Reply to: Interesting documentary so far

[vetran]

WHS, it's the price of doing business. Otherwise we have to live in walled compounds like in Brazil and SA. Bung them enough to keep quiet and we can get on with our lives.
Yes, you can piss around at the margins but there is a hardcore of unemployables in every country, get enough cash to move further away from them and get on with your life.

how depressing. I would suspect there are far fewer unemployables than you imagine, also if you keep them busy then crime may well fall.

[lukemg]

There is a fair percentage of people in this country that just don't have the skills to hold down the most basic job, it would not be worth the hassle forcing them into a position of employment, it is best they are given some money and left to do what they want with their time.

WHS, it's the price of doing business. Otherwise we have to live in walled compounds like in Brazil and SA. Bung them enough to keep quiet and we can get on with our lives.
Yes, you can piss around at the margins but there is a hardcore of unemployables in every country, get enough cash to move further away from them and get on with your life.

[vetran]

You haven't read much about the former (and current) communist states by the sounds of it. If your idea of Communism is lurking around in a tractor factory not doing much work I think you have missed quite a bit. Try being forced to turn up and work hard without any certainty of getting paid and being able to buy anything if paid.

Capitalism isn't providing jobs for some people. Creating jobs that otherwise wouldn't exist as a punishment is the workhouse made modern. It certainly isn't capitalism, which would present these people with the steal or starve options.

The tractor factory meme is commonly taken as the falsifying production figures to avoid punishment for failure to achieve (normally incorrect government targets). I suppose I should have extended it to the British Leyland type implementation but I did compare it to a Gulag a whole different level of unpleasantness so the comparison stands.

You realise both Conservatives & Labour are looking at enforced workfare for long term unemployed so its mainstream policy. The home of rampant capitalism has a workfare policy in full swing. So I suggest its a very up to date capitalist policy.

Workfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We abolished the workhouse and saw the growth of the unemployable underclass, I don't want to see the reintroduction of workhouses they were abhorrent.

The rise and fall of the workhouse | History Extra

Apparently we can't reduce the imported workforce to make labour scarce and the employers willing to take a chance on less attractive employees. So how do we get people who are happy on benefit into employment and out of a destructive life on benefits?

[Peoplesoft bloke]

nope not communist very capitalist, anyone who isn't contributing has to be made to. More Gulag than over staffed Tractor factory.

These jobs won't be cushy or theirs to abuse, they will be hard & unpleasant and if they decide they don't want to do them they don't get benefits.

You haven't read much about the former (and current) communist states by the sounds of it. If your idea of Communism is lurking around in a tractor factory not doing much work I think you have missed quite a bit. Try being forced to turn up and work hard without any certainty of getting paid and being able to buy anything if paid.

Capitalism isn't providing jobs for some people. Creating jobs that otherwise wouldn't exist as a punishment is the workhouse made modern. It certainly isn't capitalism, which would present these people with the steal or starve options.

[vetran]

I don't see how that is capitalist in any imaginable way.

Apart from that, if those jobs are hard and unpleasant, then what makes you think that they need to be 'given' them? There is always work to be done, despite popular opinion.

so what would you do with the institutionalised unemployed?

The ones that want to escape need experience to get a job, the ones that don't want to need a reason to get a job. The ones that are working illegally need to be kept busy so they can't work or give up benefits to work.

We could just leave them to it and have a feral underclass but that is already causing problems.

[SpontaneousOrder]

nope not communist very capitalist, anyone who isn't contributing has to be made to. More Gulag than over staffed Tractor factory.

These jobs won't be cushy or theirs to abuse, they will be hard & unpleasant and if they decide they don't want to do them they don't get benefits.

I don't see how that is capitalist in any imaginable way.

Apart from that, if those jobs are hard and unpleasant, then what makes you think that they need to be 'given' them? There is always work to be done, despite popular opinion.

[doodab]

There is a fair percentage of people in this country that just don't have the skills to hold down the most basic job, it would not be worth the hassle forcing them into a position of employment, it is best they are given some money and left to do what they want with their time.

WHS. Abolishing the house of lords would be a disaster.

[minestrone]

There is a fair percentage of people in this country that just don't have the skills to hold down the most basic job, it would not be worth the hassle forcing them into a position of employment, it is best they are given some money and left to do what they want with their time.

[vetran]

Communist system - no-one can be unemployed because the government always gives you a job.

Bad idea IMHO

nope not communist very capitalist, anyone who isn't contributing has to be made to. More Gulag than over staffed Tractor factory.

These jobs won't be cushy or theirs to abuse, they will be hard & unpleasant and if they decide they don't want to do them they don't get benefits.

[VectraMan]

Communist system - no-one can be unemployed because the government always gives you a job.

Also Labour's new flagship policy.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

..workfare style jobs. ..

Communist system - no-one can be unemployed because the government always gives you a job.

Bad idea IMHO

[The Spartan]

Trim the benefits so they are subsistence level. being done. Make sure working pays more.
reassess all disability claimants to identify any fit for work. In process but being done badly.
Assist newly unemployed, identify needs and get them back into work.
Train the 6-12 month plus unemployed.
if they have been out of work for a year get them on workfare style jobs. If they are working they can't be drinking or getting high, if they don't attend then sanction them.
Sack benefits staff that mistreat claimants.

then on to the next problem.

I'm definitely in favour of canning more drivel servants

[vetran]

Trim the benefits so they are subsistence level. being done. Make sure working pays more.
reassess all disability claimants to identify any fit for work. In process but being done badly.
Assist newly unemployed, identify needs and get them back into work.
Train the 6-12 month plus unemployed.
if they have been out of work for a year get them on workfare style jobs. If they are working they can't be drinking or getting high, if they don't attend then sanction them.
Sack benefits staff that mistreat claimants.

then on to the next problem.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

written by an oil rig worker in the UK -


'I work, they pay me. I<blah blah> sit on their arse drinking beer and smoking dope. Could you imagine how much money the government would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a benefit cheque? Please pass this along if you agree or simply delete it if you don't. Hope you will pass it along though, because something has to change in the UK.'

Well it worked for the Septics.....


Oh, hang on

An inane, money-eating sham: Drug tests for welfare a huge failure - Salon.com

[EternalOptimist]

written by an oil rig worker in the UK -


'I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to earn that pay cheque, I work on a rig for a drilling contractor. I am required to pass a random urine test for drugs and alcohol, with which I have no problem. ... What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a benefits cheque because I have to pass one to EARN IT for them? Please understand that I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sit on their arse drinking beer and smoking dope. Could you imagine how much money the government would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a benefit cheque? Please pass this along if you agree or simply delete it if you don't. Hope you will pass it along though, because something has to change in the UK.'