KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
Groucho said:Oh. Cheerio. And good luck with that.
I aint going yet and the last time I looked Tel Aviv does have a broadband connection
Can nu labour pretend anymore to be a party of the left
- Thread starter shagnasty
- Start date
I aint going yet and the last time I looked Tel Aviv does have a broadband connection
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
CyberRose said:Maybe we should have a referendum on whether or not to pay dole money to people who are able to work but don't?!
Sounds good to me, if it'll shut up the whinging about scroungers when the vote easily goes in favour of paying dole. And it would.
I really think all this reform is ideological, its also rushed, for instance,
MP's voted on the WRA not even knowing what the rate of the new employment support allowance would be, This Green Paper has happened incredibly quick, the Freud review on which it it was based and which was compiled in only twelve weeks as you know, only reported a few months ago, Welfare policy is being developed at a very unseemly pace and speaks volumes about the comtempt that N/L has for claimants, etc. it is the biggest piece of welfare legislation since the war, yet it has slipped in almost unnoticed. What is also significant is the the select committee which oversees all these ruthless changes is of course, labour dominated: kate humble is on it and the chair is terry rooney. labour party members may want to ask what were they doing?, Some disabled people will lose up to 40 pounds a week as a result of the WRA.The DWP is out of control: claimants are harrassed, spyed on, DWP doctors routinely lie about medical results, etc, benefits are now minimal with much conditionality, and yet it is going to get worse, much worse.
with the WRA, Incapacity Benefit (IB) will be replaced by a two tier Employment and Support Allowance and .‘customers’ who fail to participate in work-focused interviews or to engage in work related activity will lose benefits. With current levels of IB averaging £6500 per annum, claimants could lose as much as £10.93 a week rising to £21.86 for a second refusal. However, as IB is linked to Severe Disability Allowance, a claimant could lose much more, coupled with cuts in HB, this could plunge many into real poverty. So, how can this cut child poverty? i suspect they are determined to fill the jobs that will be vacant as they phase out low skill migrants from the workforce. I have said before these are massive reforms and i can't believe there is not more opposition to them.
The right wing Orange Book L/D David Laws was also on the politics show, recently signalling a shift to the right including a voucher scheme for schools and pertinent to this discussion, cutting Incapacity Benefit down to JSA level, 54.00 a week, how do they think chronically ill people for instance who may need extra laundry, etc can live on that? It seems like all parties are racing to attack the livelihoods of disabled people, single parents, etc.
we are now rapidly moving to a US style ruthless, maximum surveillance, minimal and privatized welfare system where the individual is blamed for their incapacity, etc,
Where's the opposistion?.
MP's voted on the WRA not even knowing what the rate of the new employment support allowance would be, This Green Paper has happened incredibly quick, the Freud review on which it it was based and which was compiled in only twelve weeks as you know, only reported a few months ago, Welfare policy is being developed at a very unseemly pace and speaks volumes about the comtempt that N/L has for claimants, etc. it is the biggest piece of welfare legislation since the war, yet it has slipped in almost unnoticed. What is also significant is the the select committee which oversees all these ruthless changes is of course, labour dominated: kate humble is on it and the chair is terry rooney. labour party members may want to ask what were they doing?, Some disabled people will lose up to 40 pounds a week as a result of the WRA.The DWP is out of control: claimants are harrassed, spyed on, DWP doctors routinely lie about medical results, etc, benefits are now minimal with much conditionality, and yet it is going to get worse, much worse.
with the WRA, Incapacity Benefit (IB) will be replaced by a two tier Employment and Support Allowance and .‘customers’ who fail to participate in work-focused interviews or to engage in work related activity will lose benefits. With current levels of IB averaging £6500 per annum, claimants could lose as much as £10.93 a week rising to £21.86 for a second refusal. However, as IB is linked to Severe Disability Allowance, a claimant could lose much more, coupled with cuts in HB, this could plunge many into real poverty. So, how can this cut child poverty? i suspect they are determined to fill the jobs that will be vacant as they phase out low skill migrants from the workforce. I have said before these are massive reforms and i can't believe there is not more opposition to them.
The right wing Orange Book L/D David Laws was also on the politics show, recently signalling a shift to the right including a voucher scheme for schools and pertinent to this discussion, cutting Incapacity Benefit down to JSA level, 54.00 a week, how do they think chronically ill people for instance who may need extra laundry, etc can live on that? It seems like all parties are racing to attack the livelihoods of disabled people, single parents, etc.
we are now rapidly moving to a US style ruthless, maximum surveillance, minimal and privatized welfare system where the individual is blamed for their incapacity, etc,
Where's the opposistion?.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
So basically what you're proposing is effectively the reintroduction of slavery, if you happen to find yourself in a situation whereby you lose full time employment. Rather than having any choices about how to remedy that situation, you would see such people forced to undertake menial tasks, with zero reward, and without any protection in terms of rights? And that would be a good thing in your opinion.CyberRose said:Who said anything about sacking existing workers?
We need more bin men, so why not get unemployed people to help them out? Rufuse collection is just an example. I think getting unemployed people to do community services to earn their dole money is a great idea. If they want a proper wage and proper workers rights then they know what they have to do don't they? (Get a job)
Care to explain exactly how these 'unemployed people' (who are clearly a race apart from intelligent people like yourself) will actually have the time to find any kind of decent quality sustainable employment if they're forced through your plans to do community service (something which i was under the impression was actually used as a punishment within the criminal justice system btw).
Further, you fail to see why already low-paid workers doing the same tasks as your unemployed army will be sacked - its economics dearie. Why pay someone to do something if 'unemployed' people are doing the same activities for free?
Have you ever been unemployed? If so, would you have agreed to spend 10+hours a week sweeping streets, painting walls or removing shit from canals, and how exactly would that have helped you back into work? Or is this only aimed at the scroungers and if so, how do you distinguish between the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' ones then?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Yes, of course. People aren't ignorants pigs just waiting to be told what to think by the media - i can see why you distrust democray so much if that is your opinion of others though. Most families have experience of at least one member being a recipient at some point in thier life and will appreciate the essential nature of the system.CyberRose said:Even when up against a major campaign by the right-wing media?!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
CyberRose said:
Precisely why a referendum to remove it would fail misrably...
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
I'm not saying they should do that "for a living" am I? I said why can't they do charity/community work for 10 hours a week? Are the little old ladies that work in the charity shops slaves? They are volunteers (and I already took back what I said about collecting rubbish)Paulie Tandoori said:
10 hours a week isn't much is it?
Like I said, lots of charities need volunteers (unpaid)
When I was unemployed and claiming benefits I got a contract job working 16 days in a row shovelling shit out of a steel factory so I would have some money. When that finished I signed up to a recruitment agency who sorted me out a job in a week. I can't really say how shovelling shit in a steel factory helped me back into work, but it certainly got me in the habit of working.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
CyberRose said:
Yep, and at the moment, jobseekers can undertake voluntary work without risking their benefits. Why do you feel the need to force them to do it? Why not encourage them? Why does it need to be a condition of receiving financial assistance from the state in times of need?
You're lucky iro recruitment agency, many people aren't - they need encouragement, not castigation. There's massive unemployment in many areas of the country, there's generations of people been out of work - if it was as simple as saying, 'Couple of hours down the Oxfam shop every day lovie and you'll be right as rain', don't you think it might have happened already?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
We're still waiting for the list mind to prove it..come on L&L
rhys gethin
New Member
Why SHOULDN'T people who want to look after their children be paid to do it? Why SHOULD young children be further deprived of parenting? What conceivable benefit is there in this nonsense for anyone except the rich, who pay far too little tax as it is?
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Ok I take everything backPaulie Tandoori said:
Not really. If you've got GCSE English and Maths I'm pretty sure a recruitment agency can get you a job the next day. If you don't have those qualifications, then I think you can do classes to get them.
Fair enough, how would you go about encouraging them?
Well it'd be summat to put on their CV at least!
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
CyberRose said:
Re: qualifications - that's really the big issue - the amount of un/low skilled people who simply cycle on and off benefits into low paid, low status, short term work. Allow them to claim benefits and study properly (which they can't really do at the moment under current rules). Make educational accessible and attractive to these people, not something that other people do. The courses on offer to most jobseekers are a waste of time and money, to be frank and also generalising to a degree.
How to encourage? - well, i accept its against the strictest interpretation of 'volunteering' but why not pay a bonus for jobseekers who demonstrate active engagement with such opportunities? Ffs, as recently as last year, the DWP were threatening to reduce people's benefit by the amount of any lunch expenses they were given in connection with volunteering, which hardly makes it attractive.
Give people guarantees that their benefit will be unaffected by voluntary activity, which would be especially helpful to those who are claiming due to illhealth or incapacity or disability. Promote voluntary working as a good idea within job centres. There's loads could be done.
Right, I'm off to write 2,000 words on the Green Paper, what a life.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Do they even pretend to be left wing anymore anyway - i did note harriet harman laughables attemopt to pretend that she was attacked for being 'a left-winger' the other week, and the constitution was describing them as a democratic socialist party recently, but surely no members believe this do they?
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
Not the leadership but plenty of the members.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
How? Are they right? Are you a member? Do you think that labour is a socialist or left-wing party?
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
Yes I'm a members.
Labour is a broad coalition designed to win power through Parliamentary democracy. It includes people with views from the Thatcherite right to my branch, which is dominated by Trotskyists. While not always a socialist party, it is the only hope for socialists to win any power in this country.
Labour is a broad coalition designed to win power through Parliamentary democracy. It includes people with views from the Thatcherite right to my branch, which is dominated by Trotskyists. While not always a socialist party, it is the only hope for socialists to win any power in this country.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
It is currently a socialist party? If not, when was it last and what has changed? And when/how will it change back? Can it be changed back?
There are about 250 trots in the party nationally. They mean nothing. And if the people calling themselves socialists in the party view the current labour program as socialist then i'm afraid the term is meaningless when used in relation to the party. (Unless and, see other thread we views socialism as a plan of imposing competitive capitalist development).
Your formulation should surely read labour (or tory) is the the only hope for non-socialists to win any power via parliamant in this country.
There are about 250 trots in the party nationally. They mean nothing. And if the people calling themselves socialists in the party view the current labour program as socialist then i'm afraid the term is meaningless when used in relation to the party. (Unless and, see other thread we views socialism as a plan of imposing competitive capitalist development).
Your formulation should surely read labour (or tory) is the the only hope for non-socialists to win any power via parliamant in this country.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Who mentioned 'true socialists' or 'winning power'?
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
It's a party with a lot of socialists in. Don't know if you'd call it a socialist party or whether that label means very much. It has always been a coalition of views. Such a broad coalition is necessary for winning power in a Parliamentary democracy.
The current Labour Government programme is not socialist. A future one may be, if enough of us make it happen.
The only future hope for socialism to win power, however, is through the Labour Party by reclaiming it.
All other existing and imaginable leftwing parties are doomed to fail; they are and always will be of no lasting significance whatsoever to anyone except their couple of hundred members.
The current Labour Government programme is not socialist. A future one may be, if enough of us make it happen.
The only future hope for socialism to win power, however, is through the Labour Party by reclaiming it.
All other existing and imaginable leftwing parties are doomed to fail; they are and always will be of no lasting significance whatsoever to anyone except their couple of hundred members.
tangentlama
Nameless voices crying
Are they also going to find work for the 'won't work-can't pay maintenance' absent fathers then, thus enabling these ne'er do well's to do well by their offspring? Why this complete focus on only the mothers?
Who's going to look after the kids for 6 weeks of the summer holidays? Not every town has 6 weeks childcare provision. In the case of a friend - the jobcentre asked her if her 12 yr old would mind being left alone for 3 hours a day, unattended! The only childcare available for 12+ was 1 hour on the bus away, and that meant 4 hours bus travel for her - travel costs of £15 per day, childcare costs of £30 (minimum) for the 5 hours the child would need to be cared for, and for three hours work she'd get approx £21 if she was lucky enough to have a job that paid £7 an hour, but most jobs of that nature were paying around £5.60-£6.00, presuming she can find a job that would fit in with her 2 hour bus journey before she even got to work. So the deficit of £26-28 per day would presumably be met by the Govt? Possibly not all of it. It's actually cheaper to allow a mother to stay at home, isn't it, and pay them them the £56 per week they currently receive from Income Support to look after their own child, isn't it?
When the Jobcentre ask a mother to leave a 12 year old on their own for 3 hours a day because there's no locally available childcare is that not reckless?
Who's going to look after the kids for 6 weeks of the summer holidays? Not every town has 6 weeks childcare provision. In the case of a friend - the jobcentre asked her if her 12 yr old would mind being left alone for 3 hours a day, unattended! The only childcare available for 12+ was 1 hour on the bus away, and that meant 4 hours bus travel for her - travel costs of £15 per day, childcare costs of £30 (minimum) for the 5 hours the child would need to be cared for, and for three hours work she'd get approx £21 if she was lucky enough to have a job that paid £7 an hour, but most jobs of that nature were paying around £5.60-£6.00, presuming she can find a job that would fit in with her 2 hour bus journey before she even got to work. So the deficit of £26-28 per day would presumably be met by the Govt? Possibly not all of it. It's actually cheaper to allow a mother to stay at home, isn't it, and pay them them the £56 per week they currently receive from Income Support to look after their own child, isn't it?
When the Jobcentre ask a mother to leave a 12 year old on their own for 3 hours a day because there's no locally available childcare is that not reckless?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
What do they mean by that socialism though?!! That's what i'm asking.
How many of the members do you think count themselves as socialists?
How do they/you intend to 'reclaim' the labour party and impose a socialist program (and what does that program entail?). Don;'t these attempts in the current conditions, with the constituional changges that have been put in place since 1994 doom them/you to failure and to being of no lasting significance whatsoever to anyone except their couple of hundred members.
How many of the members do you think count themselves as socialists?
How do they/you intend to 'reclaim' the labour party and impose a socialist program (and what does that program entail?). Don;'t these attempts in the current conditions, with the constituional changges that have been put in place since 1994 doom them/you to failure and to being of no lasting significance whatsoever to anyone except their couple of hundred members.
Similar threads
