Workhouse Britain

Just a couple of thoughts on all this.

To me it seems that if you are on the dole and a single person in the UK, it must be a very bleak life. Given the rate of Jobseeker's Allowance, I can't imagine how you would do more than just survive, with no cash to live any kind of life. And in the winter, unable even to heat your home properly.
Why anyone would want to go on for years and years with such an existence if they had a choice to make things better for themselves, is hard to see.
Unless they were simply either stupid, under educated or had some other kind of problem.
The 'under educated' bit of course is down to the education system. Something all governments say they are keen to improve, while all the time, from the perspective of someone looking at it from the outside, it seems to get worse and worse.

When people say they know some on benefits who go on holiday abroad and have expensive clothes etc, I just wonder how that can be.
The rate for contribution based JSA is:
age under 25 - £56.80
age 25 or over - £71.70.

How on around £60 or £70 a week you could afford to pay for a hol, and have money in your pocket to spend, is something of a mystery to me. Unless you were making money on the side through whatever means. But benefit fraud is another and separate issue.

Anyway, they say they will get the long term unemployed to cook meals for pensioners.
What do those pensioners eat now? I think some who need care already get help from professional carers with that sort of thing. So it's a fact that if you replace them with people on benefits, you can sack the carers and get the job done cheaper. With no regard at all for the feelings of the old folks themselves about it. or the quality of the care they will get from people who don't want to be there.
Even though they worked for years, paid taxes etc, they just get fobbed off with yet another mickey mouse scheme.

The basic equation here is that the system as a whole doesn't provide enough jobs for everyone. So unemployment is inevitable. Given that persistent fact, there are sure to be some who become long term unemployed through no fault of their own, but due to systemic causes. Systemic failure you could say.
I don't think, and this is only my perception of it, that this proposal by the govt. is so much about helping people back into work in a meaningful way as it is about diverting people's attention away from the more serious issues. Or indeed, seeing how they are being successively stripped of rights and generally ripped off by big business interests and their representatives, politicians.

 

Maybe if the Bank of England had invested some of the billions of quantitative easing into real industry and manufacturing base,like we used to have before everything got outsourced to China and Asia,we would have some proper jobs for people in this country.But they'd rather line the pockets of a select clique of banksters and rely on a housing bubble to create an artificial sense of wealth to con people into voting Tory at the next election.

The same with America.If banks can print money out of nowhere why is it given to financiers to further enrich the 1% and not put into the public purse for the greater good of the general population.

This system is legalised robbery - can we take it to court now?

 

I agree that giving people some basic skills is all to the good. But maybe if the governments of the past had been at all competent at organizing the education system, people wouldn't be illiterate etc in the first place.

I think there are some people out there who could be unemployable for social reasons. I have met a few who although they weren't physically incapable of work, you could just never see getting a job.

There you have my sympathies. A very similar thing happened to me some years ago when I tried to return to education and go to uni.
I had a period on benefits when if the rules had allowed I could have been studying to better myself and get onto a higher tier of employment. Maybe to fulfill potential I felt I had wasted as a youth.
What you say seems to me to show how hollow Cameron's phrase "aspirational Britain" is.

If you want to go to uni and don't have the A levels etc, some colleges run Access to Higher Education courses, which are often part time. I don't know what the rules are on JSA, but I think you are allowed to do a certain amount of PT study. They would also help and advise about courses, applications etc.

 

I tend to watch Corrie and Emmerdale

Seriously, I can see how it can be for some people.
Especially if you have no family or friends.
And especially if your at a certain point in your life.
I'm relatively young, have family and friends, and have not been out of work that long.
I can definitely say I've had my moments, but, generally I'm upbeat.
I don't find myself having to choose 'heat' or 'food'.
It's ok. For me : /

I THINK it's 'work' in the voluntary sector 'community work'.
Not replacing 'payed' work.
I presume cooking meals for O.A.Ps is basically cooking in community kitchens where people don't get payed for doing it.
Perhaps even cooking for people in their homes that usually goes to volunteers.
Don't they already have the 'workfare' programme?
I doubt they would roll out the exact same thing.
For all the tough talk - this might be 'workfare' lite.

from 1997:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-tories-were-right-workfare-really-works-1280874.html

 

Right, Tom1 - you're going to get slated because you talk crap.

So how much of the current welfare bill goes on unemployment benefits ? 50% ? 75% Well, it must be something huge, musn't it ?

Uh, no... its actually around 3%. Yes, three per cent.

More than twice that much (around 8%) is paid out in in-work benefits (tax credits, etc). Perhaps even hard working you receive some of these ?

By far the biggest amount goes in old age pensions. As even the basic pension is twice as much as the basic unemployment payment, perhaps we should be cutting pensions ?

Your proof to back up such a sweeping statement ? (Having read it in the Daily Mail doesn't count...)

And how do you see all this when you're supposedly out working hard ? How do you have such an intimate knowledge of their finances anyway ? Do you go through their bins or something ?

Dont you also see the people reliant on foodbanks ? People being made homeless ?

Yes, and when I was employed I contributed too. So did many other thousands of people now unemployed.

The majority of the unemployed haven't always been unemployed, and for the vast majority becoming so was not a lifestyle choice, whatever you might think. Do you believe I threw in an above-minimum wage job just to live on 71.00 a week ?

Not for everyone there isn't ! Read my previous post - 42 unemployed for every vacancy round here. Does that sound like plenty ?

Well, not counting the Great Depression, for example. Perhaps the Jarrow Crusade marchers were just skivers after something for nothing.

There has never been full employment, and there never will be.


Tom1, if you think everyone on the dole is living it up, why not join them ? In fact, if life for them is as good as you seem to think, you'd be stupid not to.

Plenty of people willing to take your place. You're not expendable, one day your bosses may think they can make a saving by getting rid of you...

 

Of course its not forced... you'd have the choice between a small amount of money to buy food and shelter...or nothing at all.

No pressure there at all, then.

In fact, probably more pressure on the people your slave labour is putting out of work.

Does anyone see a flaw in this ?

 

Perhaps.
I tend to think that some people just fall through the cracks.
I doubt many children in the last 30 years have been willingly left behind.
Today, some critics, even say teachers are too much like social workers, and try and deal with all of the childs needs.
Are they not on strike, in part, for increasing workloads?
I dunno, it's a difficult one.

That's the type I was referring to.
I did try and include various types of people that found themselves out of work for longer than two years.
Rather than suggest they all were just work-shy.

Well, it can be done. But when I tried it was in April, and the academic year started in September/October.
So there wasn't much they or I could do till then.
Not that it felt like they would do anything anyway.
I'm one of those 'capable' people that should be able to help myself, apparently.
To a degree (pardon the pun) that is fair enough.
It's very complicated, and the jobcentre don't really want to help you at all - if you are over 24.
The motivation and drive to do anything is just sapped from you every time you visit the jobcenter.
Most of the effort is on me, I recognise that.

People from abroad seem to find ways and means to do it after being in the country less than a year.
The problem I have is being able to afford to do it, with the burdens I already have.

 

Even back in the 19th century when Britain was the world's leading industrial and imperial power there was absolute grinding poverty, and unemployment.
Of course, the rich in those days were very rich.

We still have the very rich of course, but now we have a Britain that has been in decline for many decades. Given the rise of China, India et al, it looks like this decline is terminal, irreversible. So it seems logical to assume that this unemployment problem isn't going to go away any time soon.

I think to some extent it comes down to 'what kind of society do we want to live in?'
One where people get decent and fair treatment, or one where multi millionaires rail against the idle and workshy unemployed, whilst the Mail etc look on in approval.

..

That's something a lot of people just don't seem to see.

 

That's because it doesn't exist any more. Its the Work Programme now. You will eventually get to go on it, if you're unemployed long enough, but you wont have to volunteer - you wont have a choice.

Not from the Work Programme you wont. They'll be looking for any way to get you off the unemployment figures, including 'sanctioning' you for just about any perceived misdemeanour. The WP is not the Job Centre, its run by private companies whose one aim is to make money out of you - you will become a commodity.

More jobs might be a start (I repeat - 42 unemployed for each job in my town). But lets face it, unemployment is never going to come down (at least in the shape of proper paid jobs).

Lots of public sector jobs were cut in this region, "to save money". That meant a lot more unemployed people.

We were told that the private sector would step in and take up the slack. They didn't.

End result ? Fewer jobs, more unemployed. But hey, we saved some money (which is now being payed out in increased unemployment benefits to those whose jobs were lost to...save money !). Its the economics of the madhouse.

Oh - and blame unemployment on the unemployed. that always gets a round of applause at the party conference.

 

For some unfortunates its less - those hit by the Bedroom Tax.

I guess they have to cut down on their foreign holidays...

 

Or to put it more crudely - do we want everyone inside the tent pissing out, or a sizeable number outside pissing in ?

Outside pissing in meaning more crime (when people are left with no other option - and fewer police, since their resources are being cut too), mass homelessness, the inevitable rise in disease (and the NHS cut back) and just generally a return to the worst excesses of Victorian underclass society.

 

Listen Mr Frankenstein - wind your tongue in and that attitude whilst youre at it! There are ways to present your argument without having your kind of attitude. I appreciate that you may be someone who right now is struggling to make ends meet after loosing a job. It is hard for you and i honestly understand some of your points.

To answer some of your questions...

I don't read the Daily Mail for a start. Whilst on the subject of papers - you obviously contradict yourself as you have placed a link to a national newspaper in your original thread.

I have a good understanding of the welfare benefits system because i work in it and have done for many years. I've heard many stories, seen lots of fraud, seen people get away with it and seen people not get away with it. You name it and i've probably come across it. I've dealt with people relying on hardship payments, food banks etc. I've seen and dealt with individuals who are experiencing true poverty, desperate situations, need more help... the benefits system is there for them guys and if you care to actually read my original response you will see that i have quite clearly stated that more needs to be done for those who truly need welfare benefits. I have also seen a large number of individuals who are capable of working but know how to manipulate the system. People who claim to be in dire need of hardship payments yet they are seen week in week out on the town drinking, smoking, have a nice sky TV package and treat themselves to nice luxuries (£60 on a pair of jeans, new trainers, nice wide screen TV's etc - i could go on but im sure someone as intelligent as yourself will understand where i am going with this). It's them people who should have their benefits stopped. Unfortunately there are lots of them guys around. Despite what you may think - they are honestly a lot of those guys around. Would you consider that benefits should be paid to these people? If you was working would you agree that your tax contributions should be spent on funding these individuals lifestyles?

'The majority of the unemployed haven't always been unemployed, and for the vast majority becoming so was not a lifestyle choice, whatever you might think.'

It is quite a bold statement for you to make. It is clear you like to make presumptions as your latest response is full of them. I haven't said nor do i think that everyone who is unemployed has never worked. Thats stupid to think like that. There are people out there, and im sure you are one of them, who have contributed so much to society through employment but for reasons of which are beyond their control loose their job.

As for applying for jobs... they are out there. You keep applying and you will be the number one out of those 42. Have you looked at alternatives to being employed? such as being self employed? maybe there is something that youre good at that can generate you some income without having to have a boss over you.

Again you presume that i think everyone on 'the dole' is living it up. I don't and i have genuine empathy for those individuals who need benefits and agree that more should be done to help these people.

There are so many ways that this country could save more to help those in need but that is for another day.

I don't mean to come across as an arsehole because i'm not. - infact if your ever in my neck of the woods i'd probably buy you a pint. Just as you are sharing your views i am sharing mine and my experience.

 

And when they've re-created the whole 19th century world, they won't even have enough soldiers to do a re-run of Peterloo. Because the soldiers too will have been thrown onto the rubbish heap.

 

I saw someone out on the town with a nice sky TV package..........with my own eyes. Visible for all to behold.


58 quid a week. 60 quid on a pair of jeans.

Sure.

 

Mr. Frankenstein

There seems to be still recent references to it.
Is it basically being phased out and in it's place the 'work programme' is being put in it's place. No real difference!
Remember, I was talking about getting on it in April.
Is it just getting a new title and combining other programmes into one?

https://www.gov.uk/government/polic.../supporting-pages/managing-the-work-programme

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_Programme

When I asked about it in April, the information I had read said something about 3 months - then you can apply. Then I was told it was after my contributions based JSA had run out (this September). Then I was told it was after a year. The jobcentre don't seem to know anything about it - it 'isn't their department'.

I'm not quite sure why they don't want people to join untill after 2 years or they fall into some bizarre criteria.

http://www.yourworkprogramme.com/index.php/about-the-work-programme/volunteer-to-the-work-programme

They can get mo off their 'books' now if they want. I want to give a try, see what all the fuss is about. But they won't allow me, it seems.

I've read too many things about it to know what the actual facts are - in relation to travel.
I have been told it's half the cost (you get reimbursed).
I have been told it's only if you go for an interview.
I think it depends which 'provider' you find yourself 'working' for.

How does the government create new jobs?

I'm not really playing party politics. Sorry.

 

By who ? You ? Or just hearsay ?

How do you know ? How do you know what they buy or what they spend ? How do you know what TV they watch ?

Well then - you work in the industry, you know all the scroungers, apparently have their most intimate details at your fingertips - why haven't YOU done something about it ?

If you really do work in the industry you'll know all the nasty little ways, such as anonymous tip-offs.

Or surveillance. Perhaps that's the area you work in ?

It might explain how you seem to have such intimate knowledge of people's finances or indeed their household goods or TV choices.

You know I see similar statements appear on forums or in the newspapers - its always someone who knows someone else who is getting this, that or the other for nothing while they , the writer, is hardworking, tax paying...

I've always thought these letters were written by trolls.

In fact, Tom1, I think you are a troll. A DWP troll.

 

Not 'them' but 'those'.

Semi illiterate DWP troll I'd say. But they are very good at mangling the english language.

 

Welfare To Work was basically the last Labour attempt, I think. The current programme is Work Programme. One big difference is WP is for 2 years - was only 13 weeks under labour's.

Far as I know (I walk so dont claim travel) you can claim back travel for official appointments only. If you frequent their office unofficially (to use computers or whatever) you dont get travel. But yeah, different providers, different rules, although the DWP documents that they are all supposed to stick to are available online.

If they really want zero unemployment, or anything vaguely near it, then the only way is for a Soviet style everyone-employed-by-the-state kind of situation. Not recommending it, just saying.

Nor am I - have you seen the Labour plans for unemployment ? Stinks every bit as much as the Tories.

 

Isn't it 'semi-literate' ? I thought 'semi-iliterate' was one of those horrible Americanisms - like 'could care less'.

Never mind. I'm just joking.