Chain store in towns christmas workers are all unpaid? Whatever next!

redcard

LadyMissA wrote: »

everyone on jsa is a lazy, good-for-nothing scrounger?

Obviously not. I was mocking the attitude of smug richard

runninglea

redcard wrote: »

Instead of forcing these lazy, good-for-nothing scroungers to work for free, why can't we force them to work for a wage instead?

Or is that logic beyond the Government?

Aren't they working for their JSA, Housing benefit, council tax benefit, free prescriptions etc.

LadyMissA

redcard wrote: »

Obviously not. I was mocking the attitude of smug richard

phew thats ok then, let you off

redcard

runninglea wrote: »

Aren't they working for their JSA, Housing benefit, council tax benefit, free prescriptions etc.

My point was that this system is proving that the Government is incapable of providing employment opportunities for those seeking work.

Offer paid jobs to people on the dole, and penalise them then if they don't take them.

This scheme doesn't help consumers, tax-payers, non tax-payers, and it doesn't appear to even help the Government, bar allowing them to further fudge unemployment figures. It's not providing work-experience, and there's no potential to gain proper employment.

dandelionclock30

Its a right pi55 take is this, and we should all buoycott their stores, especially Tesco which I've always disliked because their own food is disguisting.Its like a real !!!!!!!ized form of capitalism.
I wonder how all this will progress over the next 10 years or so,I hope things will get better because eventually at this rate they will bring back the workhouse and half the country will be in it.
It definatley doesnt help the Government it makes them look incompetant.

DebiT

What makes me laugh is that when anyone on JSA complains about being sent onto the Work Programme and having to work for these companies for nothing, the usual suspects come out of the woodwork crowing about: lazy good for nothings, scroungers, bout time they were made to do some work, taxpayers like me are keeping them blah blah blah.

They are so blinded by anger and irritation at the jobless, they can't see the bigger picture, whereby sending people on benefits to work for no wages is taking a salaried job off someone else.
By providing free labour to large companies, the only ones benefitting are the large companies.
Not the person on benefits or the one who has been deprived of a salaried position because free labour is now available, and now no one is paying taxes, because no one is earning a wage.
Good eh?

scheming_gypsy

redcard wrote: »

Instead of forcing these lazy, good-for-nothing scroungers to work for free, why can't we force them to work for a wage instead?

Or is that logic beyond the Government?

because if the lazy scroungers are forced to work for their benefits then they might realise that being a lazy scrounger is losing its appeal. Once it loses its appeal they might actually be more inclined to go and look for paid work.



and by lazy scroungers i mean lazy scroungers and not everybody on JSA; just the lazy scroungers on JSA

pimento

Yeah, Tesco, they might be lazy scroungers, but they're our lazy scroungers!

scheming_gypsy

Or M&S... Not just any old lazy scrounger, an overpriced lazy scrounger.

DebiT

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

because if the lazy scroungers are forced to work for their benefits then they might realise that being a lazy scrounger is losing its appeal. Once it loses its appeal they might actually be more inclined to go and look for paid work.



and by lazy scroungers i mean lazy scroungers and not everybody on JSA; just the lazy scroungers on JSA

If "lazy scroungers" are working for benefits, then there will be even less paid work around than there is now.
Don't you understand that for every job being done by someone on benefits there is one less salaried position?

How ironic would it be if some of those so opposed to people having to live on JSA, were made redundant and their "jobs" were taken by those on JSA.
They could then also apply for JSA and do their old job for benefit money ie. £65 per week. Perhaps then they wouldnt be so smug.