Tories

[View From The Top]

Just simply swap the word Tory for the word Jew and Hitler would probably have not agreed with you more.

 

:rolleyes:

[View From The Top]

And there's me, thinking my views had mellowed with age.

 

Previously I would have just had them lined up and shot.

[Johnny Bognor]

Nope, they are low, but just not as low.

 

100m people died under communism compared to 25m under fascism.

 

Not defending fascism here, just highlighting the hypocricy of many a socialist where they seem to be warmer towards their own extreme which has resulted in more human suffering than any other type of regime.

 

Maybe I just don't get this socialism malarky.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

100m people died under communism compared to 25m under fascism.

 

Not defending fascism here, just highlighting the hypocricy of many a socialist where they seem to be warmer towards their own extreme which has resulted in more human suffering than any other type of regime.

 

Maybe I just don't get this socialism malarky.

 

TBH I think that you get Socialism just as much as I get Capitalism.

 

Which, somewhere, is where I get lost. I'm not really for nationalising everything, nor anti globalisation. My politics, for what they are, are more Utopian and Egalitarian. Utopia doen't really work in the real world, I'm old and cynical enough to realise that. However there is still an egalitarian streak running through me which would like to see the disadvantaged, not work shy etc, cared for in society. Because of that principle I cannot support Tory values, fine though a few of them are, which seem to consider ALL unemployed as slobs, council house scum, spongers etc.

 

The Tories exist to keep the class system in place, despite what the Finchley Beatch is alleged to have said, so that working class people provide the labour on which their fruits ripen. They will only help those who have hopes and aspirations. Unfortunately there are many who have no aspirations or hope because they do not have the wherewithall or nous to progress in life.

[badgerx16]

100m people died under communism compared to 25m under fascism.

Well, at least 48 million died in a war the Fascists started, plus about 500 thousand in Spain, so you are a bit short there.

 

Both political extremes are equally malign and destructive.

[Mao Cap]

One thing you can say about the Tories is that their actual politicking has been top-notch (though that's helped by Labour's being God-awful).

 

Here is an economic crisis brought on by the kind of unregulated laissez-faire capitalism favoured by the Conservatives and their City mates (even more than New Labour), saved from turning into another 1929 through the sort of intervention from Big Bad Government that they want to "scale back", and somehow it's all because of the scraps we chuck to the dolies to keep them rioting and the "bloated" pensions of dinnerladies and binmen.

 

I've no idea how they've managed to shift the goalposts, but fair play for taking advantage of the moron electorate. Seriously, f*ck democracy.

[Gingeletiss]

1) Income tax is one of the fairest taxes. However, sadly we rely on high levels of indirect and unfair taxation, which hit the poorest the hardest. That is unfair. What was also worse was that Gordon Brown scrapped the 10p tax rate (one of the best things he introduced). Many of the poorest in society were surviving just because of that rate.

 

2) The Council Tax is the most remarkably unfair tax in this country. It takes NO account of ability to pay, and ruthlessly takes from poorer people based on old house valuations. It is unfair. Many pensioners are finding that their modest family home is now falling into Council Tax bands D, or even E, and many clearly don't have the ability to pay that level of tax. It is time the Council Tax was scrapped, and replaced with a fairer Local Income Tax, so rich people pay more.

 

3) One of the most laughable things is better off people whinging that they might have to pay some tax. Boo hoo. You are so much better off than some of the poorest in city that you just don't know it. I earn less than £20k per year, but even I know how lucky I am compared to many others. Your attitude to jobs stinks as well. Many people work very hard, but are simply unable to do jobs that aren better paid. There is nothing wrong with their work ethic, but they do what they can do. They are continually being shafted by successive governments, because the better off get away with tax loopholes, and whinging about tax.

 

I'm not even half way through this thread, and already I deduce, that you Bungle my friend, have some deep lying communist tendencys.

 

So your on less that 20K....what age are you???, if your still a fairly young person, that seems to be on par with the average wage, here in the South.

 

Listen, both my partner and I have full time jobs, we work bloody hard for our money, and as such, own our own house. This means that we pay between us some £900 in mortgage repayments, this is because, we have decided to buy late in our lives, as I spent most of my time in Military quarters.

 

Now just where do you see it as fair, that I/we should pay more tax, than, lets say you. Just where is it fair, that millions live off the state, and many of these, just have no desire to work, because my working and paying taxes, allows them to stay in their beds past lunchtime each day.

 

As to doing 'jobs that are better paid'....FFS, that is life mate, I resent footballers being paid millions to kick a ball around, I resent Pop stars snorting cocaine, paid for by the pocket money of kids. That's life, it isn't fair, neither here, or anywhere else in the world.....which brings me back to your communiist traits...

 

Bungle, they don't work, there will always be an elite class, Russia/ China/ Cuba....just open your eyes, do you see their leaders living in 2 room flats, or estates by the Black sea (Russians).

[badgerx16]

One thing you can say about the Tories is that their actual politicking has been top-notch (though that's helped by Labour's being God-awful).

 

Here is an economic crisis brought on by the kind of unregulated laissez-faire capitalism favoured by the Conservatives and their City mates (even more than New Labour), saved from turning into another 1929 through the sort of intervention from Big Bad Government that they want to "scale back", and somehow it's all because of the scraps we chuck to the dolies to keep them rioting and the "bloated" pensions of dinnerladies and binmen.

 

I've no idea how they've managed to shift the goalposts, but fair play for taking advantage of the moron electorate. Seriously, f*ck democracy.

 

:smt038:smt038:smt038

 

May I suggest we replace our political system with benevolent despotism, with me at the helm

[Arizona]

I'm not even half way through this thread, and already I deduce, that you Bungle my friend, have some deep lying communist tendencys.

 

So your on less that 20K....what age are you???, if your still a fairly young person, that seems to be on par with the average wage, here in the South.

 

Listen, both my partner and I have full time jobs, we work bloody hard for our money, and as such, own our own house. This means that we pay between us some £900 in mortgage repayments, this is because, we have decided to buy late in our lives, as I spent most of my time in Military quarters.

 

Now just where do you see it as fair, that I/we should pay more tax, than, lets say you. Just where is it fair, that millions live off the state, and many of these, just have no desire to work, because my working and paying taxes, allows them to stay in their beds past lunchtime each day.

 

As to doing 'jobs that are better paid'....FFS, that is life mate, I resent footballers being paid millions to kick a ball around, I resent Pop stars snorting cocaine, paid for by the pocket money of kids. That's life, it isn't fair, neither here, or anywhere else in the world.....which brings me back to your communiist traits...

 

Bungle, they don't work, there will always be an elite class, Russia/ China/ Cuba....just open your eyes, do you see their leaders living in 2 room flats, or estates by the Black sea (Russians).

 

That's a whole bag of nails you've just hit on the head.

[bungle]

I'm not even half way through this thread, and already I deduce, that you Bungle my friend, have some deep lying communist tendencys.

 

So your on less that 20K....what age are you???, if your still a fairly young person, that seems to be on par with the average wage, here in the South.

 

Listen, both my partner and I have full time jobs, we work bloody hard for our money, and as such, own our own house. This means that we pay between us some £900 in mortgage repayments, this is because, we have decided to buy late in our lives, as I spent most of my time in Military quarters.

 

Now just where do you see it as fair, that I/we should pay more tax, than, lets say you. Just where is it fair, that millions live off the state, and many of these, just have no desire to work, because my working and paying taxes, allows them to stay in their beds past lunchtime each day.

 

As to doing 'jobs that are better paid'....FFS, that is life mate, I resent footballers being paid millions to kick a ball around, I resent Pop stars snorting cocaine, paid for by the pocket money of kids. That's life, it isn't fair, neither here, or anywhere else in the world.....which brings me back to your communiist traits...

 

Bungle, they don't work, there will always be an elite class, Russia/ China/ Cuba....just open your eyes, do you see their leaders living in 2 room flats, or estates by the Black sea (Russians).

 

I have never said I should pay less tax. I have been talking about the poorest in society, those living on the minimum wage, who earn about £11,000 a year. Those are the tax levels that need reducing. We should do it by raising the allowance on which people don't pay tax from the current £6,700, to about £10,000. This would take millions of our lowest earners (not me!), out of tax altogether, putting £700 back in their pockets.

 

We should close some of the tax loopholes that the super-rich enjoy, and we should change Council tax to a Local Income Tax, so that it is a fair not arbitrary taxation. I don't believe that is communist, I believe that is fair. In no way would it mean the rich end up taking home the same amount of money as the poorest - that is far from fair either.

[benjii]

If I use private health and private education why on earth should I pay tax to prop up the NHS or the school system?

[badgerx16]

If I use private health and private education why on earth should I pay tax to prop up the NHS or the school system?

Because, if you are in a car or train crash, they will take you to an NHS hospital.

[Clapham Saint]

If I use private health and private education why on earth should I pay tax to prop up the NHS or the school system?

 

Becuase (under an opt out system) if everybody able to pay privately did the same there would be no funding left within the NHS/schools to treat/educate those in need and unable to do so.

 

Although I share the reluctance to be paying for scoungers assuming that all people who are unable to fund services privately are scrounging is unfair.

 

Finding the balance whereby those in need are supported but those taking the p1ss are told to **** off is a lot easier said than done (unfortunately).

Edited 12 October, 2009 by Clapham Saint

[benjii]

Because, if you are in a car or train crash, they will take you to an NHS hospital.

 

Fair point!

[benjii]

Becuase if everybody able to pay privately did the same there would be no funding left within the NHS/schools to treat/educate those in need and unable to do so.

 

Although I share the reluctance to be paying for scoungers assuming that all people who are unable to fund services privately are scrounging is unfair.

 

Finding the balance whereby those in need are supported but those taking the p1ss are told to **** off is a lot easier said than done (unfortunately).

 

I agree.

 

I was trying to prompt some debate. I should have been a bit more subtle; I was borderline trolling!

 

My council tax does **** me off though. £182 per month and they can't even collect my rubbish weekly.

[bungle]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/oct/11/george-osborne-budget-plan-mistake-revealed

 

George Osborne's sums questioned by the organisation that provided him with the figures!

[View From The Top]

100m people died under communism compared to 25m under fascism.

 

Not defending fascism here, just highlighting the hypocricy of many a socialist where they seem to be warmer towards their own extreme which has resulted in more human suffering than any other type of regime.

 

Maybe I just don't get this socialism malarky.

 

Communism & fascism are ends of the same circle.

 

I detest the extreame right of the tory party as well as the extreame left of New Labour.

 

I'm centre left and whilst I'll always detest the tory party I accept the logic of many of their centre right policies.

[Special K]

Irrespective who "wins" the next election, we will be lumbered with a politician of few attributes, insipid character and a teflon coated PR sheen. It's sad that there are too few Statesmen/Stateswomen who can really get to grips with the task.

 

FWIW listening to Paddy Ashdown a few weeks ago during the Libbers conference made me wonder why he hadn't left becoming leader until about now; one of the few in modern political life who has some gravitas.

[View From The Top]

Irrespective who "wins" the next election, we will be lumbered with a politician of few attributes, insipid character and a teflon coated PR sheen. It's sad that there are too few Statesmen/Stateswomen who can really get to grips with the task.

 

FWIW listening to Paddy Ashdown a few weeks ago during the Libbers conference made me wonder why he hadn't left becoming leader until about now; one of the few in modern political life who has some gravitas.

 

The only MP's worth listening to, IMHO, are Vince Cable and Ken Clarke.

 

There are too many Oxbridge career politicans.

[Clapham Saint]

The only MP's worth listening to, IMHO, are Vince Cable and Ken Clarke.

 

There are too many Oxbridge career politicans.

 

Who was it that said that the desire to become a politician was the very thing that made somebody unsuitable to be one (or words to that effect)?

[badgerx16]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/oct/11/george-osborne-budget-plan-mistake-revealed

 

George Osborne's sums questioned by the organisation that provided him with the figures!

 

Luvverly

[Manuel]

The only MP's worth listening to, IMHO, are Vince Cable and Ken Clarke.

 

There are too many Oxbridge career politicans.

Both went to Cambridge actually.

 

I do agree though, they have a certain straight-talking 'man in the street' style, which I prefer.

[badgerx16]

The only MP's worth listening to, IMHO, are Vince Cable and Ken Clarke.

 

There are too many Oxbridge career politicans.

 

Watched Alan Johnson on the Andrew Marr show on Sunday, of all the Labour front benchers, I think he is the best and most credible by a long way; and it's a hoot every time he says he has absolutely no interest in the party leadership.

[View From The Top]

Both went to Cambridge actually.

 

I do agree though, they have a certain straight-talking 'man in the street' style, which I prefer.

 

I've nothing against their educational background, having been to a good uni' myself, it's just that smarmy Oxbridge career politician look, from all parties, that I dislike.

 

The Milibands are the perfect example.

 

Vince Cable is a colossus compared to the weak government front bench and even weaker opposition front bench.

[View From The Top]

Watched Alan Johnson on the Andrew Marr show on Sunday, of all the Labour front benchers, I think he is the best and most credible by a long way; and it's a hoot every time he says he has absolutely no interest in the party leadership.

 

Like Clarke and Cable, he has the "ordinary" about him.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Considering Labours complete failure on the immigration front, Brown & Co have done far more to promote facist views than Cameron could.

 

Nick Griffin's appearing on question time the week after next FFS

 

Hopefully he will be shown up to be the little runt that he is.

[Gingeletiss]

I have never said I should pay less tax. I have been talking about the poorest in society, those living on the minimum wage, who earn about £11,000 a year. Those are the tax levels that need reducing. We should do it by raising the allowance on which people don't pay tax from the current £6,700, to about £10,000. This would take millions of our lowest earners (not me!), out of tax altogether, putting £700 back in their pockets.

 

We should close some of the tax loopholes that the super-rich enjoy, and we should change Council tax to a Local Income Tax, so that it is a fair not arbitrary taxation. I don't believe that is communist, I believe that is fair. In no way would it mean the rich end up taking home the same amount of money as the poorest - that is far from fair either.

 

But dear Bungle.....someone else would have to pay that shortfall....I work upwards of 55 hours a week including 'unpaid o/t'...by your calculation, you'd have me paying more tax, so as the less paid, could have more to spend.......now that really is a socialist conception!!!

[bungle]

But dear Bungle.....someone else would have to pay that shortfall....I work upwards of 55 hours a week including 'unpaid o/t'...by your calculation, you'd have me paying more tax, so as the less paid, could have more to spend.......now that really is a socialist conception!!!

 

Why didn't you just read the opening line of my next paragraph, which told you how it would be paid for? And if you are super-rich and use tax loopholes then you should pay more tax. And if you are a moderate earner you probably won't. You might pay slightly more if there was a Local Income Tax. I believe that's fair.

[Clapham Saint]

I have never said I should pay less tax. I have been talking about the poorest in society, those living on the minimum wage, who earn about £11,000 a year. Those are the tax levels that need reducing. We should do it by raising the allowance on which people don't pay tax from the current £6,700, to about £10,000. This would take millions of our lowest earners (not me!), out of tax altogether, putting £700 back in their pockets.

 

We should close some of the tax loopholes that the super-rich enjoy, and we should change Council tax to a Local Income Tax, so that it is a fair not arbitrary taxation. I don't believe that is communist, I believe that is fair. In no way would it mean the rich end up taking home the same amount of money as the poorest - that is far from fair either.

 

You wouldn't be out of the tax system but you would still be £700 better off though wouldn't you Bungle. Or would you propose that the 20% and 40% income tax bands were raised to pay for it? (sorry just being pedantic).

 

Also as for "closing loopholes". There are undoubtedly loopholes, however the proportion of people who actually use a loophole to effectively trick their way into lower taxation is much smaller than people seem to think.

 

Arranging your tax affairs (transparently) such that you pay less tax is not illegal and is also not something only practiced by the rich.

 

In fact all taxation "schemes" must now be pre registered with HMRC so that they can be approved before they are used.

[bungle]

You wouldn't be out of the tax system but you would still be £700 better off though wouldn't you Bungle. Or would you propose that the 20% and 40% income tax bands were raised to pay for it? (sorry just being pedantic).

 

Also as for "closing loopholes". There are undoubtedly loopholes, however the proportion of people who actually use a loophole to effectively trick their way into lower taxation is much smaller than people seem to think.

 

Arranging your tax affairs (transparently) such that you pay less tax is not illegal and is also not something only practiced by the rich.

 

In fact all taxation "schemes" must now be pre registered with HMRC so that they can be approved before they are used.

 

I would be £700 better off if this scheme was implemented, but if it was implemented on it's own then so would everyone else.

[Wilko]

It staggers me how some people can argue against raising the threshold for 0% income tax.

 

£10k a year is nowhere near a living wage. **** me, you'd struggle to rent a room, pay bills and and be able to buy food as well anywhere in the south of England on a wage of £14k.

 

From the point of view of a young person trying to make their way in the world or a chav who can only hope to work for McDonalds, it just doesn't add up.

 

As a former member of the Conservative party, I can tell you that the membership, including councillors and MPs, does not believe in helping the poor in any other way than forcing them to work, at all costs.

 

The Conservative party is a murky place, which is obsessed with Europe and making sure big businesses can hire and fire everybody.

 

Many of them are also more sympathetic to the views of their racist and homophobic European partners than they let on. In the past I have witnessed a Tory councillor describing one of my colleagues, who is of Indian descent, as 'your brown friend'. Even more shocking was when I was at a fundraising dinner, where somebody who stood as a candidate at the last election admitted he was a holocaust denier.

 

This is what the Conservatives are really like, whether they will admit it or not.

[GenevaSaint]

Well, I've never voted Tory in my life, but I'm seriously considering it this time around. I've always voted Red, applauded the minimum wage and pay my fair share of taxes. I've never begrudged paying 40% tax for my higer earnings. I've never been a full on leftie, but I do see the value in a fair society with people paying their way and the less well off getting breaks in life. I guess I feel that way as I was bought up on a council estate in an era (70's) when the recipients of the council houses treated them with respect, almost like their own mortgaged property.

 

That said, I do begrudge people being on benefits (that I personally know) who've turned down jobs as it's "not worth their while". I can never see the Labour party resolving that issue, I could see the Tories sorting it out. If there's a job out there paying £20 per week more than your benefits and you get offered it, you should be obliged to take it, you stop being a liability and become a contributor (fiscal) to society.

[GenevaSaint]

As a former member of the Conservative party, I can tell you that the membership, including councillors and MPs, does not believe in helping the poor in any other way than forcing them to work, at all costs.

 

So Wilko, what was their take on my previous example? Do you not think it's right to "force" someone to work if what they would receive in wages outweighs their total in benefits? If your claiming JSA and successfully apply for a role why not force them to take the job even if it's min wage @ £5.80 / Hour. When they add on the other benefits available it jumps significantly assuming they've got kids.

[Gingeletiss]

Why didn't you just read the opening line of my next paragraph, which told you how it would be paid for? And if you are super-rich and use tax loopholes then you should pay more tax. And if you are a moderate earner you probably won't. You might pay slightly more if there was a Local Income Tax. I believe that's fair.

 

Bungle.......you miss the point. Why should someone earning £80,000 working a 39 hour week, have to pay even more tax in your bright new world, that someone on £11,000 working a 39 hour week. That's not a fair system. I'm not super rich, nor is my partner, our earnings are as a result of many years in the workforce, and promotions where merited. I already pay more into the 'system' than someone on £11,000 pa, why should I pay even more.

 

Here's a plan....all those who whilst out of work, can plainly work, should be employed at the minimum wage, by the government, clearing litter, etc etc etc......then instead of dole money, they will work the equivalent hours, they will be paying into the system in some form or another.

 

I again ask your age, as my experience at work, See's 18/19 year olds, wanting wage parity, with people who have worked for the company for 15/20 years..........we all started at the lower end of the wage spectrum, we had to earn the higher wages.

[Wilko]

So Wilko, what was their take on my previous example? Do you not think it's right to "force" someone to work if what they would receive in wages outweighs their total in benefits? If your claiming JSA and successfully apply for a role why not force them to take the job even if it's min wage @ £5.80 / Hour. When they add on the other benefits available it jumps significantly assuming they've got kids.

 

All other things being equal, of course I agree with you. It would be ridiculous to say anything else. However, the specifics clearly make it a more difficult question to answer.

 

One wonders which jobs the Conservatives will be able to force people to take. It's all very well saying they will be able to get people off benefits and back into work, but, as all good Kenyesians know, cutting public spending is likely to reduce the number of jobs available, not increase them.

 

At the moment, it's pretty difficult to get a job doing anything, so one presumes Dave and Gideon will produce millions of jobs on June 1 using a magic wand.

[View From The Top]

So Wilko, what was their take on my previous example? Do you not think it's right to "force" someone to work if what they would receive in wages outweighs their total in benefits? If your claiming JSA and successfully apply for a role why not force them to take the job even if it's min wage @ £5.80 / Hour. When they add on the other benefits available it jumps significantly assuming they've got kids.

 

In principle I agree as I see far too much of the benefit society for my liking.

 

That said, the system needs to be streamlined so work does pay. Far too many people think they lose everything as soon as they sign off.

[GenevaSaint]

All other things being equal, of course I agree with you. It would be ridiculous to say anything else. However, the specifics clearly make it a more difficult question to answer.

One wonders which jobs the Conservatives will be able to force people to take. It's all very well saying they will be able to get people off benefits and back into work, but, as all good Kenyesians know, cutting public spending is likely to reduce the number of jobs available, not increase them.

At the moment, it's pretty difficult to get a job doing anything, so one presumes Dave and Gideon will produce millions of jobs on June 1 using a magic wand.

 

Yes, I know there is no magic wand, it's a difficult market to get jobs. Amazingly though, I've seen a few adverts in windows rececntly so there are some out there, I've no doubt they're not the type of jobs that most people would want to accept.

 

You've raised some interesting questions about what roles the Blues would force people into. Voting Tory is not a choice I take lightly, but I do feel we need change and we've gone too far with the benefits system to the point where some people choose not to work. I guess I should have a look at the Lib Dems to see where they're going with social policies.

 

I did chuckle the other day at Cameron's speech questioning Labour's record on poverty. I've no doubt that the mimimum wage would've never been implemented under a Tory government and millions more kids would still be living in poverty.

[Thedelldays]

It is a shame that an organisation like the NHS could not employ those who are "able to work" but won't in this current climate

[bungle]

It is a shame that an organisation like the NHS could not employ those who are "able to work" but won't in this current climate

 

But surely you just want people off JSA so they aren't leaching off the state? If the NHS just creates jobs for them, surely that is going to cost the taxpayer more money than the £60 per week JSA anyway?

[Thedelldays]

But surely you just want people off JSA so they aren't leaching off the state? If the NHS just creates jobs for them, surely that is going to cost the taxpayer more money than the £60 per week JSA anyway?

 

Not create jobs. But if an opening at a hospital came available there could be a scheme were it was offered to the benefits office and people who are fit and able to work should get it. Win/win

 

of course you could argue that not advertising the job is not fair. Bit right now, we all face a massive economic problem an being fair like that should take a back seat for say two years

[bungle]

Not create jobs. But if an opening at a hospital came available there could be a scheme were it was offered to the benefits office and people who are fit and able to work should get it. Win/win

 

of course you could argue that not advertising the job is not fair. Bit right now, we all face a massive economic problem an being fair like that should take a back seat for say two years

 

I would imagine suitable NHS jobs are alreaedy offered through the Jobcentre. If you aren't creating any new jobs, then you aren't actually going to take anyone out of unemployment, so I don't see what benefit this has to anyone?

[Gingeletiss]

I would imagine suitable NHS jobs are alreaedy offered through the Jobcentre. If you aren't creating any new jobs, then you aren't actually going to take anyone out of unemployment, so I don't see what benefit this has to anyone?

 

Then get them doing gardening for Old age Pensioners, there are loads of 'jobs' they could be doing, to earn their 'entitlement'...

[Johnny Bognor]

Then get them doing gardening for Old age Pensioners, there are loads of 'jobs' they could be doing, to earn their 'entitlement'...

 

Instead of "bob-a-job", you could call it "slob-a-job". Mind you, it would put the Scouts out of business.

 

On a serious note, there is loads of community service type work that could be done. This would improve the environment for all and would be seen as a contribution to society.

[Clapham Saint]

Instead of "bob-a-job", you could call it "slob-a-job". Mind you, it would put the Scouts out of business.

 

On a serious note, there is loads of community service type work that could be done. This would improve the environment for all and would be seen as a contribution to society.

 

 

It might also help to foster a greater sense of community. Or is that too much to hope for?

[View From The Top]

It might also help to foster a greater sense of community. Or is that too much to hope for?

 

The Finchley ***** made it quite clear that the Tories don't believe that there is anything called society.

[View From The Top]

Instead of "bob-a-job", you could call it "slob-a-job". Mind you, it would put the Scouts out of business.

 

On a serious note, there is loads of community service type work that could be done. This would improve the environment for all and would be seen as a contribution to society.

 

 

I think there should be clear demarcation from those claiming benefits who are activity seeking work and those who are benefit reliant spongers.

 

Those long term, work shy, lazy f***ers should have their benefits cut by 10% for each and every month they are claiming, once beyond a certain calender threshold.

 

Those actively seeking work should be supported.

[Clapham Saint]

I think there should be clear demarcation from those claiming benefits who are activity seeking work and those who are benefit reliant spongers.

 

Those long term, work shy, lazy f***ers should have their benefits cut by 10% for each and every month they are claiming, once beyond a certain calender threshold.

 

Those actively seeking work should be supported.

 

+1 .

[aintforever]

Instead of "bob-a-job", you could call it "slob-a-job". Mind you, it would put the Scouts out of business.

 

On a serious note, there is loads of community service type work that could be done. This would improve the environment for all and would be seen as a contribution to society.

 

It is a good idea but I think one problem in getting the unemployed to do things like litter-picking is that it makes current litter-pickers redundant. So all you end up doing is lowering the wage of the worst jobs.

 

In principle it's a good idea, if they can find a way for it to work.

[bridge too far]

In principle I agree as I see far too much of the benefit society for my liking.

 

That said, the system needs to be streamlined so work does pay. Far too many people think they lose everything as soon as they sign off.[/QUOTE]

 

When so many people were unemployed during the late 80s, a friend of mine experienced difficulty with this.

 

He was a film editor who had been made redundant so he started looking for freelance work. He signed on whilst he was looking and got unemployment benefit (as it was called then) and assistance with his mortgage. He had worked all his adult life and was married with 4 children.

 

Occasionally, freelance work did come in. But if he'd declared this, and signed off only to sign on again when the assignment ended (and the assignments usually only lasted a couple of weeks), he would then have had to wait another 6 weeks, or 3 months, or whatever it was at the time, before he would start to get benefits again.

 

Obviously he couldn't afford this with so many commitments. I imagine some people currently on JSA turn down temporary jobs for the very same reason. And of course some people really are better off on JSA than working in a very low paid job because of things like free prescriptions, housing benefit etc that they lose once they're back at work.

 

I'm not condoning it - just trying to understand why it happens sometimes.

[badgerx16]

On a serious note, there is loads of community service type work that could be done. This would improve the environment for all and would be seen as a contribution to society.

But what would happen to all those offenders who are being sentenced to 'community service' by the courts, particularly now as there is a recommendation that anybody whose offence carries a tariff of less than 12 months should be kept out of our overcrowded jails ?