We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Labour To Bring In Proper Paid Guaranteed Jobs For Jobless Long Termers
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »After reading some other threads on this, I have to say, I'm genuinely perplexed and genuinely amused!
Y'see, what labour are proposing will bring self esteem to those out of work for longer than 2 years, it will help them better themselves and join back into society. Yet when the coalition bought the same principle in, it was claimed it was slavery and intimidating.
So wheres the difference? Howcome labours "go on the placement we offer or you will lose your benefits" isn't intimidating and slavery when the colaitions "work on the placement we offer or you will lose your benefits" is.
Well, it all appears it's about thw wording. Labour word the placement as a "job". The colaition worded the placement as what it is, a "placement". Either way, both were temporary, but as labour are stating a "job" it's ok, and suddenly offers self esteem and opportunity to the individual.
But some can still be caught out, suggesting the coalition scheme was slavery and this is opportunity. So, what to do then? Well....again, labour can't lose according to some. Labour are more compassionate and haveb't actually pledged this scheme, therefore, they won't actually do it, whereas the coalition would. Therefore, labour trumph again. Bizarely, they triumph merely because they have suggested something even they won't do. So labour win the moral high ground again.
Utterly bizzare. It's all stemmed down to labour suggesting it's a "job". Not a temporary placement. That play on words has won the day and labour win again. The fact they won't even implement it themselves appears to pass their apologists by!
Surely the definition of a job is a position that has been created because there is a need for one, not just giving an oppertunity with no future to it.
As you say a play on words that actually mean nothing.
As you say utter bizzare.0 -
DecentLivingWage wrote: »Labour To Bring In Proper Paid Guaranteed Jobs For Jobless Long Termers
Given that every Labour government in history has always left office leaving unemployment higher than when it started, I wouldn't rely on any future Labour government being able to actually reduce unemployment.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards