MSE News: George Osborne to make £10bn welfare cuts

PaulF81

clemmatis wrote: »

I thought this bore repeating, Glen, particularly given the current Tory "everybody must work" mantra. There are far far fewer jobs than there are JSA claimants, and so, far far far fewer jobs than there are work-less. THERE AREN'T ENOUGH JOBS.



So, you think all the official government statistics are wrong? You have better statistics? Post them.



Oh, that is true, in some instances. However, if each and every job vacancy were filled, there would still be many people who were unemployed, because, THERE AREN'T ENOUGH JOBS.




Yep. And THERE AREN'T ENOUGH JOBS.

There aren't enough jobs that people want. There are plenty of jobs, it's just that indigenous lazy Brits expect care homes and farmers fields to be staffed by immigrants.

Don't work hard at school? Expect to wipe 90 year old backsides and pick carrots for a living. Suck it up. The free ride is over.

poppasmurf_bewdley

I think the majority of members commenting on this forum are in agreement that benefits should be there to help people who, by no fault of their own, have fallen on hard times and need help in preventing homelessness and hunger.

Benefits should not be there to provide a lifestyle choice for those who could work but chose not to. Neither should they be there to help keep up the subscriptions to Sky or Vodaphone, nor help to run the family car or pay for holidays.

Anyone disagree?

Morlock

jobdone1 wrote: »

And your point is """"""

Tories want a sweatshop economy.

vpeake

robpw2 wrote: »

no one is expecting under 25s to live with thier parents , they could go out and get jobs and fund their own places , like the rest of us have too.
it wil be only those who don't want to work who will have to live with their parents till they are 25

What if their parents don't want them to live with them again? What are they supposed to do WHILST looking for a job? Just because someone isn't working doesn't automatically make them a scrounger. This bill could potentially make honest people homeless.

I used to live miles away in another city from my parents. What would I have done if I had been forced back to live with my dad who didn't want me there and tried to kick me out?

And by the way, I am working now and the tax that I have paid more than covers the benefits I claimed whilst looking for work. I took any job I could get, just to get out of the house and have some pride, but i'm glad that I had those benefits to get me through whilst I wasn't working (which was not my choice!)

clemmatis

robpw2 wrote: »

i went into town with my cv at weekend at least 1in3 shops were looking for staff

I don't believe it!

(I don't mean I don't believe your anecdote.)

1. There are job vacancies, around 400,000 (official figures -- some posters here dispute that, because not all vacancies are notified to job centres), they include temporary jobs, part-time jobs (some, temporary), seasonal jobs, and specialist, highly skilled jobs (official figures).

2. There are unemployed people; of those, there are active job seekers who can start a job immediately. There are 2.68 million such job seekers (official figures).

3. But there are massive local and regional variations, so in some places, there are 35 seekers per job, in others, 1-2.

(Please note that of 34 of the 35 got on their bikes to look for jobs where there were only 1-2 seekers per job, there would still be not enough jobs.)

Gordon_B_2

So easy to see on here the complacent in work ones.
It truly baffles me how an unelected government with no mandate can take these measures.
Austerity measures!! lets call it what it is, deliberate drive into poverty, this in any decent civilization would end up with the whole government being dragged before the court of human rights, for deliberately endangering the health and safety of millions.
They simply have no right to do most of what they already have let alone what's planned.
Damned public schoolboys with no concept of real day to day survival.:mad:
Fact all politicians lie and the Conservatives always have lied more than any other party, their name says it all, conserve the Dickensian status quo, those with will keep more and more those without will know their place and suffer.
We only get one life why should it be one of torment when there is so much idle money doing nothing in the world.
Yes everyone should earn their way, but they MUST be given the opportunity to do so, people with a bank balance with multiple zero's on the end can't spend it, don't invest it, usually haven't actually earned it, so take it off them and make use of it!!! simple common sense.:cool:

PaulF81

Gordon_B wrote: »

So easy to see on here the complacent in work ones.
It truly baffles me how an unelected government with no mandate can take these measures.
Austerity measures!! lets call it what it is, deliberate drive into poverty, this in any decent civilization would end up with the whole government being dragged before the court of human rights, for deliberately endangering the health and safety of millions.
They simply have no right to do most of what they already have let alone what's planned.
Damned public schoolboys with no concept of real day to day survival.:mad:
Fact all politicians lie and the Conservatives always have lied more than any other party, their name says it all, conserve the Dickensian status quo, those with will keep more and more those without will know their place and suffer.
We only get one life why should it be one of torment when there is so much idle money doing nothing in the world.
Yes everyone should earn their way, but they MUST be given the opportunity to do so, people with a bank balance with multiple zero's on the end can't spend it, don't invest it, usually haven't actually earned it, so take it off them and make use of it!!! simple common sense.:cool:

Over entitled viewpoint. If you can't afford stuff, don't expect other people to pay for it. Cut your standard of living. If you think people will stay and continue to pay for !!!!less losers with poor genes to breed whilst having their hard earned wealth taken off them by the state, think again.

Hmm71

robpw2 wrote: »

i went into town with my cv at weekend at least 1in3 shops were looking for staff

But were they permanent full time jobs or were they just looking for Christmas staff?

jobdone1

Morlock wrote: »

Tories want a sweatshop economy.

I am not a torrie supporter but i have to agree that it is long over due to clamp down on a life on benifits. Don't judge me i do agreee that their are many cases that will mean a life on benifits such as the disabled and rightly so.

I get fed up with the i am better off on benifits than going to work attitude. That may be so, but i feel proud to work and get out of bed or when on nights go home an enjoy my sleep knowing i have done the right thing in life. And in many cases be equal or worse off than those that stay on benifits when paying the bills and feeding the kids.

But i feel proud to walk down my high street knowing if i buy something i have earned it.

poppasmurf_bewdley

Hmm71 wrote: »

But were they permanent full time jobs or were they just looking for Christmas staff?

Why does it matter if a job is permanent or for Christmas only? Surely, if a job takes someone off the unemployment roll for three months, then that is worth having, or should we only get out of bed at 7am if the job is permanent?