Figures reveal long-term jobless.

mbga9pgf

olly300 wrote: »

If you have a parent who shouts at you "Shut up" every time you say something.

Gives you a whack and tells you to "F*** off" every time you try and ask them for something.

Screams at you for playing because you are making a noise when all you are doing is playing with a wooden spoon or the one toy someone gave you because your parent can't be bothered to buy you toys.

They also sit you in front of the telly and give you some junk food do you really think you are going to be functioning as normal when you go to school?

I know more than one person who has taught in infant schools where the children come in wearing nappies, not being able to eat with cutlery and not being able to talk properly at the age of 4.

So if you are behind when you go to school i.e. can't talk in sentences how long do you think it's going to take you to learn to read?

Remember children the majority of time at home even when they are school age.


Because one reason why people steal and commit crimes is because they are functionally illiterate.


Why do you presume these people are on illegal drugs?




You show a lack of realism and emotional intelligence.

This is why CB needs to be limited to 2 children max. Why do you think scum parents like this want children? Parents like this should have their kids taken off them and they should be permanently neutered. Unfortunately, you socialists have views on such measures...

People dont steal because they are illiterate. They do it because they are BAD PEOPLE. More excuses from socialists whilst ignoring the unpleasant truth.

mbga9pgf

Davesnave wrote: »

You are not offering 'tough love.'

You are writing people off from birth.

They are individuals. They have a choice at school. Either work hard, or doss around. It really is that simple.

If they choose the latter, its not mine, nor the states problem.

olly300

mbga9pgf wrote: »

This is why CB needs to be limited to 2 children max. Why do you think scum parents like this want children? Parents like this should have their kids taken off them and they should be permanently neutered.

Not all these "scrum parents" have more than 2 children.

And unfortunately if you are taken into care due to the way the system currently operates you are normally taken in when the damage has already been done.

Plus the care system is such a mess they are more likely to end up in prison if they are taken into care.

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Unfortunately, you socialists have views on such measures...

I'm not a socialist.

mbga9pgf wrote: »

People dont steal because they are illiterate. They do it because they are BAD PEOPLE. More excuses from socialists whilst ignoring the unpleasant truth.

What makes "BAD PEOPLE"?

olly300

mbga9pgf wrote: »

They are individuals. They have a choice at school. Either work hard, or doss around. It really is that simple.

If they choose the latter, its not mine, nor the states problem.

Unfortunately it is your problem if you are a tax payer.

Your the one paying for their prison place and the criminal justice system. Your the one paying for their benefits when they get out of prison.

Edited to say: The answers aren't that simple.

mbga9pgf

Prison would be a much cheaper alternative if I were in power. And believe me, people wouldnt want to re-offend.

What makes "BAD PEOPLE"?

Probably the same thing that makes a rapist rape.

chucky

mbga9pgf wrote: »

They had all the opportunities everyone else had. The education system didnt let them down. They just couldnt be @rsed, and still cant. There are plenty of government courses you can go on to help with illiteracy.

what this man said :T >>>>

Davesnave wrote: »

I'm sorry that you just don't get it.

Maybe, you'll yet be blessed with a child who is mentally not quite as quick as the majority. Then, you may begin to appreciate how well the state caters for him/her.*

*And he/she would still be lucky in having a parent who would:
(a) know
(b) care
(c) act

ukcarper

mbga9pgf wrote: »

This is why CB needs to be limited to 2 children max. Why do you think scum parents like this want children? Parents like this should have their kids taken off them and they should be permanently neutered. Unfortunately, you socialists have views on such measures...

.

That one made me laugh everybody to the left of Attila the Hun is a socialist.

lemonjelly

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

I find the costumers using self-service a little odd, most will be on far more than the checkout staff so the time-value of DIY makes no sense to me.

Since most checkout staff earn a little more than minimum wage, circa 6.50ph for a big supermarket chain depending on locale, what would happen to their jobs if the minimum wage was raised to £7.50 or indeed lowered to £3?

PS. I know you're a little left-wing lemonjelly that's why I'm querying - up it to £7.50 and the only till staff unaffected will be the highly productive ones in Aldi and Lidl who already earn that amount. I'd suggest the slow-mos in Asda/Tesco/Sainsbury/Morrisons would get fired and replaced by self-checkouts or made to be as productive as staff in Lidl who seem to do 50% more work for 20% more pay.

I'm not sure Mr Mumble. To be honest, I think all that would happen is the amount of tax credits they get would go down a little. Bosses'd be a little harder on them productive wise, but at the end of the dy such a move wouldn't significantly harm employers. They can afford it. I do feel that tax credits is effectively subsidising low wage employment.

vivatifosi wrote: »

Exactly, they can't compile a CV and are expected to apply for jobs online. In fact they are expected to apply for everything on line, which is really difficult if you are functionally illiterate.

Including stuff like welfare benefits and the like. I am a little torn on this one. Part of me is concerned by what I see as a form of excluding a great many people from access to services (& not only the young, many vulnerable people do not have pc's/web access at home). However, I work in a college & have a heck of a lot of students telling me they can't afford to get here, & times are tough, & they are skint, yet they sit there telling me this whilst playing on their blackberry or iphone.

Also, the cars on the student car park are nicer & newer than the cars on the staff car park!:eek:

Davesnave wrote: »

They do realise, but they don't have a choice, whereas we do.

Whenever they invite me to use one, I always say in a very loud voice, "No thanks, even if I do have to wait, I'm not interested in doing (insert name of store) staff out of their jobs."

The reactions I get leave me in no doubt how they feel!

:T:T:T:beer:

I like this one dave!:D
I'm gonna try it out...

Davesnave

lemonjelly wrote: »

I like this one dave!:D
I'm gonna try it out...

There is so little social interaction already in supermarket shopping I see little to be gained in reducing it further.

Yeah, I know there will be people who will say "I'm too busy to interact, mate."

To them I'd just say, look at your life. You only get one.

Where I am now, supermarkets can sometimes be busy, but unlike where I came from everyone still has time for a word or two. It's a different culture.

olly300

Davesnave wrote: »

There is so little social interaction already in supermarket shopping I see little to be gained in reducing it further.

I often go to supermarkets in the evening/night the checkout assistants spend time talking to people particularly if they are elderly.

Sometimes I end up being the only one in the queue waiting for 15 minutes because the check out operator is busy talking to an elderly person normally a man who is widowed and doesn't have anyone else in the world.

Oddly at these times I don't care if the shop assistant spends 15-20 minutes time talking to someone but get me on a Saturday and that would make me leave my shopping and go elsewhere. :rotfl:

Oh and I'm in London.