Iain Duncan Smith

[lindyloo]

also, i don't think anyone who is questioning the wisdom of this scheme, is overeacting. i think we are saying that it is judgemental and a waste of human resource, and that so much better could be achieved if some thought had gone into solving the various problems which have led to the situation.

[StephenH]

For goodness sake, it's only 4 thirty hour weeks to keep getting the benefits. It's not full-time permanent "slave labour"!
Why use such emotive language?
How can this hurt anyone? Everyone who's against it is griping on about litter picking but someone's got to do it! I spent a part of last year working in a fish factory because it was all I could find at the time. I would rather have been out in the fresh air, let me assure you

I don't object to it in principle; my main worry is that it'll give the stony-hearted rat-bags in benefit offices one more excuse to stop people's benefits, and you can be sure they'll interpret the rules as rigorously and inflexibly as possible. I know whereof I speak, having been long-term unemployed for two separate periods in the past. On the whole, I'd prefer it if the government tried to tackle unemployment by creating real jobs, instead of forcing the unemployed in to fake jobs.

[Jeanied]

Exactly, StephenH. Well said!
I did predict a return to the workhouses, but maybe that was over egging it a bit.

[PAULW]

pigletwillie; you forget the fact that the population has grown, therefore the workforce expanded. at least the labour government tried to create jobs and housing, rather than being judgemental with no positive solutions coming forward.

LINDY
What you have forgotten is the working population has shrunk, kids dont leave school till the are almost 18 and them that go to uni are in their mid 20s before they look for work, I and most of my generation left school at 15 and got a job.

[lindyloo]

well, that is true too, paul, but it is cancelled out by the fact that we- men and women- are all working longer now, and women have to work to make ends meet, whereas when 'we' were younger, most of them worked till marriage, when they became full time mothers and home makers, or just worked a few hours for pin money.

also, there are a heck of a lot of kids who leave school at 16 nowadays as well, the only differance is there aren't any jobs. which is really the point being made. my comment was just an aside to the main issue for me, which is no jobs, lack of housing, no solutions coming forward.

i wasn't wanting to argue with pigletwillie-- i just wanted to offer a counterbalance

[PAULW]

LINDY
Its not so much that there are no jobs for 16 yr olds its more that they are not allowed to do anything until they are 18 because of over zealous H&S rules and regs, as I have said I left school at fifteen and went to work in a slaughterhouse where I used knives, cleavers, electric saws and the humane killer, up to my armpit in blood,sh1t and guts and have still managed to reach my mid fifties, nobody want anybody hurt in an accident at work but how on earth do you learn to avoid situations if you never experience any.

[Two_Sheds]

So keeping the "working class" where they belong?
It's the rich(bankers & money dealers) who got us in the manure

The rich will still need cleaners, baristas, taxi drivers, waiting staff etc etc. Where are these low-paid workers to live? In house? Or be expected to commute for an hour or more on minimum wage?

[Seahorse]

May I refer you to the Rt Hon Tony Blair and Gordon Brown for those issues.

Who 'caused' it is irrelevant, it's the solutions that matter (and I could just as well refer you to Mrs Thatcher!).

If at the end of the day, you object to a long term unemployed person being given 4 weeks experience of getting off the sofa and into a work routine, then there really is no hope of getting people to be responsible for themselves.

I don't think anyone is saying that - but make it something fulfilling and of potential use in a future job, not just something that will make people who already feel marginalised and disaffected, even more so.

Most jobs on offer were either short term,part time or minimum wage or a combination of two or all three.

And for a lot of 'easily available' jobs you can add in anti-social hours too. Acceptable perhaps if you're young, free and single but very difficult if you have any family to care for.

[valmarg]

If so, this so called 'work ethic' doesn't appear to have done there own country much good?

Doesn't need to. They come over here work hard, and earn some money, most of which they send back. Then of course they can also claim child benefit for their children back home courtesy of the UK taxpayer.

valmarg

[valmarg]

Will you be saying the same when you become unemployed & no one will employ you because you are too old.
I had worked almost continually since I was 16 but lost my last job at 57 I applied for at least 150 jobs but I was luck to even get a reply.
Most jobs on offer were either short term,part time or minimum wage or a combination of two or all three.

D'you know bubblewrap I feel as bitter and twisted on my husband's behalf as you do on your own. He had worked for the company for nearly 27 years, and was a few months away from being eligible for the company's early retirement scheme. On the Monday afternoon, roughly a week before Christmas (c.4.30 p.m.) he was told that there was no job for him in the reorganised department, he was given his redundancy details, 'and you won't want to stay until Friday will you.' The thing that was missing was his redundancy cheque

It was devastating to him. He had put his heart and soul into working for the company. The smack in the face they gave him was devastating.

He says it is all water under the bridge, but not for me. I'm still as bitter and twisted as Monday 18th December, 1998, c. 4.30 p.m. sically my husband didn't deserve such treatment.

As I said he was a matter of months before he would have been eligible for the company's early retirement scheme.

Sleep well Sir Antony.

valmarg

[lindyloo]

paul w; its a little off the subject, but honestly , you don't have to convince me about the nonsense of health and safety, then and now ( i am nearly 60).

my gripe is that there appears to be no ideas coming forward on a solution for the lack of jobs, and lack of cheap housing, on top of which i have read that m.c. wants to lower the minumum wage. ( what the ---? when everything is going up so much, and just wait til vat goes up in january. !)

we can all come up with our own personal views, and come up with facts and figures to support our personal views, and that is fine, but we do actually PAY the polititians to come up with solutions, and what they are coming up with so far, isnt a solution.

on the subject of child benefit which someone mentioned; when i married my second husband who was not british, ( i am) we lived over here. i had a previous child, and although i was working full time, and paying tax and nat. ins. i was not entitled to child benefit for either of my children, both born in uk. my first child's child benefit was stopped, when i married, and i was unable to claim it for my second child too, ( also born here) until years later, when we seperated prior to divorce. now, thats a strange thing considering how many foriegners get child benefit and housing courtesy of the uk!

[PAULW]

LINDY
If you look at the FT index and IMF report someone out there thinks the government proposals are the right thing to do and faith in the country is improving day to day, sometimes the nastiest medicine does the most good.

[bubblewrap]

LINDY
If you look at the FT index and IMF report someone out there thinks the government proposals are the right thing to do and faith in the country is improving day to day, sometimes the nastiest medicine does the most good.

I have one point about that.

[PAULW]

BUBBLEWRAP
Completly agree with you under new labour we would have been in the same situation as the PIIGS Portugal,Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain LIVING IN A BANKRUPT COUNTRY

[bubblewrap]

If certain organisations(eg Vodaphone)paid the right tax & the banks hadn't cocked it up ?