Universal credit = more riots.

jojo1964

tomterm8 wrote: »

Then why is youth employment at 20%? And don't tell me because it is people don't want to work. Youth employment wasn't anywhere near that when I left university. It wasn't like that five years ago, either. Hundreds of thousands of people don't suddenly decide not to work, for no reason.

There simply are not the jobs, remember the Brown rhetoric, British jobs for British workers, what were the figures? something like 75% went to immigrants, why? Many of the youth of today do not want to work for minimum wage, employers do not trust youngsters, immigrants work harder? i dont know how much is true, but these are reasons, or excuses put forward.

Politicians of all parties argue that too many British people who could work are instead claiming Jobseekers' Allowance or Incapacity Benefit, holding back the economy.
But ministers faced embarrassment last month when it emerged that more than half of new jobs created under Labour since 1997 had gone to foreign workers - more than previously stated.
Mark Rye, of the employment firm DKM Labour Solutions, explained why this was often the case.
He said: "It's a lot easier to find jobs for these people because these are the people applying for the jobs.
"Gordon Brown's suggestion that we should march British jobless to the front of the queue belies his lack of understanding of the situation."
Asked whether many British people did not want to work, he replied: "Yes, I think that's one way of putting it."
Vacancies have to be filled, either by British citizens or foreign workers.
Mr Brown's supporters argue that the boost to training gives his statement substance.
Others are still not so sure.

StevieJ

MacMickster wrote: »

Benefits of £26,000 per annum with no tax or national insurance to pay? This is equivalent to a wage of around £35,000 - not too far short of having to pay higher rate tax.

There should be riots if benefits are not reduced to a lower level than this. Benefits are meant to be a safety net for those who are unable (either temporarily or permanently) to go out and work for a living. They should not provide anyone with a better standard of living than the majority who pay taxes to fund those benefits.

I wouldn't consider living on Broadwater farm a better standard of living than the majority who pay taxes :eek:

tomterm8

jojo1964 wrote: »

Others are still not so sure.

The problem with such an argument is that these benefits, and "rewards" for unemployment, existed five or six years ago. Youth unemployment wasn't 20%+ then.

ffacoffipawb

jojo1964 wrote: »

Good point, those convicted will find it difficult, if not impossible to find a job now, although those convicted who already work might lose their jobs, freeing up a few jobs for those who want to work.

Serve them right, like looter Alexis Bailey.

jojo1964

tomterm8 wrote: »

The problem with such an argument is that these benefits, and "rewards" for unemployment, existed five or six years ago. Youth unemployment wasn't 20%+ then.

Immigration wasnt as high either, the simple fact is that there are not enough jobs to go round, particularly now post recession, or heading into a double dip, yet we cannot stop legal immigration, and feel unable to prevent illegal immigration.

Migration
Net migration remains high


Long-Term International Migration (LTIM) to/from the UK 1991-2009
Net migration (the difference between immigration and emigration) increased to 198,000 in 2009 compared with 163,000 in the previous year. This change was primarily as a result of decreased emigration.

The number of people leaving the UK for 12 months or more fell to 368,000 in 2009 compared with 427,000 in 2008. The drop in total emigration was due to a decrease in the numbers of British and EU citizens leaving the UK. An estimated 140,000 British citizens emigrated in 2009, the lowest number since 1999 and down from 173,000 in 2008.

An estimated 567,000 people arrived to live in the UK in 2009, which is consistent with levels seen since 2004 and compares with 590,000 in 2008. Non-British citizens accounted for 83 per cent of all immigrants; a third of these were from EU countries.

ukcarper

If you are 18 and unemployed I believe you get about £53 +LHA for a room.

drc

TedButler wrote: »

The shooting may have been a spark for the North London riots, but the reason they have spread is anger by the lower classes, because of all the cuts.

If the cuts go ahead next year for housing benefit and total benefits per household are capped at no more than 500 per week to include everything rent, council tax and everything, then imagine the anger and riots that will be seen on the streets on London then.


Saying that if there is this mass Exodus out of London to cheaper areas, it may be easier to control the rioters. Let them smash up their ghetto's, it will just be an even worse place to live.

Rubbish, those rioting include a grammar school educated girl whose parents are millionaires, a school teacher, a scaffolder, a charity worker and various other people, not just those on benefits. These people are looting because they can, because of 13 years of soft policies and human rights legislation which means they think they are untouchable because the police are more concerned with quotas, bureaucracy, the IPCC than with arresting criminals.

Most of the cuts so far are only going to affect those in work (cuts to child benefit, working tax credit etc) and the cuts to housing benefit are merely common sense (no universal right to live in Central London using taxpayers money).

Besides, even if the rioters were class warriors, fighting against imperialism and capitalism, since when has it been ok to let rioters direct government policy?

Loughton_Monkey

ukcarper wrote: »

If you are 18 and unemployed I believe you get about £53 +LHA for a room.

All the more reason to have had kids. An 18 year old single mother will get:

Child Tax Credit: £5,662
Income Support: £3,529
Council Tax Benefit: £850 (say)
Housing Benefit: £13,071 (say)
Child Benefit: £1,762

Total Annual Income after tax: £24,874

Not a bad 'screw' is it? I would simply love to know (a) what percentage of working people believe this to be 'about right', and (b) what other [so-called] 'civilised' country would pay anything like the same amount?

CLAPTON

StevieJ wrote: »

I wouldn't consider living on Broadwater farm a better standard of living than the majority who pay taxes :eek:

all the flats have central heating; all the windows are double glazed; there are key operated security gates (to keep undesireables out); play spaces for kids etc

from Broadwater farm you can be in central London in about 25 minutes using the excellent Victoria line

what exactly is your point?

dtsazza

tomterm8 wrote: »

We need more work.

There's no universal right to a salaried job.

You support yourself by producing something that other people value, and by exchanging it with them for something you value. (Nowadays the exchange is mostly via the proxy of money, which means the two parties don't need to have exactly symmetric goods, but the principle is the same).

If you produce things that people want, they will pay you for them. If you don't produce things that are useful, you won't get paid.

Being part of a corporate structure isn't a necessary part of being "in work" - it's about the work itself.


So the only way we need "more work" is if there is nothing that people want any more. (And if we're in that state, I don't think we'd need to change anything!)