Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L
But we are stooping to the level of finding any excuse not to pay out to save money. if we weren't in this mess we probably wouldn't be thinking of ways to stop benefit money from being paid out.
|
YAY you finally get it ,we are in a mess so we have find ways to save money and the moral implication is to stop people thinking they can continue to claim benefits for no good reason
Quote:
|
We have to assume that these jobs will not have been done by somebody being paid to do them. then we have to think if these people are busy doing these then 'they' are stopping them from being able to look for work.
|
Most of the jobs that the benefit claimants will be asked to do will already be being done ,just at a much reduced rate ,for example we know get the street cleaners around our area once a month instead of once a fortnight with some additional "benefit volunteers" for want of a better phrase they will now get done more frequently ,nobody will lose their job ,and the claimants will be able to look for work in the 10 hours they get off a week ,or at week ends
Quote:
again, we have to assume that this will only be for those that have been on benefits for around 10 years, and not people who have been for a few months. or even suspected of working whilst claiming.
|
not sure what the definition of long term unemployed is at the moment
Quote:
if they stuck to the original policy of not looking for work then no money, then nobody will get away with anything.
but I believe that they know that if they stuck to that there would be people who would have no choice but to rob and steal in order to survive.
|
For some "robbing and stealing to survive" means "robbing and stealing to get a better telly"
---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Angry
If it's "compulsory" it cannot, by any definition, be classed as voluntary.
yes i did point out the contradiction
As I pointed out earlier given the minimum wage legislation and the effect that earnings will have on interdependant benefits (housing, childcare etc etc) this programme will end up costing the treasury more than it could ever possibly save.
but if it's classed as voluntary work then it won't affect other benefits they get because they won't be getting paid minimum wage
It reads well to a certain demographic but it does not withstand much scrutiny.
|
Yes it does ,the demographic being the ones over taxed to pay the 200billion bill ,but i accept that it will be a hard policy to implement correctly so it has the desired effect