More nonsense from the tory toffs

[caro]

The reason there's so much community and voluntary work, not to mention unemployment, is because of cuts in public spending. Instead of wasting so much money persecuting those who need some support, we need proper funding of public services. At least old people wouldn't need to rely on charity and "community workers" to cook their meals, and people would be paid a proper wage for their work.

[dyfed]

Youre only here to get the rich richer so get used to it!

[estellyn]

Just for the record I didn't say I thought it did.

I have just told the labour party that before I vote for them they need to be a socialist party

 

I know, I wasn't saying you did. I was pointing out that if they had any sense they'd look at places like Kansas and realise that their economic ideology is flawed.

[Mr.P]

The real question is where would it stop. Where would that thin line be drawn?

 

Why is it a thin line ?

In the context of this discussion, perhaps it should be a little chubby, could do with losing a few pounds line...

 

As for the election, too close to call IMO. [...] All I know is that it will be a hung parliament

 

Great idea, I'll go and get the ropes

[essexmat]

"Frankly I have no idea how anyone on JSA or other income related benefits can possibly afford something like a flat screen TV"

 

I am on ESA and HB and guess what? I have a 42" TV, games console, laptop, tablet, music system etc - I cannot see a problem with that? I worked for 20 years and paid NI and Tax and got a redundancy payment - why should I not have these things? Also, what I claim is for rent and food - these purchases were made from MY MONEY and nothing to do with DWP whatsoever.

 

Oh, and I also go on regular breaks away - paid for out of the very little saving I have and my Father helping me out of his money - the money he worked 42 years for before claiming benefits due to having three strokes and vascular surgery.

 

Just because people are on benefits it does not mean they should sit at home eat pot noodles and have no life at all - a lot of these people have worked hard for their money and paid their way and are now on benefits due to illness and redundancy

[fletch70]

Don't get so defensive. Read the rest of what I wrote.

 

I do not understand how anyone can fund these things out of JSA as it is such a little amount

[honeybee13]

I think we're straying off topic now, can we stick to matters related to Tommy's thread title please?

 

HB

[tommy456]

I see in last night question time on the BBC the same rhetoric from their mouths regarding this, Do their MP's go through some brainwashing process ,? i also noticed a couple of what appeared to me a couple tory stooges that where amongst the audience how much where they paid i wonder?

[tfp]

Workfare - the economics of the nut house!!!

 

Henry Ford once famously said ''If I don't pay my workers decent wages, how are they going to be able to afford the cars my factories produce?" And Ford was hardly a liberal. In fact he was as hard nosed a businessman as they came - and then some! Ford simply knew that if his own workers could not afford his Model T's, not many others would!

 

Today, we see zero-hour jobs, dodgy self employment positions and unpaid workfare. How can people in such positions afford to buy even life's necessities, let alone any luxuries?

 

Of course we often hear that workfare will instil a ''work ethic'' into the young unemployed and will teach them ''how to get up in the morning'' (despite the fact most will have performed this task regularly by going to school). However, what about teaching them the benefits and giving them the experience of earning a wage in return for the work the Govt. expect them to dutifully perform???

 

What workfare does is shift the blame onto job seekers themselves. Supporters of workfare suggest it is not a lack of jobs, but the actual behaviour of the job seeker. Hence we hear terms such as ''scrounger, feckless and work-shy'' And the notion that they (job seekers) must ''put something back'' further strengthening the notion that all job seekers do is take, take take.

 

This is useful reading on the matter:

 

https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/why-workfare-isnt-working/

[fletch70]

Workfare is nothing new and certainly nothing the Yanks can claim credit for. It is just one step away from the workhouse which is a great British tradition (or not as the case may be)

[SabreSheep]

Quite agree

 

Austerity is simply put Broken economics.

 

The less people can afford to spend = reduced demand - reduced jobs = less spending.

 

Job security Reduced = People putting money away as they cannot guarantee an income = Less spending = Reduced Jobs

 

The current shower of idiots think that by cutting overheads, by introducing cheaper labor and workfare will lead to economic growth. It will not do so. Instead unemployment will appear to fall, but spending will remain flat or grow very very slowly. The rest of the GDP increase will be down to increases in property dues to an ever deficient housing stock.

 

As we are seeing, inflation is heading for deflation. The bank has held interest rates at silly levels because it is trying to stimulate spending by making it less favorable to save money. Problem is the job market being so saturated with non jobs, zero hour and part time work mean people CANT spend. That and Short term tenancy agreements adding uncertanty also reduces spending.

 

Ignoring eu and world economy. If inflation continues to drop and hit deflation then there is big problems. Spending will further reduce. Why make that big purchase today when it will be cheaper tomorrow!

The bank will have to raise interest rates.

All those buy to lets and middle class with mortgages. Woops! We hit another Crash!

 

Again, worst felt by those renting from private buy to let landlords who find themselves homeless.

 

In short to fix this economy properly for everyone.

 

1) BAN zero hour contracts. (Yes for a small number there are good reason but not for the majority)

2) Encourage FULL TIME Jobs

3) Encourage longer tenancy agreements.

4) Raise the minimum wage to a living wage (Do it slowly allowing time for business to adjust) This will also stop deflation and encourage inflation

5) Education - Sort that **** out. Apprenticeships etc.

6) Employees that have to still claim housing benefit whilst working, their benefits get reclaimed from the employer by the government. Stop subsidising BAD employers

7) Essential services taken BACK into public ownership. Rail, Utilities. etc

[citizenB]

Quite agree

 

Austerity is simply put Broken economics.

 

The less people can afford to spend = reduced demand - reduced jobs = less spending.

 

Job security Reduced = People putting money away as they cannot guarantee an income = Less spending = Reduced Jobs

 

The current shower of idiots think that by cutting overheads, by introducing cheaper labor and workfare will lead to economic growth. It will not do so. Instead unemployment will appear to fall, but spending will remain flat or grow very very slowly. The rest of the GDP increase will be down to increases in property dues to an ever deficient housing stock.

 

As we are seeing, inflation is heading for deflation. The bank has held interest rates at silly levels because it is trying to stimulate spending by making it less favorable to save money. Problem is the job market being so saturated with non jobs, zero hour and part time work mean people CANT spend. That and Short term tenancy agreements adding uncertanty also reduces spending.

 

Ignoring eu and world economy. If inflation continues to drop and hit deflation then there is big problems. Spending will further reduce. Why make that big purchase today when it will be cheaper tomorrow!

The bank will have to raise interest rates.

All those buy to lets and middle class with mortgages. Woops! We hit another Crash!

 

Again, worst felt by those renting from private buy to let landlords who find themselves homeless.

 

In short to fix this economy properly for everyone.

 

1) BAN zero hour contracts. (Yes for a small number there are good reason but not for the majority)

2) Encourage FULL TIME Jobs

3) Encourage longer tenancy agreements.

4) Raise the minimum wage to a living wage (Do it slowly allowing time for business to adjust) This will also stop deflation and encourage inflation

5) Education - Sort that **** out. Apprenticeships etc.

6) Employees that have to still claim housing benefit whilst working, their benefits get reclaimed from the employer by the government. Stop subsidising BAD employers

7) Essential services taken BACK into public ownership. Rail, Utilities. etc

 

1: I certainly agree with this. How can someone plan a future if they don't know what their earnings are going to be.. if any ? This type of contract would be great for groups such as nurses who would normally work via agencies - Local Hospitals could have a list of those who would be happy to be called in at short notice, but don't actually rely on a full time salary. This would reduce the cost by not having to pay agency fees.

 

2: Agreed - that way people can plan for the future and possibly start spending again.

 

3: I am not sure how this would work ?

 

4: Agreed - whilst employers know that the tax payer will take up the slack in tax credits, etc they will never pay a proper living wage. It is beyond my understanding that someone who is in employment has to have their salary topped up in this way.

 

5: I never understood why Apprenticeships were done away with. However the Scheme that is planned on being introduced will keep participants on low wages until they are around 25 years old !

 

6: Agreed, same response as for point 4.

 

7: Controversial, but yes - Public services should NEVER have been sold off. If they CAN make money, then that should be going back into funding repairs - expansion, etc. Not into the pockets of the already wealthy.

 

And another one..

 

Local Authorities should NOT be permitted to vote for salary increases whilst they continue to cut essential services within their boundaries.

[sillygirl1]

All that has to happen to create a fairer society is for ANYONE who becomes an MP spends THREE months on basic unemployment money with NO OTHER FUNDS OR SAVINGS.... that way the government would soon realise that the 'life of Riley (whoever he was)' is not what is portrayed by the media.

 

By no other funds or savings it means that anyone who DOES give them a handout ends up having to live the same way for the next three months.

[sillygirl1]

I should point out that many local hospitals have workers (not only nurses) who work 'Bank' shifts as well as normal shifts, especially if they have specialist skills, so that agencies aren't used... and where agencies ARE used a fixed rate is payable to the agencies.

[estellyn]

All that has to happen to create a fairer society is for ANYONE who becomes an MP spends THREE months on basic unemployment money with NO OTHER FUNDS OR SAVINGS.... that way the government would soon realise that the 'life of Riley (whoever he was)' is not what is portrayed by the media.

 

By no other funds or savings it means that anyone who DOES give them a handout ends up having to live the same way for the next three months.

 

Interesting idea, but I would just have a requirement of 1000 hours of community service with the poor of the ward each candidate chooses to run in. Would solve a huge host of problems

[sillygirl1]

The only problem with the idea of Community Services is that they would all simply state that by being an MP they ARE providing a vital service to the community in general.

 

It is the levelling of the 'financial playing field' for a short period of time which would bring a large dose of reality to the political parties.

 

This three month period would be compulsory for each time the MP is re-elected...not just a basic one-off ... to remind them of what their constituents are going through.

 

They would have to do the 'paper trail' that everyone goes through (including delay after delay for no apparent reason) before the system becomes what it should be.

[id6052]

Personally, I think MPs should: -

1. have their salary capped at a level proportionate to average earnings nationally/locally, e.g. salary to be set at the national median average salary + the lower of the constituency or national median average salary
   
2. have basic accommodation provided by the state by way of a block of Council flats
   
3. be expected to pay for their constituency accommodation our of their own pocket
   
4. be forbidden from holding secondary employment or directorships/etc (or alternatively means test their MP salary to deduct income from other sources)
   

[fletch70]

IMO the problem with the system is that in this day and age there are too many career politicians and not enough conviction politicians. Love them or hate them there used to be a few, Tony benn, Gwyneth Dunwoody and I can't believe that I am saying this Maggie. These days they are all to dependant on the leaders of their parties for their jobs .

I do agree that they should live full time in their constituency and only have basic accommodation in London if needed.

We do need to remember that they do at times need to appear professional and we do need to attract people with enough intelligence to actually make informed decisions .

 

The idea of living for 3 months on JSA is a non starter , I think most people can juggle finances for a few months , its when you start in debt or have no prospect of getting off JSA in sight.

 

Another thing to remember is that Labour is no better, remember that Blair did away with clause 4 which was one of the basic principles of the Labour party .

 

I also think a complete overhaul of the electoral system with some form of PR but they all have pros and cons however any system has to be fairer than the one we have where you can get a landslide majority with 35% of the vote which can be less than 25% of the actual available vote.

[estellyn]

The only problem with the idea of Community Services is that they would all simply state that by being an MP they ARE providing a vital service to the community in general.

 

It is the levelling of the 'financial playing field' for a short period of time which would bring a large dose of reality to the political parties.

 

This three month period would be compulsory for each time the MP is re-elected...not just a basic one-off ... to remind them of what their constituents are going through.

 

They would have to do the 'paper trail' that everyone goes through (including delay after delay for no apparent reason) before the system becomes what it should be.

 

No the idea of having to do community service of some sort to the intended constituency prior to being eligible for a seat, is to ensure that anyone intending to represent that constituency has a good understanding of the worst issues facing the constituents. I've had enough of career politicians being 'parachuted' in to run for constituencies they have no detailed knowledge about. I'm also fed up of people who have led cushy lives and public and private schooling representing large numbers of people who they have no comprehension of the issues facing them.

 

We need to change 'politics' into governance, where instead of being a power game played mostly by the rich, it instead becomes a calling for those who truly want to represent their constituents (rather than lobbying groups, industry and others like themselves).

[id6052]

the difficulty with some sort of "community service" is that the people who can afford to take 3 months off are the people who are rich already (the same people who are already over-represented in westminster)

[fletch70]

I am sure this won't go down well but I am tired of bashing politicians purely based on their perceived class . A person can not help what sector of society they are born into and what should be really important is what their experience and intentions are. I agree with estellyn about career politicians who have gone straight from University into working in some form of politics with no real life experience. What is needed is people who have lived and worked in a community, not necessarily doing community service but working somewhere they can see what real life is like.

There was a fairly recent survey that showed the perception of the Milibands was of public school professional politicians and Farage is a man of the people. In fact the Milibands were brought up in a very left wing state educated household and farage is the public school buffoon.

 

Tory does not automatically equal bad and labour does not automatically equal good. In my opinion Blair is a liar and more Tory than many tories .

 

Rant over

[tommy456]

I'm sure most labour voters hated Bliar for the questionable war in Iraq ,I wouldn't vote for him, But he was a self serving politician there are far too many of them, But why should only those that have been to further education be top politicians? they so far have proven that despite their academic qualifications they neither have any real clue about what is outside their bubbles or that thing called common sense time the real working classes had a go at running the country ,

Tonight on the news cameron has said he ain't going to take away the extra benefits that aren't currently means tested from the wealthy pensioners, so millionaires like peter string-fellow will get winter fuel payment a free bus pass and free tv licence if he wanted them, Why?, Not only does cameron want their votes, but they are like him,wealthy,

labour have said that they will make those means tested ,and IMO they should already be , as Pensions cost the tax payer a lot more than ESA/JSA do, also cameron will be increasing the retirement age , will he and cronies be working till the same age ? i doubt it even on their lucrative pay,

[citizenB]

The problem with making certain benefits, such as the winter fuel payment and bus pass, means tested.. there will always be many elderly people who are too proud to make the claims or have no one to help them do it.

 

I would say those with incomes/savings over a certain level should either not accept them or be taxed on them as income if they do.

[SabreSheep]

Rewarding a generation of people that have worked all their lives etc.

 

This generation oversaw the rise of "Greed is good" and ran up the debts this country has. THEY should be helping to cut the deficit just as much as everyone else.

 

I really wish the younger voters and the unemployed started voting on mass.

[tommy456]

If those who are middle aged aren't voting due there not being any real difference between the main 3or 4 political parties if you count ukip, It don't surprise me that the younger generation aren't interested , as none of them are going to help them ,