Kicked off A4e and then wrestled out of job center.

vegankris

Even though the posters wishface responded to may not have used any swear words per se themselves, they were still IMHO very abusive, bullying and belittling towards others in their posts. It's no wonder s/he was furious- righteous indignation I'd call it.

I'd also like to add that expecting jobseekers to work below the rate of minimum wage is abusive, exploitative, and slave labour.

I see nothing wrong with doing voluntary work per se (in fact I'm currently in paid employment and do some voluntary work myself) but that's not to say there aren't some people out there who do exploit their volunteers. I've heard a few horror stories.

From what I've heard by people who have attended them, the League Of Gentlemen comedy show's parody of Jobseekers' courses was pretty accurate! (And also very funny, if you've never seen it, it's worth a watch!) This'll cheer you up!-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y309i3u_J9A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Chm34KJB_w

wishface

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I don't see anything wrong in advocating a bit of self control in public. To say that "she was escorted off the building for refusing to take no for an answer " suggests to me a spoiled child who's having a tantrum because she's not getting exactly what she wants.

You weren't advocating 'a bit of self control in public' (whatever that means).

In fact this quote really says all I need to know about you and confirms everything I said. You are a nasty, bitter sort who chooses ignorance and fear over compassion and respect.

Of course people are never escorted from buildings (jobcentres or otherwise) unreasonably; the authorities and the state are never wrong. So it must be that this poor woman was a hysterical loon worthy of little more than our disdain.

What she wanted was for someone to help.

But, as is the case these days, all people like you want to do is tut and walk away while using such people (people you don't know) to further confirm all your sad little prejudices and neuroses.

Life is hard enough without people like you; that people like you choose to make others; lives that bit harder is why I find you objectionable. The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with.

red_devil

There are people sent on New Deal who clearly shouldnt be there but have just been sent because they are unemployed.

Its been known for people with drink/drug problems to be on them and for them to be going into the toilets to do the necessary then returning to the training room in a bit of a state and have to be asked to leave the building. This isnt very nice for anyone else and unnerving. I think its disgusting. They shouldnt be there.

If you complain then the powers that be deny it.

glossgal

Wishface, I have more real quantifiable experience of benefit claimants of all creeds, class, colours, circumstances etc then you could ever dream of in your tiny mind of so don't lazily assume everyone is as reactionary as your good self.

I have no intention of switching goal posts and discussing MP crimes-although I love the indignation of the public btw who wail at the MPs whilst having one hand in the stationary cupboard at work-I was merely making the point that rules can be brought in for the good of everyone. Yes many claim legitimatley but if you really think all claims are bourne of genuine need and the system works fine as it is then you must have been brought up in a cave, or at least currently reside in one so as not to observe how a significant portion of modern British society operates .

The wildly defensive tone of your posts can only lead someone with any degree of intelligence to assume you are one of the 'leeching waster scumbags' (not my words, the dulcet tones of the OP) we are talking about??

wishface

glossgal wrote: »

Wishface, I have more real quantifiable experience of benefit claimants of all creeds, class, colours, circumstances etc then you could ever dream of in your tiny mind of so don't lazily assume everyone is as reactionary as your good self.

Where have I assumed that everyone is as reactionary? I await your response with appropriate quotes including examples proving my opinions to be equally so.

The only 'experience' demonstrated is that you are prepared to give undue credence to hearsay and judge accordingly. I certainly hope that isn't an attribute that typifies JC staff.

glossgal wrote: »

I have no intention of switching goal posts and discussing MP crimes-although I love the indignation of the public btw who wail at the MPs whilst having one hand in the stationary cupboard at work-I was merely making the point that rules can be brought in for the good of everyone. Yes many claim legitimatley but if you really think all claims are bourne of genuine need and the system works fine as it is then you must have been brought up in a cave, or at least currently reside in one so as not to observe how a significant portion of modern British society operates .

What does it matter if a tiny insignificant minority are fiddling the system? Are you going to tar everyone with the same brush (which you have)? Using this as an excuse to make a difficult poorly managed unfair system in society that treats people using it badly even more so is poor thinking at best.

I wasn't brought up in a cave, I just make sure I know what I'm talking about rather than resort to populist opinions about welfare and the society involved. This continued idea that 'because people are claiming then X% of that must be on the fiddle' is just stupid. IF you run the country with that logic, no one would have a job! Would you suggest we stop selling food because of supermarket chains that don't pay enough corporate tax? Do we sack all the GP's because one of them was a serial killer?

glossgal wrote: »

The wildly defensive tone of your posts can only lead someone with any degree of intelligence to assume you are one of the 'leeching waster scumbags' (not my words, the dulcet tones of the OP) we are talking about??

not your words? did someone else type them for you then?

it never ceases to amaze me how little it takes for your kind to show their true colours.

Oldernotwiser

wishface wrote: »

You weren't advocating 'a bit of self control in public' (whatever that means).
.

I wonder how I knew that you wouldn't understand the concept!

JoeBreakdown

wishface wrote: »

Well of course people should be educated. That doesn't mean they aren't. This country isn't drowning under a wave of single mother poverty.

Nor does it mean that such people shouldn't receive welfare where needed. But if you think people become single mothers just to 'get on the social'; well you need to stop watching Shameless and reading the News of the Screws.

There are exceptions to the nature of people in all walks of life, but the papers aren't filled with the misdeeds perpetrated by office workers stealing stationery, sales reps abusing corporate junkets and expenses, retail workers who help themselves to stock or anyone anywhere.

As for basing your opinions on what you overheard some complete stranger saying...well honestly, you're as bad as Carole Malone if that's how you think. The world needs less people like her (if youre worried about overcrowding there's a place to start).

I do not base my opinions on a conversation I overhead. I was merely giving an example as to why people think like that. I certainly don't think people should be sterilised at birth, and to suggest that I might, is rather offensive.

My off tangent point was mainly that bringing up a child in poverty is certainly not ideal and maybe more could be done to educate so this happens less.

We do live in a vastly over populated World, however, but I concede this has very little to do with the British Welfare State.

I admit was response was a not in tune with the OP's post, but you will see that I do indeed sympathise with them.

nexuss

red_devil wrote: »

i think its crazy that the jc staff are under pressure to get people back into work how can they, they dont dish out the jobs its the companies that do.

The government have even cut jobs so its odd.

As the GOVT does no wish to be employing so many JC staff as of the cost.

wishface

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I wonder how I knew that you wouldn't understand the concept!

I asked you to explain your words. What i understand is irrelevant: you made the comment so it's your responsibility to explain it if you wish to be taken seriously. Until then please enjoy living in the victorian ages. What's next I wonder: back to the poorhouses? Sending kids up chimneys and down mineshafts? Debtors prisons? Typhoid?

Those were the good old days!

Widelats

This thread is getting better than the MP's expenses row ...

All those in favour of salve labour and doing exactly what the govornment tells you even though you will cry and starve say 'eye' .... LOL 1 vote from oldernotwiser so motion is declined .... order .... order ... wheres my expenses sheet!! ....