on my own on a low wage

tghe-retford

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

But as you obviously seem to see college and university as being beneficial, why do you keep posting about people being "forced" to improve their qualifications and having further education "imposed" upon them? I would've thought that you would welcome being able to make up the opportunities that you missed when you were younger. It still doesn't make sense to me.

Easy - it's all about tax revenue and answering the calls from employers that they need more skilled workers, as I quoted earlier in Gordon Brown's speech to the CBI. Just this weekend, the BBC reported that video game developers are not getting the workers who they need with the skills required to work. If you equip workers with skills that are in demand, they will get higher paid jobs, thus employers will be happy, but more importantly for the Government, they get more tax revenue from employees, and with the Government in so much debt, they could do with every penny they can get!

The carrot approach is something the Government doesn't like doing because it costs them money, whereas the stick approach is less costly but puts the fear into those who don't comply, the pay as you throw schemes and £50 fines for those who don't recycle is an example of that. Here, it would be fairly easy for the Government to fine people through the tax system if they can't be bothered to train for a skill in demand, ie. electricians, plumbers, joiners etc.

I see where you're coming from and I see the benefits of learning, but not everyone wants to go back to or even go onto further education, indeed many will stay in the same low paid job for a long time. People who do not want to make a career choice of staying on the dole but wish to contribute to society and gain experience through working, yet don't wish to go back to learn new skills through college or university because of financial, work or responsibility pressures. One of Brown's long term plans is to improve social mobility. This is why we are currently seeing action being placed on people on benefits, particularly disabled people, fuelled by the negative reporting of the media who label them as "workshy" and "fit to work". As I said before, Brown's targets won't be covered by getting as many benefit claimants into work as they can, so they have to go up the next step, and that will be part time and low paid unskilled workers. That's why I would recommend the original posters and others in the same situation to find a new full time job as soon as they can. Labour do not have long to act before the General Election.

Oldernotwiser

tghe-retford wrote: »

"One of Brown's long term plans is to improve social mobility."

Do you actually understand what's meant by the term "social mobility"? You're the only person I've ever come across, except the most far right of Tories, that thinks social mobility is a bad thing. You seem like a good person but I can't understand why you want to keep everybody down at the bottom of the pack and why you believe that giving disadvantaged people more opportunities isn't to be encouraged.

tghe-retford

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

You're the only person I've ever come across, except the most far right of Tories, that thinks social mobility is a bad thing. You seem like a good person but I can't understand why you want to keep everybody down at the bottom of the pack and why you believe that giving disadvantaged people more opportunities isn't to be encouraged.

I'm all for opportunities for the disadvantaged, as you say, of course only a far right capitalist would disagree. what I disagree with is the current Government making people go into careers they may not want to do for their interests, voters and business, rather than allowing people a freedom of choice of what they want to do, and then work around someone's career choice.

P.S. I actually think as a liberal left-wing person, I am just very cynical of what the right wing Labour/Tory parties are doing for disadvantaged people in order to grab the support of the more privileged voters and businesses.

Chrysalis

I agree the stick approach is wrong and they using it for a variety of things more and more now. For example it seems mcdonalds and some retailers are having trouble finding people to do min wage retail work, a solution may have been to offer higher wages but labour had a better idea, force certian people into low paid retail work with certian companies.

tghe-retford

A coincidence this occurred today, it backed up many of the things I said. No action other than a £200 payout for poor parents at the moment, but these things tend to be done in stages over the years. It all ties in together with the CBI speech Gordon made I quoted earlier.

More people need to adopt the work ethic and aim high in life, Gordon Brown will say today in a keynote speech on social mobility.

The Prime Minister will declare that he wants Britain to become upwardly mobile once again.

... [Social mobility] “cannot be achieved without people themselves adopting the work ethic, the learning ethic and aiming high ... We must set a national priority to aggressively and relentlessly develop the potential of the British people”.

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4193223.ece

Gordon Brown has a drive to improve social mobility and improve the work ethic of the public. Government wants people into work using the stick option, and is doing so with benefit claimants. Caroline Flint wants council tenants to work. Brown wants people learning to improve their way. And Brown has acknowledged from industry that there is a skills shortage that needs to be filled. It does all slot together and agree with what I am suggesting earlier.

Oldernotwiser

I just cannot see what you can object to about the quote you've posted. You still keep banging on about upword mobility as if it's a bad thing. I'm no great fan of GB but I would agree 100% with the sentiments you've quoted above and cannot understand why don't. Would it have been better if he'd said "We want to see people staying at the bottom of the pack as we think education is not for the working classes, who really ought to know their place?" You seem to be from another reality from me;you really do. How can anybody be against more education, social advancement and the work ethic?

Chrysalis

Well here are my thoughts on the times article.

The £200 yet another bribe exclusive to adults with children paid for by childless adults. So lets pay adults to take their children to see a nhs doctor. Aside from that there is nothing that says how he will get poorer people into further education.

loulou88

dmg24 wrote: »

There are plenty of jobs with flexible hours - what about bar work? If you are not going to get any more hours at your current employer, surely you should be looking for a different job?

Good luck x

these jobs depend on where you live rural jobs are not easy to come by.