oh dear! wish I'd never started this one!!


I'm thinking that you must be particularly rich being that you are paying for all these peoples children.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> Wouldnt do for me either.


BUT!! you can see why there are SOME that do it! BUT spose you cannot blame thementirely - thegovernment hasalot to answer to for allowing it for so long!

ANYWAY!!! I have a perfect solution - They should be made to job share - take two families - you know the sort - woman never worked, supposedly the father of the children does not live with her (yeah right - but thats another thread) they should be teamed up with an 'equal family' and made to job share - one person working whilst the other provide the child care and visa versa - doing the most tedious manual jobs if need be! AND NO benifits if they fail to show!  And seeing as many of these families have absent fathers (pull the other one) they could be made to house share too

Now I bet that suggestion has made me real popular!! NOT!


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

I think people view people who claim benefits in a very general way... which isnt fair imo. Yes you have the lazy scroungers who will claim every penny they can get and just dont want to get off their backsides to work.
Then you have people who have worked from the day they have left school, maybe even before and paid their taxes just like everyone else. 
The benefit system is for people who need it, thats what we ALL pay taxes for.
its been there fro us when we needed it in the past and im greatfull it was there.
Its really unfair to even suggest these people should do national service, most of them are only using the benefit system to be able to survive until they manage to get work.


----------



## hope (May 25, 2011)

david camron is the biggest idiot born and god know why people voted for him in the first place !


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> BUT!! you can see why there are SOME that do it! BUT spose you cannot blame thementirely - thegovernment hasalot to answer to for allowing it for so long!
> 
> ANYWAY!!! I have a perfect solution - They should be made to job share - take two families - you know the sort - woman never worked, supposedly the father of the children does not live with her (yeah right - but thats another thread) they should be teamed up with an 'equal family' and made to job share - one person working whilst the other provide the child care and visa versa - doing the most tedious manual jobs if need be! AND NO benifits if they fail to show!  And seeing as many of these families have absent fathers (pull the other one) they could be made to house share too
> 
> Now I bet that suggestion has made me real popular!! NOT!


What do you do?  x


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

It really does annoy me how and why all these families get so much money yet some, the more genuine families that need help through no fault of their own fail.
My brother could not claim a penny or any help with child care been a single parent because he owned his own house was one of the reasons, these people must know something others dont i reall dont get it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

morsel said:


> I'm thinking that you must be particularly rich being that you are paying for all these peoples children.


Not rich by a long chalk! Stupid maybe!
But collectively EVERYONE who works contributes towards 'those' children! SOME of those people may want to have children themselves but have not done so because they cannot afford too, or are saving for the day when they do.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> BUT!! you can see why there are SOME that do it! BUT spose you cannot blame thementirely - thegovernment hasalot to answer to for allowing it for so long!
> 
> ANYWAY!!! I have a perfect solution - They should be made to job share - take two families - you know the sort - woman never worked, supposedly the father of the children does not live with her (yeah right - but thats another thread) they should be teamed up with an 'equal family' and made to job share - one person working whilst the other provide the child care and visa versa - doing the most tedious manual jobs if need be! AND NO benifits if they fail to show!  And seeing as many of these families have absent fathers (pull the other one) they could be made to house share too
> 
> Now I bet that suggestion has made me real popular!! NOT!


There's people playing football and getting more money put in to their bank account each week than people on benefits will ever see in their whole lifes etc. etc. Super rich get away with murder... The system deserves to be screwed, as much as possible. The poor and less fortunate of this country being brought up brainwashed by the state, carrying the burden of guilt for a monarchists history of abuse against humanity feeling responsible whilst having their livelyhoods and industries pulled from under their feet. The state doesn't have real jobs to offer. It's a con. A way of slowly torturing the less fortunate by keeping them down. Gives people something to focus on, whilst the Eaton boys concentrate on implementing policies which will supress the masses. I remember, in the last conservative government, when Kenneth Clarke, then education secratary, said that he manipulates the education system, so as to provide 'sausage for the factories'.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Not rich by a long chalk! Stupid maybe!
> But collectively EVERYONE who works contributes towards 'those' children! SOME of those people may want to have children themselves but have not done so because they cannot afford too, or are saving for the day when they do.


I don't think that what the average person pays in, pays for it. The reality is that if people want them to seek work then it's your jobs that they will have to compete for because there is not that much work going. It's just the nature of things. If there was no crime then their would be no need for police etc. If everyone was healthy.. If people didn't create waste or drop litter etc. If everybody that is unemployed found work then those whose jobs relied on unemployement would become unemployed. Some people are just better kept out of employment. Plus we are all going to die.


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

morsel said:


> There's people playing football and getting more money put in to their bank account each week than people on benefits will ever see in their whole lifes etc. etc. Super rich get away with murder... The system deserves to be screwed, as much as possible. The poor and less fortunate of this country being brought up brainwashed by the state, carrying the burden of guilt for a monarchists history of abuse against humanity feeling responsible whilst having their livelyhoods and industries pulled from under their feet. The state doesn't have real jobs to offer. It's a con. A way of slowly torturing the less fortunate by keeping them down. Gives people something to focus on, whilst the Eaton boys concentrate on implementing policies which will supress the masses. I remember, in the last conservative government, when Kenneth Clarke, then education secratary, said that he manipulates the education system, so as to provide 'sausage for the factories'.


It seems to me that most people love to believe what they are told by the media, and whilst via the media we are set against each other no one questions the amount spent on the bonuses given to the bankers, no one questions the amount spent on being involved in other peoples wars no one questions anything any more, it is far easier to blame single parents, the jobless, immigration the vulnerable it is far easier to turn against each other.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

I certainly think footballers and the like get too much money, but they do get out of bed and do something for it cant say that about the ones scrounging out of the system.
I really dont know what system would work or work well, but something has to be done to change the mind set of some of these youngsters because they they must think the world owes them a living.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

morsel said:


> There's people playing football and getting more money put in to their bank account each week than people on benefits will ever see in their whole lifes etc. etc. Super rich get away with murder... The system deserves to be screwed, as much as possible. The poor and less fortunate of this country being brought up brainwashed by the state, carrying the burden of guilt for a monarchists history of abuse against humanity feeling responsible whilst having their livelyhoods and industries pulled from under their feet. The state doesn't have real jobs to offer. It's a con. A way of slowly torturing the less fortunate by keeping them down. Gives people something to focus on, whilst the Eaton boys concentrate on implementing policies which will supress the masses. I remember, in the last conservative government, when Kenneth Clarke, then education secratary, said that he manipulates the education system, so as to provide 'sausage for the factories'.


Erm! So this i really a gripe about the government then right! As long as I have a holeis my ar*e there will never be a govenemnt in power that will please EVERYONE! never!

But anyone has to be blind if they fail to see that there are those in society who have may a career out of doing naff all! Leaving school dropping kiddy after kiddy and sitting on their jacksys accepting all the handouts they can get! They know how to work the system, the one that winds me up the most is the lastest 'naughty child syndrome' least thats what I call it - many of you may have a posh medical name for it! But hey, guess what - it gives em an extra thirty quid a week! so well done whoever dreampt that one up!

BUT!! that said - we have to blame ALL the govenments for getting us into this state, The lack of social Housing, the cost of living, low paid jobs the cost of child care it does make it nigh on impossible for and finanially insane for someof the lower paid to even dream of getting onto the employment ladder!

T'is the old folk I feel sorry for - then that have worked bloody hard all their lives, them scroungers are stealing from then too !

That said - I am not completely heartless- there will ALWAYS be genuine cases. And I feel real sorry for the honest hard working families who struggle on by on mimimum wage without a cat in hells chance of ever moving forward! Them are thefolk that need help!


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> I certainly think footballers and the like get too much money, but they do get out of bed and do something for it cant say that about the ones scrounging out of the system.
> I really dont know what system would work or work well, but something has to be done to change the mind set of some of these youngsters because they they must think the world owes them a living.


THe state owes them a living.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> I certainly think footballers and the like get too much money, but they do get out of bed and do something for it cant say that about the ones scrounging out of the system.
> I really dont know what system would work or work well, but something has to be done to change the mind set of some of these youngsters because they they must think the world owes them a living.


And we are not paying the footballers their wages - and they arepaying their taxes!


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

hope said:


> david camron is the biggest idiot born and god know why people voted for him in the first place !


Because the alternative was a morose Scot with the personality of a house brick, who nobody voted as prime minister in the first place.

Makes no difference anyway...there is no democracy...we can't vote for who we want...we have to vote for who *THEY* want.The parties pick their cronies,not the people.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Not rich by a long chalk! Stupid maybe!
> But collectively EVERYONE who works contributes towards 'those' children! SOME of those people may want to have children themselves but have not done so because they cannot afford too, or are saving for the day when they do.


'Those' children could become your doctor, nurse, carer etc etc


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Changes said:


> It seems to me that most people love to believe what they are told by the media, and whilst via the media we are set against each other no one questions the amount spent on the bonuses given to the bankers, no one questions the amount spent on being involved in other peoples wars no one questions anything any more, it is far easier to blame single parents, the jobless, immigration the vulnerable it is far easier to turn against each other.


Hell no! I am not going by the papers! I seldom buy em - what we spend on wars need bringing to heel - especially when we cannot even affort to kit out our soilders properly! Discusting, and the banks should be made to pay back every penny theyhave had of tax payers money before they even think of a bonus!


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

harley bear said:


> 'Those' children could become your doctor, nurse, carer etc etc


So that excuses there parents having to provide for them then does it?
Everyone can go breed to their hearts content without giving a sh*te who pays for them on the assumption that one day they may drop one who goes on to be prime minister!


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

morsel said:


> THe state owes them a living.


This is the mind set ime talking about no one owes anyone anything, we owe it to ourselves and our children to do our best and if the best someone can do is go down the dole office with a stream of kids and drag all they can out of them, then something has to be done. Ime not talking about the genuine ones here and its usually the genuine ones that get very little or nothing at all, i can only speak from 1 member of my family, my brother as a single parent, worked from leaving school, because believe it or not thats what was done then, because he owned his own home no one could give him any help at all, but if he finished work, sold the house, gifted the money, they pay unemployment benefit and the rent on the house, he turned it down, that situation wouldnt be turned down these days by most of em, what a meal ticket ey.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

classixuk said:


> There seems to be a lot of discussion on the news comments sections today about whether this will work, but I think it will. The reason for that is for the last 3 weeks we've had a young lady sent to us by the job centre to work for her benefits (she does 26 hours a week for 8 weeks). I'm so impressed with her that I think I will be offering her a full time job next month. It just seems that she hasn't really been given a chance before now.
> 
> What are your thoughts on the new benefit reforms?


So ......... have I understood this correctly? You had a girl sent to you under the _old system_ who turned out to be excellent, and because of this you think the _new system_ will work? I'm not following your logic here - are you saying that the new system is going to mirror the old system? In which case, why throw money at private firms to do what is already being done? Or are you saying that the new system is vastly different - in which case, how can you use an example from the old system to assume the new system will be better? I'm confused .....


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> So that excuses there parents having to provide for them then does it?
> Everyone can go breed to their hearts content without giving a sh*te who pays for them on the assumption that one day they may drop one who goes on to be prime minister!


Keep your wig on.

These poor kids dont ask to be born or brought up on benefits. But one day these kids will be paying taxes themselves so i really dont have a problem with taxes going towards them.
Its the lazy barsteward parents that i have something against.


----------



## MissShelley (May 9, 2010)

morsel said:


> THe state owes them a living.


The state owes them nothing! If you want something in life, you have to get up off your ar5e and work for it and not have handed to you on a plate and that's part of the issue. And that is something government has to advocate.

My lad is going to sixth form, he gets no government help, no EMA, so he's having to fund it himself with the wages from his part time job, he's trying to better himself with A levels, imagine if he had the "state owes me a living" mindset, doesn't seem fair when others make raping the state a full time occupation. Nope I think it's a fab idea! And I know of a few people who could do with such a reality check.

When I broke my ankle, I couldn't claim anything. Despite having worked since leaving school.... I ended up going back to work just two days a week while I had my leg in plaster, could of easily used the "I can't" Excuse, for many there is no such thing as a can't. Some have no choice.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Erm! So this i really a gripe about the government then right! As long as I have a holeis my ar*e there will never be a govenemnt in power that will please EVERYONE! never!
> 
> But anyone has to be blind if they fail to see that there are those in society who have may a career out of doing naff all! Leaving school dropping kiddy after kiddy and sitting on their jacksys accepting all the handouts they can get! They know how to work the system, the one that winds me up the most is the lastest 'naughty child syndrome' least thats what I call it - many of you may have a posh medical name for it! But hey, guess what - it gives em an extra thirty quid a week! so well done whoever dreampt that one up!
> 
> ...


I agree with bits of what you say. To my mind, even if people do not want to work and would prefer to live lower quality lifes, or feel they need drugs to be happy etc. then I would question their health and capacity to cope with life. I would not deem them simply 'lazy'. And, yes, handicaps suffered by children have been renamed and blurred somewhat but thats not the fault of the unemployed. It's the fault of those in trusted positions of work that are trying to make a name for themselves or often ridding themselves of the responsibility for their teaching or other proffessional failiures and so improving their carreer prospects by clouding their own real ability. Alot of the parents subject to this kind of system, are not trying to pull a fast one but have been conditioned to think that way through a system that says the state knows what is best for their children and that this should not be questioned. The majority don't question it and as 'changes' said, they believe what they are told.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

harley bear said:


> Keep your wig on.
> 
> These poor kids dont ask to be born or brought up on benefits. But one day these kids will be paying taxes themselves so i really dont have a problem with taxes going towards them.
> Its the lazy barsteward parents that i have something against.


Erm! it is not the kids I am moaning about! Sounds like we COULD be singing off the same hymn sheet! It is the parents that see having babies as a meal ticket for life that winds me up! Expecting the rest of the country to pay for em!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

poohdog said:


> Because the alternative was a morose Scot with the personality of a house brick, who nobody voted as prime minister in the first place.
> .


But only 20% of _people who voted_ - not even 20% of people in the country - voted for Cameron as Prime Minister.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> And we are not paying the footballers their wages - and they arepaying their taxes!


Exactly, i think they are paid way too much but its costing us nothing so hey ho, good luck to em.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Changes said:


> It seems to me that most people love to believe what they are told by the media, and whilst via the media we are set against each other no one questions the amount spent on the bonuses given to the bankers, no one questions the amount spent on being involved in other peoples wars no one questions anything any more, it is far easier to blame single parents, the jobless, immigration the vulnerable it is far easier to turn against each other.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

harley bear said:


> 'Those' children could become your doctor, nurse, carer etc etc


But its still not up to us to keep them until that time, mine and thousnads of more could have been but to get them there came from me not someone else through not having a choice.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Bandy said:


>


Like your'clap' Bandy!
Just don't you get giving me any!


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Erm! it is not the kids I am moaning about! Sounds like we COULD be singing off the same hymn sheet! It is the parents that see having babies as a meal ticket for life that winds me up! Expecting the rest of the country to pay for em!


Yeah seems so.
The trouble with this country is there are too many idle barstewards and because of that we are being flooded with immigrants who are willing to do more work for less money. 
What they should be doing with people with a ton of kids is after a few months taking away their benefits and just making them live on the child tax creds! 
And what REALLY REALLY gets my fooking goat is people who 
are 'disabled' who are faking it and their partner is fit for work and cant be arsed and breed dogs and sell drugs instead


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> This is the mind set ime talking about no one owes anyone anything, we owe it to ourselves and our children to do our best and if the best someone can do is go down the dole office with a stream of kids and drag all they can out of them, then something has to be done. Ime not talking about the genuine ones here and its usually the genuine ones that get very little or nothing at all, i can only speak from 1 member of my family, my brother as a single parent, worked from leaving school, because believe it or not thats what was done then, because he owned his own home no one could give him any help at all, but if he finished work, sold the house, gifted the money, they pay unemployment benefit and the rent on the house, he turned it down, that situation wouldnt be turned down these days by most of em, what a meal ticket ey.


Whole mining communities were destroyed for conservative political gain and reduced to being the 'scroungers' that people are now condeming. They risked their lifes to contribute for a relatively low income and the state destroyed their communities and their morale. Now, the same conservatives want them to take the brunt of responsibility. So, yes, the state owes them a living. 
They broke their legs and then gave them a crutch to walk. Now they want to break their legs again.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Bandy said:


>


Thats so fitting to this debate, thats what the bloody scroungers do when theyve just popped out another kid and just left the benefits office.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

morsel said:


> Whole mining communities were destroyed for conservative political gain and reduced to being the 'scroungers' that people are now condeming. They risked their lifes to contribute for a relatively low income and the state destroyed their communities and their morale. Now, the same conservatives want them to take the brunt of responsibility. So, yes, the state owes them a living.
> They broke their legs and then gave them a crutch to walk. Now they want to break their legs again.


The miner wern't scrougers! they pulled together! some today could do with their sense of community spirit!


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> Thats so fitting to this debate, thats what the bloody scroungers do when theyve just popped out another kid and just left the benefits office.


but it isn't really.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> The miner wern't scrougers! they pulled together! some today could do with their sense of community spirit!


It's these sort of communities, whose younger generation now engage in the kind of activities that make you angry. Communities which have been neglected or bullied in to submission.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

morsel said:


> It's these sort of communities, whose younger generation now engage in the kind of activities that make you angry. Communities which have been neglected or bullied in to submission.


Nope! not at all - Many of the miners turned their hands in other directions! as did the foundry workers! This problem is NOT exclusive to 'such' communities!


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

morsel said:


> Whole mining communities were destroyed for conservative political gain and reduced to being the 'scroungers' that people are now condeming. They risked their lifes to contribute for a relatively low income and the state destroyed their communities and their morale. Now, the same conservatives want them to take the brunt of responsibility. So, yes, the state owes them a living.
> They broke their legs and then gave them a crutch to walk. Now they want to break their legs again.


So thats one of the secrets why some get it all, "my dad was a miner" dont make me laugh.
Oh no, no you cant blame the miners strike for how things are today, i was part of a mining family not directly myself years ago so was my husband and a lot of my friends we have all worked, still do and have children that do, one of the reasons why they are like they are today is like yourself theres always someone to justify this sort of behaviour and make it ok to scrounge get all they can from doing very little.
The government are to blame to a point they are allowing this to happen, ime under the same government but i dont think this way and neither do thousands more, its down to the fact they are bone idle, scrougers.
The genuine ones i feel genuinely sorry for, young families working just to exist, throw a bit more their way.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> So thats one of the secrets why some get it all, "my dad was a miner" dont make me laugh.
> Oh no, no you cant blame the miners strike for how things are today, i was part of a mining family not directly myself years ago so was my husband and a lot of my friends we have all worked, still do and have children that do, one of the reasons why they are like they are today is like yourself theres always someone to justify this sort of behaviour and make it ok to scrounge get all they can from doing very little.
> The government are to blame to a point they are allowing this to happen, ime under the same government but i dont think this way and neither do thousands more, its down to the fact they are bone idle, scrougers.
> The genuine ones i feel genuinely sorry for, young families working just to exist, throw a bit more their way.


Hear Hear!
I aint spreading bandy's clap your way though!


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Hear Hear!
> I aint spreading bandy's clap your way though!


That cleared up years ago...he has lot's of new interesting infections now...


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

* Strange how when we talk about all the people on the dole we tend to aim our anger at the unmarried girls.Are'nt we forgeting their kids have fathers,why don't we start with making them pay for their kids?
I don't trust ANY tory 99% of them wouldn't help you if their lives depended on it.Their motto has always been,keep the rich rich and the poor poorer.*


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> * Strange how when we talk about all the people on the dole we tend to aim our anger at the unmarried girls.Are'nt we forgeting their kids have fathers,why don't we start with making them pay for their kids?
> I don't trust ANY tory 99% of them wouldn't help you if their lives depended on it.Their motto has always been,keep the rich rich and the poor poorer.*


Thats if they know the fathers


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> So ......... have I understood this correctly? You had a girl sent to you under the old system who turned out to be excellent, and because of this you think the new system will work? I'm not following your logic here - are you saying that the new system is going to mirror the old system? In which case, why throw money at private firms to do what is already being done? Or are you saying that the new system is vastly different - in which case, how can you use an example from the old system to assume the new system will be better? I'm confused .....


I think the idea is to do similar but make it compulsory and benefits dependant on it - the old system was voluntary - there was no compulsion.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

haeveymolly said:


> Thats if they know the fathers


*Well if they didn't know who the father was i'd tell them they are on their own.
If they want to play adult games then they would be made to act like responsible adults.*


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> Thats if they know the fathers


Awh! but! we have the Jeremy Kyle show 
But that said - there is always ONE!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Strange how when we talk about all the people on the dole we tend to aim our anger at the unmarried girls.Are'nt we forgeting their kids have fathers,why don't we start with making them pay for their kids?


Very true.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> These poor kids dont ask to be born or brought up on benefits. But one day these kids will be paying taxes themselves so i really dont have a problem with taxes going towards them.


Unfortunately, these kids are more likely to become long term benefit claimants themselves - sadly there are whole families where generations have never worked!


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> Unfortunately, these kids are more likely to become long term benefit claimants themselves - sadly there are whole families where generations have never worked!


t'is called following on in the family business


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Does anyone remember when MT was in and the schemes she had for school leavers? Here it was called SWIM.Which was nothing short of slave labour.Had no guarantee of work after people had done their 1 year training.*


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

One thing they need to be taught and that "recognising and taking 
responsibility this is something the people in question tend to struggle with, not realising what is "their" responsibility and taking responsibility for "their" own actions. It seems that its always down to everyone else and everyone elses fault.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> *Does anyone remember when MT was in and the schemes she had for school leavers? Here it was called SWIM.Which was nothing short of slave labour.Had no guarantee of work after people had done their 1 year training.*


Maggie Thatcher did the best thing any government has ever done and the worse also in the same act! She made it possible for many many familes onto the housing ladder who did not have a cat in hells chance by the sale of the council housing! And in the same stroke she put an unrecovable strain on the social housing! Another big mistake was by privatising many of our industries . But remind me - which muppet sold our gold reserves when they were rock bottom? That has to be one of the biggest crimes in politics !


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Roobster2010 said:


> He/She works for themself & has had someone doing 26 hours work a week for their benefit money, even though he has said he'll give them the job at the end.
> 
> I often wonder why people like this don't just employ the person as soon they realise that the person is suitable for the job.
> 
> I think its a bit of a power trip & a way of undervaluing others & of course theres the fact that no money is coming out of his pocket.


A power trip? LOL A way of undervaluing others? LOL

That says more about your way of thinking than mine.

Should I also sack my cleaner in case she feels 'undervalued' cleaning my boxer shorts?





myshkin said:


> I'm not. My parents are. And I object to the way you've linked large families, and therefore my parents to lazy people who expect the state to fund their many offspring. So while you're busy insulting my hard working parents with your lazy assumptions I won't be lightening up.


OMG. So you're getting offended on behalf of other people? How presumptuous of you.

Look at my avatar. Dark hair. Pale skin. The ash cross used to show up clearly every year on that little forehead! Wanna know how many aunties and uncles I have? 10. And yet you haven't even been confirmed and you get offended? 

I was asked why people already struggling to live on benefits continue churning out kids. We all know the real reasons why, and many other posters have pointed out those reasons on this very thread.

I, however, added a new, more respectable 'excuse' that they haven't thought of. If you were catholic you would know that we don't believe in contraception.

If I wanted to offend your parents I'd have said something about them personally. Stop reading into stuff that isn't there.



Changes said:


> I know I said I was done with this thread but... Who the hell do you think you are!! How dare you speak like this to another member of these forums, you have NO Right...


Who do you think YOU are? LOL. The admin? Jog on.



morsel said:


> There's people playing football and getting more money put in to their bank account each week than people on benefits will ever see in their whole lifes etc. etc. Super rich get away with murder... The system deserves to be screwed, as much as possible. The poor and less fortunate of this country being brought up brainwashed by the state, carrying the burden of guilt for a monarchists history of abuse against humanity feeling responsible whilst having their livelyhoods and industries pulled from under their feet. The state doesn't have real jobs to offer. It's a con. A way of slowly torturing the less fortunate by keeping them down. Gives people something to focus on, whilst the Eaton boys concentrate on implementing policies which will supress the masses. I remember, in the last conservative government, when Kenneth Clarke, then education secratary, said that he manipulates the education system, so as to provide 'sausage for the factories'.


Footballers don't get their money paid into their bank account by the rest of us though. They work for their money and they are paid it by their employers.

So what do footballers have to do with the benefits system?



Changes said:


> It seems to me that most people love to believe what they are told by the media, and whilst via the media we are set against each other no one questions the amount spent on the bonuses given to the bankers, no one questions the amount spent on being involved in other peoples wars no one questions anything any more, it is far easier to blame single parents, the jobless, immigration the vulnerable it is far easier to turn against each other.


Why should I question what a banker is paid in their bonus? Banking has always been a well paid job, and investment bankers have always earned more money than most people ever see in their lifetimes.

An evil dictator surpressing their people in Libya is not the reason that Joe down the road screws the system. They are two completely different things.



Spellweaver said:


> So ......... have I understood this correctly? You had a girl sent to you under the _old system_ who turned out to be excellent, and because of this you think the _new system_ will work? I'm not following your logic here - are you saying that the new system is going to mirror the old system? In which case, why throw money at private firms to do what is already being done? Or are you saying that the new system is vastly different - in which case, how can you use an example from the old system to assume the new system will be better? I'm confused .....


No. I was sent someone under the 'new' system which has now been extended.

This girl went to college full time for 2 years, however, couldn't find a job when leaving college due to lack of industry experience. She's been on the dole ever since.

This is a common problem for kids attending full time college courses, and one which I have written about on this forum before.

I wasn't looking to take anyone on, but I have a feeling I'll be creating a new job for this girl if she'd like to work with us at the end of her placement as I think she could be really good.

I took a gamble like this before on a girl about 8 years ago and she's now one of my senior managers.

My feeling is, that for the ones who are lost in the system yet sparkle when given a chance that other firms will do the same.




morsel said:


> Whole mining communities were destroyed for conservative political gain and reduced to being the 'scroungers' that people are now condeming. They risked their lifes to contribute for a relatively low income and the state destroyed their communities and their morale. Now, the same conservatives want them to take the brunt of responsibility. So, yes, the state owes them a living.
> They broke their legs and then gave them a crutch to walk. Now they want to break their legs again.


What the heck?

So 20 year old Stacy with 3 kids and another on the way is that way because of mining? There weren't even any mines operating when she was born, and if there were, I think it highly unlikely that Stacey would have applied for a job working in them.

You know something? My uncle was a miner, and he was laid off when the pits closed in Nottingham.

He and his wife opened a little market stall and sold used videos (shows how long ago it was). This grew until they ended up getting a small premises and so on. Through his example, his son learned that if you want things in life you have to work for them. His son (my cousin) carries on the legacy to this day, and whilst not in 'videos', owns 3 successful businesses in Nottingham.
He doesn't feel the state owes him a living, and neither did his dad.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> Thats so fitting to this debate, thats what the bloody scroungers do when theyve just popped out another kid and just left the benefits office.


That's what you took from her post?

Seriously?

Seems you missed the whole point...no sense faulting the blind for not being able to see I guess.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

poohdog said:


> That cleared up years ago...he has lot's of new interesting infections now...


That's just a rumor started by haters. 

Aside from obvious mental defects, I'm A ok :tongue_smilie:


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> * Strange how when we talk about all the people on the dole we tend to aim our anger at the unmarried girls.Are'nt we forgeting their kids have fathers,why don't we start with making them pay for their kids?
> I don't trust ANY tory 99% of them wouldn't help you if their lives depended on it.Their motto has always been,keep the rich rich and the poor poorer.*


I'd give this Bandy's clap if I knew how.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Bandy said:


> That's what you took from her post?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> Seems you missed the whole point...no sense faulting the blind for not being able to see I guess.


No i didnt think that what was meant at all, but thats what i meant.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

myshkin said:


> I'd give this Bandy's clap if I knew how.


Just quote my post....steal the link, add to your post and then exit outta my quote.

Simplest way I can think to help :tongue_smilie:


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> No i didnt think that what was meant at all, but thats what i meant.


Oops. 

My apologies. Seems I misread what you were saying...

I'll just go hide in the corner till people forget how thick I can be..:blink:


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Bandy said:


> Oops.
> 
> My apologies. Seems I misread what you were saying...
> 
> I'll just go hide in the corner till people forget how thick I can be..:blink:


Ha Ha no worries, turn ya face to the wall as well ..........................do you understand what i mean there, sorry:001_smile::001_smile:


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

classixuk said:


> OMG. So you're getting offended on behalf of other people? How presumptuous of you.
> 
> Look at my avatar. Dark hair. Pale skin. The ash cross used to show up clearly every year on that little forehead! Wanna know how many aunties and uncles I have? 10. And *yet you haven't even been confirmed* and you get offended?
> 
> ...


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

myshkin said:


> Wrong. I have been confirmed, I know exactly what Catholics believe in and don't, and I'm not reading anything into stuff other than what was plain for all to see - an ignorant oik making connections between large families and "scrounging" that no, doesn't offend my parents, they really don't care what you think of them, shockingly.
> You can make pathetic excuses and paint it in whatever light you want, but in the context of a discussion about how people on benefits continue to churn out babies, your remarks were pretty crass and out of order.


LOL. So you claim to know what the thinking was behind my post even better than I do? That's some claim...to know more about a post than the person who wrote it.

Peace be with you.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> Ha Ha no worries, *turn ya face to the wall *as well ..........................do you understand what i mean there, sorry:001_smile::001_smile:


long as that means I ain't about to be violated, I'm ok with that


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> Ha Ha no worries, turn ya face to the wall as well ..........................do you understand what i mean there, sorry:001_smile::001_smile:


and put a pointed hat on! preferably one with a D on it


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> and put a pointed hat on! preferably one with a D on it


Be nice you...I even apologized...


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

classixuk said:


> A power trip? LOL A way of undervaluing others? LOL
> 
> That says more about your way of thinking than mine.
> 
> ...


your flippant and ignorant response to what I was trying to say ( and the destroyed mining communities is one example) shows that your aim is to mock and ridicule and score points rather than discuss that which is a valid point even though you disagree. The point is that whole generations of families have been affected culturaly and socially by the destruction of British industry for pollitical gain and they deserved proper jobs as their sacrifice made Britain great. Instead they were left on the scrap heap whilst having the 'bling' and lavish lifestyles waved in their face. Not everyone has the ability to go in to business.
There are always scabs; Those that would favour personal gain over the welfare of the many.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

classixuk said:


> LOL. So you claim to know what the thinking was behind my post even better than I do? That's some claim...to know more about a post than the person who wrote it.
> 
> Peace be with you.


I've claimed nothing of the sort. I have taken your post on face value, and the verbal acrobatics you've performed since have done nothing to convince me that I misunderstood. I know nothing about you other than how smirkingly clever you believe you are.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Bandy said:


> long as that means I ain't about to be violated, I'm ok with that


 oh no certainly not


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Bandy said:


> Be nice you...I even apologized...


AWWW you poor thing, you can come back out and play now.:blink:


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Does anyone besides me see what's going on here?
The infighting, amongst ourselves over issues that are in place...and not by accident?

Rather, I think instead of us getting side tracked by the very plan laid for the gain of a few, shed the light on THEM...


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

morsel said:


> your flippant and ignorant response to what I was trying to say ( and the destroyed mining communities is one example) shows that your aim is to mock and ridicule and score points rather than discuss that which is a valid point even though you disagree. The point is that whole generations of families have been affected culturaly and socially by the destruction of British industry for pollitical gain and they deserved proper jobs as their sacrifice made Britain great. Instead they were left on the scrap heap whilst having the 'bling' and lavish lifestyles waved in their face. Not everyone has the ability to go in to business.
> There are always scabs; Those that would favour personal gain over the welfare of the many.


Sorry but i dont realy get why or what the miners strike has anything to do with the benefit scroungers of today, why they have the mentality they do that its someone elses responsibility to go to work to keep them and their children.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

morsel said:


> your flippant and ignorant response to what I was trying to say ( and the destroyed mining communities is one example) shows that your aim is to mock and ridicule and score points rather than discuss that which is a valid point even though you disagree. The point is that whole generations of families have been affected culturaly and socially by the destruction of British industry for pollitical gain and they deserved proper jobs as their sacrifice made Britain great. Instead they were left on the scrap heap whilst having the 'bling' and lavish lifestyles waved in their face. Not everyone has the ability to go in to business.
> There are always scabs; Those that would favour personal gain over the welfare of the many.


I don't think there are many on this planet who would not prefer personal gain - but I fail to see why it has to be against the welfare of many! People who start their own businesses work bloody hard! They get no overtime paid ,no holiday pay, no benifits, they are lucky to get a day off a month when they start! and very often they work for less they the minimum rate! SOMETIMES these businesses take off! You could say no pain no gain - or then again you get out what you put in!

And for you info - there are many needy cases , there through no fault of their own whom I would willingly give too! But there are equal as many , there because they choose to be who I would not give one single brass farthing too.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> Sorry but i dont realy get why or what the miners strike has anything to do with the benefit scroungers of today, why they have the mentality they do that its someone elses responsibility to go to work to keep them and their children.


Did not several of those miners start up with small business's when they got their payouts! Miners have never been frightened of hard work ,and have high morals! don't know who these miners are that morsel keeps banging on about! YEP! the striking miners had it hard! but so did many!


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

And too add! Many miners did NOT want their sons to go down the mines either!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> AWWW you poor thing, you can come back out and play now.:blink:


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> AWWW you poor thing, you can come back out and play now.:blink:


no he can't! his hats not big enough!


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

morsel said:


> your flippant and ignorant response to what I was trying to say ( and the destroyed mining communities is one example) shows that your aim is to mock and ridicule and score points rather than discuss that which is a valid point even though you disagree. The point is that whole generations of families have been affected culturaly and socially by the destruction of British industry for pollitical gain and they deserved proper jobs as their sacrifice made Britain great. Instead they were left on the scrap heap whilst having the 'bling' and lavish lifestyles waved in their face. Not everyone has the ability to go in to business.
> There are always scabs; Those that would favour personal gain over the welfare of the many.


I don't need to mock, ridicule or score points.

I'm up for discussion...I started the thread for goodness sake.

I just don't accept that whole generations of families have been affected culturally and socially by the destruction of British industry. What were the alternatives? Keep making cars at a loss? Keep burning coal in our homes and polluting the atmosphere? 
Life, and technology, moves forward. We need to adapt.



myshkin said:


> I've claimed nothing of the sort. I have taken your post on face value, and the verbal acrobatics you've performed since have done nothing to convince me that I misunderstood. I know nothing about you other than how smirkingly clever you believe you are.


Exactly. You know nothing about me.

I stated my intentions and therefore, in the absence of any other knowledge about me, you should accept it and we'll move on.

Peace be with you.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> no he can't! his hats not big enough!


You sayin I gotta big head?


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Bandy said:


> Does anyone besides me see what's going on here?
> The infighting, amongst ourselves over issues that are in place...and not by accident?
> 
> Rather, I think instead of us getting side tracked by the very plan laid for the gain of a few, shed the light on THEM...


I ain't fighting! YET I am still warming up!


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Bandy said:


> You sayin I gotta big head?


Nope! I was saying the D weren't big enuff! we need to see it across the pond


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> I ain't fighting! YET I am still warming up!


LOL.

We should think ourselves lucky. If Bandy started fighting, many on here would probably faint with fright. I reckon there's a true warrior behind those ringmaster eyes.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

classixuk said:


> LOL.
> 
> We should think ourselves lucky. If Bandy started fighting, many on here would probably faint with fright. I reckon there's a true warrior behind those ringmaster eyes.


butI knows how to keep him sweet


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> LOL.
> 
> We should think ourselves lucky. If Bandy started fighting, many on here would probably faint with fright. I reckon there's a true warrior behind those ringmaster eyes.


I used to be a bastard..and on one of my old sites still am ...but only when attacked.

There was a time when making people have to go out and buy new key boards after a few rounds with me was great fun. But, after looking around a bit and being able to count the real friends on one hand with 5 fingers left over, it made me realize just how empty that is.

These days, I'd rather be known as a lover...not a fighter. :tongue_smilie:


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

classixuk said:


> Exactly. You know nothing about me.
> 
> *I stated my intentions* and therefore, in the absence of any other knowledge about me, you should accept it and we'll move on.
> 
> Peace be with you.


Erm, no. No you didn't, certainly not until much later. Your immediate response was that old chestnut which the slight of brain always fall back on when they've been offensive, which is that everyone should "lighten up". I see what you did there, how cunning, to make it my fault because I have no sense of humour. I wish I could keep up with the intellectual twists and turns of this debate 

So, yes, we can move on all right. But I won't be accepting it, regardless of what you think I should do.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

classixuk said:


> LOL.
> 
> We should think ourselves lucky. If Bandy started fighting, many on here would probably faint with fright. I reckon there's a true warrior behind those ringmaster eyes.


Tried to pick a fight with me earlier  saw the error of his ways tho and ended up in the corner


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

God someones going on a bit call THE WARRIOR!!!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> Tried to pick a fight with me earlier  saw the error of his ways tho and ended up in the corner


But I took my Xbox with me...self imposed exile has its perks. :tongue_smilie:


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

myshkin said:


> Erm, no. No you didn't, certainly not until much later. Your immediate response was that old chestnut which the slight of brain always fall back on when they've been offensive, which is that everyone should "lighten up". I see what you did there, how cunning, to make it my fault because I have no sense of humour. I wish I could keep up with the intellectual twists and turns of this debate
> 
> So, yes, we can move on all right. But I won't be accepting it, regardless of what you think I should do.


Whatever...you're wrong. Take it from me. The original poster. I know what I meant.

Read into it what you like and feel however you like about it. You obviously do anyway.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Bandy said:


> I used to be a bastard..and on one of my old sites still am ...but only when attacked.
> 
> There was a time when making people have to go out and buy new key boards after a few rounds with me was great fun. But, after looking around a bit and being able to count the real friends on one hand with 5 fingers left over, it made me realize just how empty that is.
> 
> These days, I'd rather be known as a lover...not a fighter. :tongue_smilie:


LOL! That made me laugh!


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Going back to the original question about whether this "welfare to work" will work:

There needs to be a wide range of employers who are willing to take candidates on and not just the ones that have won contracts by giving empty promises.

It needs to be all over UK and not heavily concentrated in just a few areas.

The employers themselves need to be screened so that any candidate is given the right training and the same opportunities and to be treated fairly if any vacancies do arise. As it can be open to abuse where a candidate is just used to fill a gap in the employers workforce and does not gain anything.

Therefore they should be a set requirement that all employers must abide by for each Jobcentre candidate.

Therefore some independent monitoring must be maintained.

However there are only so many new employees that a company can take on. So realistically the chances of securing employment with the company sent to for training will be small.

What the candidate will gain would be work based skills and ethics and motivation and confidence building. 
Also if up to standard then a reference too.


To be honest the "welfare to work" is no different to the old New Deal whereby the long term unemployed had to go on work placements for up to 13 weeks.


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> Going back to the original question about whether this "welfare to work" will work:
> 
> There needs to be a wide range of employers who are willing to take candidates on and not just the ones that have won contracts by giving empty promises.
> 
> ...


I can remember on the old, old new deal (that's a tongue twister LOL), we were given £60 a week towards a person's wage for the first 6 months of employment if we took them on.

I do prefer the new system where the person gets a chance to have work experience and check different occupations out without real commitment per se. It's easier for the employer and the candidate to check each other out.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> LOL! That made me laugh!


Truth is stranger than fiction....and all that..


----------



## Jonesey (Dec 30, 2010)

Well obviously I don't live in the same country so my opinion may not mean shite to you guys. 

Ontario brought in legislature to get people off welfare and working in the late 90's. It's not bad, there are less that live on welfare alone, but then again the percentage of working poor has increased greatly. There are also the usual complaints against immigrants and refugees that get a lot handed to them even though many arrive with degrees and skills that aren't recognized by our government or Canadian companies, ie midwives and nurses working as health care aids etc..

IMO we have changed our way of life irrevocably over the last 30yrs and we can't go back. The Walmart bastards started it, our greed fueled it and then all kinds of companies we never thought would up and jumped on the bandwagon. That's why nothing is made here anymore and few things are made really well. Clothing is often crap, appliances that could last you 15yrs now last 2 if you're lucky. But hey we want lots of stuff and we want it cheap. If it breaks down wth you can throw it out and get a new one. When you call up for technical service and half an hour on hold till you're talking to someone in India with a heavy accent? Gee the computer was such a great deal wasn't it. The free trade agreement has cost everybody.

Not only that, but (just for example) you can go on about coal smoke polluting and how you're not doing it anymore, but in China, India and other countries that are producing most of our 'stuff' now there are no environmental laws. I saw the remake of 'The Karate Kid' and there was a scene in it where they can't figure out how to get hot water in their shower and Jackie Chan shows them the switch and then goes on to say 'if you want to save the earth you should have these in America' or something like that and I *LMAO*. There are cities in China that don't have sunlight anymore because of all the pollution. You think that air doesn't circulate around the whole world? They've set the clock back on pollution control by a hundred years or more. What we do to help our environments has less impact on the world at large when you have giant fecking nations destroying theirs twice as fast.

Anyway I could go on and on and on till you want to claw your eyes out and have already gone way way off topic, but in the end I fear for my children in their adulthood and what the world will be like in another 20yrs.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Jonesey said:


> The free trade agreement has cost everybody.
> 
> Anyway I could go on and on and on till you want to claw your eyes out and have already gone way way off topic, but in the end I fear for my children in their adulthood and what the world will be like in another 20yrs.


You actually get it...

I like you.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

I recon these people who use the tax pot as a personal bank account should have all benefits taken away (if they have no kids) and given vouchers to pay for food and essentials they will soon be off their arses when they have no money for ****,booze and other luxuries.


----------



## poohdog (May 16, 2010)

Jonesey said:


> Well obviously I don't live in the same country so my opinion may not mean shite to you guys.
> 
> IMO we have changed our way of life irrevocably over the last 30yrs and we can't go back. *The Walmart bastards started it*, our greed fueled it and then all kinds of companies we never thought would up and jumped on the bandwagon. That's why nothing is made here anymore and few things are made really well. Clothing is often crap, appliances that could last you 15yrs now last 2 if you're lucky. But hey we want lots of stuff and we want it cheap. If it breaks down with you can throw it out and get a new one. When you call up for technical service and half an hour on hold till you're talking to someone in India with a heavy accent? Gee the computer was such a great deal wasn't it. The free trade agreement has cost everybody.


For Walmart over here read Tesco...but the majority can't see the wood for the trees and think they're wonderful.They are slowly choking the British high street and market place into bancrupcy.
Thousands of shops and gas stations have already disappeared to the giant monopolies.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Jonesey and poohdog:


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

myshkin said:


> Jonesey and poohdog:


People are gonna talk...you caught my clap.

:lol:


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

Heh....a double dose!


----------



## Changes (Mar 21, 2009)

poohdog said:


> For Walmart over here read Tesco...but the majority can't see the wood for the trees and think they're wonderful.They are slowly choking the British high street and market place into bancrupcy.
> Thousands of shops and gas stations have already disappeared to the giant monopolies.


Walmart has taken over ASDA they bought it back in 1999 I think -

Most of the larger stores and businesses here in the uk such as ASDA are now only willing to employ people on a 4 hour per week contract, some places are offering 0 hour contracts, this makes it really difficult for people who are currently unemployed to get enough hours to come off benefit.

It also means that the employers liability is greatly reduced, much less holiday pay, less sick pay, and the ability to lay people off during quiet times without consequences.


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Erm! it is not the kids I am moaning about! Sounds like we COULD be singing off the same hymn sheet! It is the parents that see having babies as a meal ticket for life that winds me up! Expecting the rest of the country to pay for em!


Do you actually believe that these parents who, by the way, were once children themselves. Grew up. got together & thought to themselves, " Oh I know, lets get together have loads of children & live together on benefits with no self respect or hope for the rest of our lives, YAY!!!!!"

REALLY??

I'm not surprised to be honest, successive governments over the years have, through economic & education systems very carefully & cleverly absolutely mastered the art of 'Divide & Rule'

I choose to think for myself


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Roobster2010 said:


> Do you actually believe that these parents who, by the way, were once children themselves. Grew up. got together & thought to themselves, " Oh I know, lets get together have loads of children & live together on benefits with no self respect or hope for the rest of our lives, YAY!!!!!"
> 
> REALLY??
> 
> ...


Sadly i work with children at 11 years old that have that attitude. Some of them bright enough to really make something of themselves, if they had different role models.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Roobster2010 said:


> Do you actually believe that these parents who, by the way, were once children themselves. Grew up. got together & thought to themselves, " Oh I know, lets get together have loads of children & live together on benefits with no self respect or hope for the rest of our lives, YAY!!!!!"
> 
> REALLY??
> 
> ...


THOUGHT to themselves to do that or were conditioned....



Can't speak to the situation in the UK other than the universal effects...but here in the US where the father of the child is made redundant because of the state picking up the tab, the effects on these kids are horrific.

Crime, drugs, lack of self respect, personal responsibility, sense of needing to have an education, gang affiliation/violence...

it;s just a nowhere road with a downward spiral.


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Roobster2010 said:


> Do you actually believe that these parents who, by the way, were once children themselves. Grew up. got together & thought to themselves, " Oh I know, lets get together have loads of children & live together on benefits with no self respect or hope for the rest of our lives, YAY!!!!!"
> 
> REALLY??
> 
> ...


Originally Posted by DoubleTrouble 
Erm! it is not the kids I am moaning about! Sounds like we COULD be singing off the same hymn sheet! It is the parents that see having babies as a meal ticket for life that winds me up! Expecting the rest of the country to pay for em!

From the quote above where exactly did I indicate that! what part of what I said did I not make clear? if you ask nicely I may spell it out for you!


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

classixuk said:


> A power trip? LOL A way of undervaluing others? LOL
> 
> That says more about your way of thinking than mine.
> 
> Should I also sack my cleaner in case she feels 'undervalued' cleaning my boxer shorts?


So you have a woman cleaning your boxer shorts & your not undervaluing her or on a power trip?? Now its my turn to LOL.

Also I notice you said nothing to my 3rd point, why don't you just employ this girl from when you know she's suitable to work for you, i.e at interview instead of you doing your own draining of of the benefits system & keeping her & possibly others on benefits while you make up your mind.


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

DoubleTrouble said:


> Originally Posted by DoubleTrouble
> Erm! it is not the kids I am moaning about! Sounds like we COULD be singing off the same hymn sheet! It is the parents that see having babies as a meal ticket for life that winds me up! Expecting the rest of the country to pay for em!
> 
> From the quote above where exactly did I indicate that! what part of what I said did I not make clear? if you ask nicely I may spell it out for you!


No dear, we are definitely not singing off the same any sheet. Please don't think* you* have to ask me anything nicely, as I said. I think for myself, now off it's getting late off you pop to bed before you give yourself a nosebleed.


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

haeveymolly said:


> Sadly i work with children at 11 years old that have that attitude. Some of them bright enough to really make something of themselves, if they had different role models.


Yip, I think you got one thing right...................................................................Sadly *you* work with children


----------



## MissShelley (May 9, 2010)

Roobster2010 said:


> Yip, I think you got one thing right...................................................................Sadly *you* work with children


Why is that sad?


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Roobster2010 said:


> No dear, we are definitely not singing off the same any sheet. Please don't think* you* have to ask me anything nicely, as I said. I think for myself, now off it's getting late off you pop to bed before you give yourself a nosebleed.


What ever makes you think I would want to ask you anything 'nicely'Doubt you would have anything in that noodle of yours that would be of interest to me! Besides - seems you have a problem engaging the brain prior to putting the gob in gear! No you toodle on up the woodenhill sunshine! the bogey man will be round soon


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

MissShelley said:


> Why is that sad?


I was curious about the same thing really.


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

DoubleTrouble said:


> What ever makes you think I would want to ask you anything 'nicely'Doubt you would have anything in that noodle of yours that would be of interest to me! Besides - seems you have a problem engaging the brain prior to putting the gob in gear! No you toodle on up the woodenhill sunshine! the bogey man will be round soon


Your obviously tired dearie, READ YOUR PREVIOUS REPLY TO ME.

Now nitey nite. I'm bored with you now


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Roobster 2010 for a newbie you are coming across as not a very nice person in your posts, you are really aggressive, think you need a chill pill!!


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Roobster2010 said:


> Your obviously tired dearie, READ YOUR PREVIOUS REPLY TO ME.
> 
> Now nitey nite. I'm bored with you now


Ya know...just a bit of friendly advice here and all...

beings that ya only have 35 posts, ya may not have gotten the "flavor" of the place...

cockiness for the sake of being a prick ain't gonna garner ya much in the way of happiness here.

advice, like anything free, can be taken or tossed..

its up to the recipient to decide what's wanted or rubbish. 

EDIT***



DoubleTrouble said:


> I did after having a sense of Deja vu! Shall just say an old thread rang a few bells!


Oh, dear..

had honestly hoped it was a misguided soul and not a troll...


----------



## Guest (Jun 12, 2011)

Roobster2010 said:


> Your obviously tired dearie, READ YOUR PREVIOUS REPLY TO ME.
> 
> Now nitey nite. I'm bored with you now


I did after having a sense of Deja vu! Shall just say an old thread rang a few bells!


----------



## MissShelley (May 9, 2010)

DoubleTrouble said:


> I did after having a sense of Deja vu! Shall just say an old thread rang a few bells!


Do you remember these?










Go for a fortune on ebay nowadays


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Roobster2010 said:


> So you have a woman cleaning your boxer shorts & your not undervaluing her or on a power trip?? Now its my turn to LOL.
> 
> Also I notice you said nothing to my 3rd point, why don't you just employ this girl from when you know she's suitable to work for you, i.e at interview instead of you doing your own draining of of the benefits system & keeping her & possibly others on benefits while you make up your mind.


Self Portrait:










Move along now.


----------



## morsel (Dec 22, 2010)

classixuk said:


> I don't need to mock, ridicule or score points.
> 
> I'm up for discussion...I started the thread for goodness sake.
> 
> ...


She just imported and stockpiled the coal at greater expense. It was a fact, whether you want to accept it or not. She sold out british oil, used the funds to prop up the benefit system and shifted people of the dole on to social security so that it looked like she hadn't created mass unemployment. Thewn, as the recession kicked in, she bought the oil back at a greater price. She didn't create better opportunity, power to the individual and economy but she conned the nation and turned united hard working communities in to areas of distrust and crime. All in the name of conservatism. Conserving the elite in society at the expense of the majority and now it's happening again. Mainly to public sector workers. Eventually people start to say up yours, I'm not falling for that one again. The system and the state screws it's citizens over and over.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

morsel said:


> Eventually people start to say up yours, I'm not falling for that one again.


I'm still waiting for that part to happen in the US...


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

morsel said:


> She just imported and stockpiled the coal at greater expense. It was a fact, whether you want to accept it or not. She sold out british oil, used the funds to prop up the benefit system and shifted people of the dole on to social security so that it looked like she hadn't created mass unemployment. Thewn, as the recession kicked in, she bought the oil back at a greater price. She didn't create better opportunity, power to the individual and economy but she conned the nation and turned united hard working communities in to areas of distrust and crime. All in the name of conservatism. Conserving the elite in society at the expense of the majority and now it's happening again. Mainly to public sector workers. Eventually people start to say up yours, I'm not falling for that one again. The system and the state screws it's citizens over and over.


She didn't just import and stockpile the coal. If you remember, she gave the unions their wage rises in the form of lots of overtime, and they happily mined away producing tons and tons of coal...more than the country actually needed.
All the while, she was plotting away to shut down the mines.
Why did she give them the overtime and get them to dig out so much coal?
Because she didn't want a repeat of the 3 day week.
Once the coal was out of the ground, it was available for industry to use.

It was Queen against Pawn, but the miners were too wrapped up in their own demands, self-needs, self-preservation and "f*ck the rest of you" attitude to see it. They rejoiced with their pay rises while the rest of the workforce were unemployed and facing YOB schemes. Even the public grew tired of it all and support for the miners waned.

At that time, the unions would call a miners strike and the rest of the public servants went out on strike in sympathy. FFS, in the North East, even the dinner ladies went on strike in support of the miners and kids were sent home each day with a packed lunch. It didn't matter who the public voted for in elections...the Unions always won and they ran this country however they saw fit.

If the miners were too blind to see what was coming, is that their fault, that of their union leaders or that of their opponent?

So you see, I'm not blind to what's going on in the world. I just view it from a different angle. It's good though that we can all have different opinions, as the only way we can open our eyes is to challenge other's opinions and learn from them.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> So you see, I'm not blind to what's going on in the world. I just view it from a different angle.


So you do see it as MT's way of busting the unions then?


----------



## classixuk (Jun 6, 2009)

Bandy said:


> So you do see it as MT's way of busting the unions then?


Nope. Worse.

She was famously called the Iron Lady by the Russians.

i.e. A+ from Europe's communist leaders.

MT needed to prove she had balls of steel to the rest of the world's leaders, and she did so by busting the balls of the British working man.

My admiration for her is the same as my admiration for a python that catches it's prey. I can't help but marvel at the sheer genius at the moves and how they are played out. But that's just me. I'm the sort of guy who will shake your hand if you manage to bankrupt me, as I'll at least give you the recognition that you were one step ahead in the game at all times.

You need to understand the UK we currently live in Bandy to fully appreciate where I'm coming from (although I suspect you're actually way ahead of me anyway).

In this country, if you successfully sue your boss for unfair dismissal, you can demand that your role be re-instated. And you know something? Some people actually do that and go back to work. 

And going back not so long ago (and some people still say this is true even to this day) the government convinced everyone that if you didn't pay your TV licence (a government tax) that a special van could drive past your house and 'tell if you were watching your TV' unlicensed. I kid you not. I know you won't believe me, so here's the advert that was broadcast into our homes all those years ago:

[youtube_browser]8NmdUcmLFkw[/youtube_browser]

Do you see what I mean?

That's why, when people play into the government's hands and then moan about it afterwards...sorry...I have no sympathy. They shouldn't be such sore losers. Why don't they educate themselves?


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

classixuk said:


> Why don't they educate themselves?


I've been asking that for years as I've pointed out things and have been accused of hating my country.

I think it's because they are mesmarized by the pretty faces on the box telling them everything is ok...even though they know it isn't.

It's not called programming for nothing mate.



classixuk said:


> MT needed to prove she had balls of steel to the rest of the world's leaders, and she did so by busting the balls of the British working man.


I think you're on to something here, but a little bit askew.

She wasn't showing her power to would be threats...but showing the strength to play ball.
If that makes sense.

I think it all boils down to a seriously nefarious plan...



David Rockefeller said:


> "We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."
> 
> "I*t would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years.* But, the world is now more sophisticated and *prepared to march towards a world government*. *The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries*."


David Rockefeller, *Trilateral Commission Founder *1991

Which reminds me of a thread I was supposed to do a while back about pulling back the curtain on the lies we're told in the media...

damn no time and short memory anyway.



> "It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not be free - to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national state, or of some private interest within the nation, wants him to think, feel and act. "The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective."


 - Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley, 1958


----------



## Jonesey (Dec 30, 2010)

Bandy said:


> THOUGHT to themselves to do that or were conditioned....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And they can get their hands on guns.

You know there are bulldozing thousands upon thousands of empty houses in the States right now to keep the squatters out? What if they have an uprising of the unemployed and impoverished in say Detroit?


----------



## Jonesey (Dec 30, 2010)

Bandy said:


> I've been asking that for years as I've pointed out things and have been accused of hating my country.
> 
> I think it's because they are mesmarized by the pretty faces on the box telling them everything is ok...even though they know it isn't.
> 
> ...


This stuff scares the hell out of me. Canada is A-Okay right now with our natural resources (although many are already owned by China), but if the US goes down and it looks like it's not that far off, we go with it. People don't realize that the cracks are turning into fissures.

In all honesty I can't dwell too much upon it because I truly believe that it will drive me insane. If it wasn't for my MIL living with us I'd convince my OH to sell up, buy a property in the north and outfit it with solar panels and a wood burning stove you can cook on. The extra money would be used to buy gold and not just on paper, but actual bars that I'd bury somewhere.

And that's why I generally stay away from threads like this and prefer the lighter or dog related ones.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Jonesey said:


> And they can get their hands on guns.
> 
> You know there are bulldozing thousands upon thousands of empty houses in the States right now to keep the squatters out? What if they have an uprising of the unemployed and impoverished in say Detroit?


That would qualify as a national emergency and the National Guard would be called in.

Can't be having the people gettin outta hand, now can we? :blink::blink:

As for getting our hands on guns...atm, we still have that right.
They are steadily tryin to nix that though...with everything from nutty rules, to tryin to make ammunition impossible to get...to actually trying to make owning firearms illegal....

I think that's the bit that's frustrating them right now...American's will only put up with so much shite when it's obvious to them what's being tried..

sadly, most of our rights that were stripped weren't obvious as they were sailed through in laws that made us feel "patriotic" when passed.

Ever read the Patriot Act?

shameless...and most Americans don't even realize what all has been lost.


----------



## Jonesey (Dec 30, 2010)

Bandy said:


> That would qualify as a national emergency and the National Guard would be called in.
> 
> Can't be having the people gettin outta hand, now can we? :blink::blink:
> 
> ...


Two rights in America that they will never give up - the right to free speech and the right to bear arms.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Jonesey said:


> This stuff scares the hell out of me. Canada is A-Okay right now with our natural resources (although many are already owned by China), but if the US goes down and it looks like it's not that far off, we go with it. People don't realize that the cracks are turning into fissures.
> 
> In all honesty I can't dwell too much upon it because I truly believe that it will drive me insane. If it wasn't for my MIL living with us I'd convince my OH to sell up, buy a property in the north and outfit it with solar panels and a wood burning stove you can cook on. The extra money would be used to buy gold and not just on paper, but actual bars that I'd bury somewhere.
> 
> And that's why I generally stay away from threads like this and prefer the lighter or dog related ones.


Just hang onto your hat then, hun.

We won't go down without takin ya. Im sure ya have heard about the North American Union. That bit was trying to be sneaked through but was highlighted and squashed.
We'll be one big happy union, just like the EU. :

Only thing I wonder...will we have the American style judicial system, or will it be a parliamentary style like you're used to?

No offense, but I hope defacto capitol (ie Brussels in the EU) is located in the US...but then, Im a bit biased. :tongue_smilie:


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Jonesey said:


> Two rights in America that they will never give up - the right to free speech and the right to bear arms.


Cuz we like to talk smack while shootin people? :tongue_smilie: :lol:

Ok...bad time for a terrible joke..

DT..I need that hat back, hun.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

classixuk said:


> Nope. Worse.
> 
> She was famously called the Iron Lady by the Russians.
> 
> ...


*imo classix as much as i wasn't a fan of MT she had more balls than any man we've had in power since her.The likes of Cameron/Clegg will never get close to her.She tried her best imo to sell this country short and this tory goverment are "trying" to follow in her footsteps.SHME on them is all i can say.*


----------



## Roobster2010 (Jan 17, 2011)

I had no idea how many posts a person had to have on here before voicing an opinion. I have a right to say what I like & read or not read what I like on here. This is a free forum & yes my views are very very different to those of classix, dt et al. 

I just thank all my Gods every night for that.

Bandy I am neither a troll nor a misguided soul. My views on whatever other thread dt is talking about are MY views, they don't have to be yours but if I want to post that's exactly what I'll do. I don't need a 'feel' for the place to have an opinion & state it if I wish. I don't post to make people 'like' me. 

Kathryn H if I am coming across as "not very nice &/or aggressive" I'm sorry, but you don't know me & written word can be so easily misunderstood especially in Cyberspace.

Anyhoo, think I'll stick to pet threads from now on, there's nothing like politics for starting arguements & bad feeling.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Roobster2010 said:


> I had no idea how many posts a person had to have on hear before voicing an opinion. I have a right to say what I like & read or not read what I like on here. This is a free forum & yes my views are very very different to those of classix, dt et al.
> 
> I just thank all my Gods every night for that.
> 
> ...


*Just be yourself and remember the old saying "you can please some of the people some of the time,but not all of the people all of the time". lol It gets me through.*


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

Roobster2010 said:


> Yip, I think you got one thing right...................................................................Sadly *you* work with children


Ha Ha looks that way
No its sad that that at 11 they feel this way. I really do think you knew the way it was meant.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

Roobster2010 said:


> Bandy I am neither a troll nor a misguided soul. My views on whatever other thread dt is talking about are MY views, they don't have to be yours but if I want to post that's exactly what I'll do. I don't need a 'feel' for the place to have an opinion & state it if I wish. I don't post to make people 'like' me.


Then no need to be so defensive.

As I said, ya can take or toss the advice.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

DoubleTrouble said:


> I did after having a sense of Deja vu! Shall just say an old thread rang a few bells!


Mmmmm those bells are ringing here too.


----------



## Bandy (Sep 29, 2010)

haeveymolly said:


> Mmmmm those bells are ringing here too.


Wouldn't have anything to do with _this_ line would it?



Roobster2010 said:


> My views on whatever other thread *dt* is talking about


:lol:


----------

