Gordon IS a moron

[Doggy Styles]

How could he have known that when he thought up the policy? Your anger is confusing you thoughts (as Yoda might say).

Isn't the point that £2500 is only going to cover a small proportion of the cost of hiring someone, and as companies aren't hiring anyway why should they incur the rest of the cost, and be net out of pocket, for no good reason?

Surely Gordon Brown would have seen that.

[PM-Junkie]

He's not a moron - anyone who gets a PhD is hardly a moron. I just think having a degree in history and a PhD centred on the Scottish labour party in the early part of the last century means he wasn't qualified to be chancellor. He should have carried on being a journalist, and left the economics to someone who understands the subject.

[Bagpuss]

Isn't the point that £2500 is only going to cover a small proportion of the cost of hiring someone, and as companies aren't hiring anyway why should they incur the rest of the cost, and be net out of pocket, for no good reason?

They aren't forced to hire anyone, it does apply to those considering it though, and surely there must be quite a few of those still? If all companies were f'd then we would really be in the poo. Not a fantastic policy but not that different to what the opposition has been suggesting.

[Cyberman]

Exactly, he'ss not being a moron, but cleverly doing something which looks very good (it's a nice scheme in principle) but will cost him very little in the near future.

Yeah, clever, just like removing regulation on the banks, taxing pensions by 5 billion pounds a year, abolishing the 10% income tax rate, selling our gold and reducing the VAT rate to 15%. All of those probably looked good to Labour supporters at the time. The more intelligent of us saw through it immediately. Others saw through it once these stupid decsisions either had no effect or a devastating effect.

[Platypus]

Isn't the point that £2500 is only going to cover a small proportion of the cost of hiring someone, and as companies aren't hiring anyway why should they incur the rest of the cost, and be net out of pocket, for no good reason?

And conversely, if a company was about to hire someone who'd been on the dole for more than 6 months, wouldn't they just do it anyway? Right man for the job etc?

So I don't see how this plan will encourage anything at all, apart from publicity for Gordo being seen to be doing something.

[Bagpuss]

This message is hidden because Cyberman is on your ignore list.


The Oracle has spoken, argument over

[Cheshire Cat]

So when the JSA claimants are at the highest level since NL took power, does that not suggest we are doubly fooked?

Expect a proposal imminently from Gordo: The Govt to pay each person on JSA £10,000 to go to the docs and complain of a bad back or M.E. to swap over the JSA claimants to IB.

[PM-Junkie]

...there's a few of us have done the same thing BP.

[Doggy Styles]

If the £2500 DID make a difference between hiring someone and not, wouldn't it encourage discrimination against people that have only been out of work, say, 4 months, even if they were the better candidate? I wouldn't be happy with that.

[Purple Dalek]

There was a scheme during the shutting down of the pits that a company could take on someone from one of the areas and basically employ them for free for 3 months. Result: companies set up to employ people for three months.