Labour To Bring In Proper Paid Guaranteed Jobs For Jobless Long Termers

Gentile

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Or less of a feeling of entitlement.

Work exists, its often low paid and not that good, but thats always been the case. Sadly dirty low paid jobs are beneath many.

Unskilled workers who did not bother to get an education while they could ( of whom there are millions now ) do not want to take up jobs which required unskilled labour because it is beneath them, instead they want a desk job in an airconditioned office with a starting salary of 30K.

Graham_Devon

This is nothing more than a political gesture, and that's been admitted (in all but words) by a labour MP on the radio today.

There are NO plans to introduce it. They are suggesting the coalition should, but have stated, they would not pledge to do so themselves.

Asked by the presenter why labour have said it should be done, it appears it's in response to the feeling that labour are not tough on benefits. Asked by the presenter again if labour were tough on befefits, then why are they opposing every cut the coalition suggest, he stated "we don't know what the books are like, therefore, we cannot comment".

Was a train wreck. Anyway, there are no plans by labour, and there is no intention by labour, to introduce this. In effect, it's just a waste of time for all concerned.

Labour is also suggesting this money would be taken from tax relief on pensioners. However, they have already "spent" that money elsewhere on reversing tax credit cuts. They are now spending it again (which is what led to the "oh, but we wouldn't implement it and have no plans to do so" malarky.

ILW

N1AK wrote: »

What would happen if the world fell off Atlas shoulder!?!?! I'll answer your imaginary problem right after you answer mine

These are not real jobs, they will just ease out existing workers who will then become unemployed. As an employer, would you prefer to pay someone minimum wage or nothing at all for the same amount of work?

This has happened with all the previous schemes from YTS onwards.

DecentLivingWage

Well if thats the case, isnt the current coalition scheme also pointless? - only even worse as the hopeful work seekers arent even being paid! Except if you class being funded by taxpayers as 'payment.'Cons cant say it's a poor idea uinless theirs is too! (Clever Labour!)

chewmylegoff

Graham_Devon wrote: »

This is nothing more than a political gesture, and that's been admitted (in all but words) by a labour MP on the radio today.

There are NO plans to introduce it. They are suggesting the coalition should, but have stated, they would not pledge to do so themselves.

Asked by the presenter why labour have said it should be done, it appears it's in response to the feeling that labour are not tough on benefits. Asked by the presenter again if labour were tough on befefits, then why are they opposing every cut the coalition suggest, he stated "we don't know what the books are like, therefore, we cannot comment".

Was a train wreck. Anyway, there are no plans by labour, and there is no intention by labour, to introduce this. In effect, it's just a waste of time for all concerned.

Labour is also suggesting this money would be taken from tax relief on pensioners. However, they have already "spent" that money elsewhere on reversing tax credit cuts. They are now spending it again (which is what led to the "oh, but we wouldn't implement it and have no plans to do so" malarky.

Hilarious isn't it. Labour has invented a new type of opposition politics. Announce pretend policies which you admit you have no intention of ever implementing. It's just for fun as Rob Brydon would say!. Virtual politics. Now if we can just get the government to get on board and stop actually implementing its policies then things might just sort themselves out!

DecentLivingWage

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Hilarious isn't it. Labour has invented a new type of opposition politics. Announce pretend policies which you admit you have no intention of ever implementing. It's just for fun as Rob Brydon would say!. Virtual politics. Now if we can just get the government to get on board and stop actually implementing its policies then things might just sort themselves out!

If you would like to talk 'virtual politics' then I can help you out!

What is Ed's Virtual Majority for Labour in the House Of Commons tonight?

Answer = 122 !! (it has been for months!)

Cons down to lowest ever psychologically crucial 29%

Somehow don't hink that's going to change any toime soon after tonights terrible triple Dip Recession news for Osborne! lets face it the whole country is beginning to think Ed Balls was right, esp looking at US

Virtual majority for 122 - which marginals will fall I wonder?

chewmylegoff

Who cares, all that matters is what happens when there is a general election.

Why does your thread title and OP suggest that this is a real Labour policy when they admit that it is not going to be their policy and they have no intention of implementing it.

A._Badger

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Who cares, all that matters is what happens when there is a general election.

Why does your thread title and OP suggest that this is a real Labour policy when they admit that it is not going to be their policy and they have no intention of implementing it.

Um, because some trade union pays him to say that?

chewmylegoff

Surely no-one can think it's worth paying it to say anything?

Wookster

All these 'wonderful' ideas. What was labour doing when they were in power?