Quote:
Originally Posted by MTJR
It was just an example. Not intended to be a "one size fits all" approach. I also understand that everybody's needs are different and that there will be people that are just incapable, through whatever reason, of carrying out a job of work.
Generally, I don't think anyone can disagree that there are a number of people out there on benefits who are "cheating" the system and more to the point "cheating" the system on purpose.
If the only people who ever claimed benefit were always legitimate then I doubt we'd feel the need more such measures. The minority spoiling it for the majority. Any system under any government that attempts to tackle the issue must surely be looked upon positively.
John
|
There have always been a number playing the system for personal advantage and without doubt due to the massive numbers now within the system it has reached ridiculous levels. Something must be done and rolling back to what was intended and reasonable must be achieved.
What I find irksome is the is manner in which the achievement of the objectives are proposed. A government in a rush to resolve problems acts the same way as anyone who sees a goal as the objective and skips the planning stage. The consequences of the carnage on the way to the goal often creates more problems than the objective and frequently the goal is lost in a raft of new problems created by unintended consequences.
A blanket tick box test on previously unfit people will throw up thousands of anomalies and especially with those who have the myriad of complaints that alternate between flare and remission. Almost everybody could be classified as being fit to do something but matching an individual to a job that they supposedly could do with an employer who is willing to take on the liability of what may be, through no fault of the unfortunate potential employee, a grossly unreliable employee is where the government's utopian dream ends.
The coalition idea whereby long term unemployed are possibly going to be required to do compulsory work is IMO a degrading and punitive move. The close parallels with court orders virtually ensures stigma. It is easy to think of the work-shy free loaders and think that they deserve such a kick up the backside but a different conclusion may be reached if the thought process involves "what if I become one of those". Before this period of economic re-adjustment is over many who currently think themselves safe and secure will find disappointment.
Fortunately little of this affects me personally as I am retired as is my wife. My businesses are closed and I no longer hire and fire but having been a concurrent employee and employer I can see the naivete of all of these coalition proposals. They are divisive and a recipe for social division which is not only evident but gaining momentum.
These problems could have been tackled with more precision but the new young guns are in a hurry and its sledgehammer to crack a nut time. Social division, anger, resentment and disdain towards others is something that I decidedly do not want to see but it is building via the government and media and as it will affect quality of life for almost everyone I see no winners beyond the coalition deflecting criticism from themselves.