Institute for Fiscal Studies Forecast Decade of Pain - Guardian

carolt

Davesnave wrote: »

No, it's not 'too easy.' I pay tax too. I'm not denying that, as a medium-term strategy, reducing benefits paid to the work-shy is essential.

However, as a teacher, you will know that effecting change in behaviour is a difficult process involving an alteration of mind-set, and it just doesn't happen overnight, even among the relatively well-motivated.

I think it's too easy to say, 'Let them starve,' when you and I know that children are involved, so this nuclear option will never be used.

I'm not saying 'let them starve'; I was just disagreeing with your assessment that those currently unemployed are also unemployable.

The reason I'm a teacher is precisely because I believe that everyone can learn and improve, if shown how to do it - giving up on people just reinforces their own belief that they can't do it and therefore shouldn't bother trying.

Anyone who's been unemployed for any length of time knows that the hardest thing is not others' attitudes but your own - the unemployed may well need help - or a good push - to get them off their !!!!!! and back into work, because if they've not worked in a while, they may have lost the belief they'd be capable of it.

Davesnave

I don't think we are disagreeing, Carol, except perhaps over the time scale.

The problem is that every other week this government has come out with some ill-considered, underfunded, half-baked initiative, and this has to be something much bigger & better planned than anything so far envisaged.

I'm not sure if any party likely to be governing has the political will to do it properly.

carolt

I think it does have to be done though - I was reading last week about various parts of the UK, eg some of the poorer London boroughs where virtually half the children living there were in homes where everyone lived off benefits! :eek:

Clearly, when we're 800 bn in debt as a country, this cannot and should not be allowed to continue.

kennyboy66_2

Generali wrote: »

The obvious thing to do with the NHS is charge for it. If there's no financial cost to using something, people will use it until it costs them in other ways.

People routinely go to their GP with colds and things like that. It's a waste of time and money. If it cost them, they'd think twice.

The problem is, the UK needs to save hundreds of billions of pounds, not just a few quid here and there. You can't tinker round the edges any more. You need wholesale changes and you need them now.

Except that in many countries that charge, people visit their doctor significantly more than they do in the UK.

The real problem is that people who mainly use the NHS tend to be old or sick and poor.
Or all 3.

Who'd have though it eh ?

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_con_wit_doc-health-consultation-with-doctors

Plenty of things wrong with the NHS amongst plenty of good things, but to think that spending more on Health care as a nation (which is inevitable if we go down the pay route), is a solution to this country problems is somewhat naive.

The_White_Horse

Davesnave wrote: »

It isn't that simple, though.

Even if half the useless people in the country decided to go out and work, who would employ them? Most lack the skills employed people have, so a good proportion would probably be more of a liability than an asset.

Considering that well-educated people are finding jobs tricky to find, I don't hold out much hope for the f eckless suddenly transforming themselves, whatever we do. More will simply turn to crime.

If they are given nothing, they will have to do something. If they turn to crime, then so be it, provided they are PROPERLY punished. These people should be put down like the animals they are.

kennyboy66_2

Wookster wrote: »

Many of the immigrants who have come here are unskilled, they work in food processing plants, as cleaners, fruit pickers. I don't see why those who have been on benefits for years couldn't do jobs like that, infact they should be doing jobs like that. The only two things stopping them (please add if there are more) is a lack of work ethic and the state benefits system that allows people to stay on benefits for years on end.

Your are right, but for the wrong reason.

Most of the immigrants are actually skilled, it just happens that the easiest route into the job market for new entrants without perfect english is in un-skilled work.

I exclude the seaonal agricultural labour schemes as the vast majority of those people are not immigrants in the normal sense.

Generali

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Your are right, but for the wrong reason.

Most of the immigrants are actually skilled, it just happens that the easiest route into the job market for new entrants without perfect english is in un-skilled work.

I exclude the seaonal agricultural labour schemes as the vast majority of those people are not immigrants in the normal sense.

My mate used to joke that the Russian behind the bar in the pub near our old workplace could serve you a pint and later give you a liver transplant.

It's tough to get a decent job if you can't fill out a job application in great English. Easier to get an entry level job at first, build up the language skills and then try to get back into your old line.

The_White_Horse

i think one of the biggest problems is the perceived and very real unfairness of it all. On my way to the station, to my boring job that I do to pay the bills, i pass an out of work gentlemen most days. He is usually out walking his large mastiff style dog (I would like a dog, but my wife and I work, so there is noone to look after one during the day). He is also invariably smoking. My wife and I gave up smoking because of the negative effect on health, but mainly because they were becoming so expensive, we couldn't justify buying them. Yet this bone idle leech can happily smoke all day, with his dog, his can of beer and his free house.

If you don't work, you should GET NOTHING except the bare minimum to get through the day. A small bit of food and that is all. Taste is a luxury. You want taste, work and buy something tastier. You want to smoke? Work. You want to booze? Work. You want a dog? Work.

At a very minimum, these people should be forced to sit behind a desk all day doing nothing but looking for jobs from 9 to 5 = and have to wear a suit to do it. Only then should they get a greatly reduced from the current amount, allowance.

I am sat at a desk, working, paying tax and he is currently sunning himself in flats garden, drinking and smoking.

IT IS A TRAVESTY OF NATURAL JUSTICE.

Wookster

Davesnave wrote: »

I'm not sure if any party likely to be governing has the political will to do it properly.

This is the real problem.

Labour don't do anything, The Tories will treat beneficiaries of benefits belligerently and the Lib Dems will say its because they had disadvantaged childhoods.

No real solutions are in sight and to be honest, I wouldn't know what to do - you simply can't educate a couple of million people individually. Its the idea that the state will provide indefinitely if you won't that is so wholly broken.

leftieM

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i think one of the biggest problems is the perceived and very real unfairness of it all. On my way to the station, to my boring job that I do to pay the bills, i pass an out of work gentlemen most days. He is usually out walking his large mastiff style dog (I would like a dog, but my wife and I work, so there is noone to look after one during the day). He is also invariably smoking. My wife and I gave up smoking because of the negative effect on health, but mainly because they were becoming so expensive, we couldn't justify buying them. Yet this bone idle leech can happily smoke all day, with his dog, his can of beer and his free house.

It's good that he smokes. For every 20 fags he buys, he puts £4.45 of his dole money back into the taxman's pocket.