Unemployed could be forced to do compulsory manual labour

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

Problem is though that system wasn't working ,

Working in what way? they weren't saving much money or people were actually not breaking the rules?

this system will have the benefit of stopping people working on the black market and claiming benefit ,it will get people back into the routine of getting up and working ,and it will make people realise that the good old days of the state supporting you for life are over

Yes, it covers everything. just like I said earlier. depending on who's asking you get a different answer.

[TheDaddy]

I wonder where this'll end up going, wouldn't be the biggest shock if it led to privitising refuse collection, road sweeping and park keeping, whilst appealing to huge swathes of Daily Mail readers at the same time, just a thought...

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I wonder where this'll end up going, wouldn't be the biggest shock if it led to privitising refuse collection, road sweeping and park keeping, whilst appealing to huge swathes of Daily Mail readers at the same time, just a thought...

Yeh, eventually the LAs will have an unemployed workforce doing the jobs that they once had to pay someone to do.

all in the name of depending who's asking.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by punky

You are still convinved that this will affect people that are medically incapable of work without providing any evidence of this.

Punky, Again I refer you to the link earlier - there are various instances - not to forget the anecdotal evidence in this thread from those at the "coal face" per se.

Originally Posted by punky

You mention a white paper but that's barely consultation, let alone law. Yet, you still you cling on to this notion that the genuinely ill will be forced to work.

Again, see above. There are very clear examples of genuinely ill people who are not on benefits being forced to work through necessisty. Are you seriously, in your naivety, trying trying to say that ill people on benefits wont be forced to work when there are those not in receipt of benefits who are managing to work through necessity?

Catch a grip man.

Originally Posted by punky

Couple this with your nasty little asides trying to paint me as a nasty little Daily Mail reader who is advocating the return of Victorian workhouses and sending orphans up chimneys.

It was never my intention to portray you in that light. If that's how you think I and others see you then go ahead, knock yourself out. If the hat fits then wear it.

Originally Posted by punky

You point back to some claimants going through a despute over their benefits with the DWP. Well, it's been going on years and neither the coalition's, IDS' or my fault. It is a despute which has no relevence to this article. Which sums up a lot really as to why you mentioned it.

You see that's part of your problem, you cannot differentiate between sick claimants and fraudsters. Even when presented with the facts you opt for your black and white "a despute over their benefits with the DWP".

It is, regrettably, not as simple as a dispute. It is a realignment and determination which adversely affects the sick and most vulnerable in society. Nobody is saying it's your fault but you'll find that it has every relevance to this article.

Allow me to explain it to you. The sick people referenced in the earlier link have been deemed fit for work by way of their Work Capability Assessments. Now, lets take by way of example the cancer sufferer. Has his or her cancer been cured or has it abated as a result of the WCA?

No, sadly it hasn't.

However, in order to receive any benefit he / she will have to claim Jobseekers Allowance as it is the only other living benefit available to him / her. Doing so will put him / her in the firing line for this "new" proposal from Duncan Smith.

Given the scenario I have outlined please explain to me, and the nation, how you and Duncan Smith - given the fact that these ill claimants have no alternative but to claim a jobsearch activity related benefit - would ensure that sick people will not be forced to work given that this very same process places those found capable of participation in the Work Related Activity Group element of the ESA are classed as fit for work or work ready.

Like yourself Duncan Smith hasn't thought this one out. He's had three years to think this nonsense up and this is all he can come up with - punatitive measures against the sick rather than addressing the fraud.

I await with baited breath your next attempt at avoidance of the facts by denial.

Originally Posted by punky

Given the above i'd suggest you're a lot more prejeduiced than you think.

Yes. I'm prejudiced against prejudice - and I'm not afraid to say it.

I'm surprised you appear so affronted by the fact - sorry to have offended your obviously Victorian sensibilities.

[Gary L]

Mr Alexander denied the plans were treating the long-term unemployed in the same way as criminals doing community service, telling the BBC's Politics Show the "purpose is emphatically not to punish and it's not to humiliate".

It was intended to "support and encourage" and to get people back into the habit of getting up and going out to work. It also meant those who did it could demonstrate their employability to prospective employers.

Yeh, you can put it on your CV. "I attended this compulsory 30 day, 30 hour week thing to show that I am employable. I didn't do it because I would starve and not have any heat in my home otherwise. I could have not turned up if I so chose. but I stuck it out. so please Mr, give me a job mate?"

Originally Posted by Gary L

Yeh, you can put it on your CV. "I attended this compulsory 30 day, 30 hour week thing to show that I am employable. I didn't do it because I would starve and not have any heat in my home otherwise. I could have not turned up if I so chose. but I stuck it out. so please Mr, give me a job mate?"

It really is quite dark and gloomy in your world - you seem to focus almost exclusively on the very negative aspects of any situation, rather than on "what is good, what is bad, and what could be improved upon".

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Hugh

It really is quite dark and gloomy in your world - you seem to focus almost exclusively on the very negative aspects of any situation, rather than on "what is good, what is bad, and what could be improved upon".

What about if I do the reality, I mean negative things. and you do the positive?
I can do positive. he can enclose this in his CV. a reference from his charge hand.

We didn't have to sit outside his house in the minibus bibbing the horn until he got his lazy self out of bed. he was always there with his packed lunch eagerly waiting to be picked up to be taken to the park. where he would actually want to cut the grass and not kick a football around and chat up the local tarts smoking weed till knock off time.

[dilli-theclaw]

Well, I've got my order in already

Originally Posted by Gary L

What about if I do the reality, I mean negative things. and you do the positive?
I can do positive. he can enclose this in his CV. a reference from his charge hand.

We didn't have to sit outside his house in the minibus bibbing the horn until he got his lazy self out of bed. he was always there with his packed lunch eagerly waiting to be picked up to be taken to the park. where he would actually want to cut the grass and not kick a football around and chat up the local tarts smoking weed till knock off time.

so how would you tackle workshy claimants ,or long term unemployed .Since both you and MR A have poo pooed the idea i would think you have a better solution ,or is it just a case of the government suggested so lets slag it off

Originally Posted by Gary L

What about if I do the reality, I mean negative things. and you do the positive?
I can do positive. he can enclose this in his CV. a reference from his charge hand.

We didn't have to sit outside his house in the minibus bibbing the horn until he got his lazy self out of bed. he was always there with his packed lunch eagerly waiting to be picked up to be taken to the park. where he would actually want to cut the grass and not kick a football around and chat up the local tarts smoking weed till knock off time.

Sums it up, really.

I would rather think the best, and be occasionally disappointed, than expect the worst (and have the concomitant attitude and outlook) and be occasionally surprised by good things (and even then, having a negative outlook would probably poison the positive points).

Good luck in your world - I am glad I don't live in it.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by martyh

so how would you tackle workshy claimants ,or long term unemployed .Since both you and MR A have poo pooed the idea i would think you have a better solution ,or is it just a case of the government suggested so lets slag it off

I'd stick to the strict rules already in place that single out the workshy. where if they are not looking for work they have their benefit reduced or stopped. I'd do this so all the other genuine ones that are looking for work don't have to do what we associate 'criminals' having to do in 'payback to society'

if it means 'we' (I'm the government now) save some money then we've done our job. if we don't save as much money as we had hoped, then tough. I wouldn't victimise society just to make up for that money.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

It was never my intention to portray you in that light.

...

sorry to have offended your obviously Victorian sensibilities.

Hmm, remarkable turn around there. I see you aren't even being coy now. It's a shame you rather resort to that.

Another one for the ignore list.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Good luck in your world - I am glad I don't live in it.

Tell me what it's like in your world. tell me the positives of this. instead of the negatives of me.

Originally Posted by Gary L

Tell me what it's like in your world. tell me the positives of this. instead of the negatives of me.

I try to think the best of people, and most people live up to my expectations.

I don't think that most of the unemployed are work-shy layabouts, living of my hard-earned taxes, but are people, just like me, but going through a difficult spell (I know there are some people who abuse the system, but why should I tar the majority with the behaviours of a minority (so true in so many areas....)).

I find most people willing to be helpful, with the occasional rude person, but why should I let their rudeness make me miserable - they are already doing it to themselves, why let them spread the gloom.....

I find it sad that some people focus on the negatives, but I can only assume they have had an experience in the past that makes them think the worst of everything and everyone, and I am glad I have not let past negative experiences of my own affect me that way.

I think that everyone has the capability to be good, but some (again, only a minority) prefer to be bad - I try not to tar everyone as bad, just the ones who are.

HTH

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I try to think the best of people, and most people live up to my expectations.

I don't think that most of the unemployed are work-shy layabouts, living of my hard-earned taxes, but are people, just like me, but going through a difficult spell (I know there are some people who abuse the system, but why should I tar the majority with the behaviours of a minority (so true in so many areas....)).

I find most people willing to be helpful, with the occasional rude person, but why should I let their rudeness make me miserable - they are already doing it to themselves, why let them spread the gloom.....

I find it sad that some people focus on the negatives, but I can only assume they have had an experience in the past that makes them think the worst of everything and everyone, and I am glad I have not let past negative experiences of my own affect me that way.

I think that everyone has the capability to be good, but some (again, only a minority) prefer to be bad - I try not to tar everyone as bad, just the ones who are.

HTH

I meant the positives from being in your world in regards to the subject?

that was all very nice though