I'd work 18hrs a day here, 2-3 jobs. I'd apply for whatever social support was on offer but never look at it like a crutch. If I got benefits it would be a bonus. A change in policy wouldn't stop me getting out of bed that much earlier, socializing that much less or make me rely in anyone but me to support the family.
Margaret Thatcher has died
- Thread starter SoggySoape
- Start date
PropeshiaBean
New member
- Apr 14, 2008
- 25
- 0
- 1
In an unskilled job?
In a free market economy, if you had skills that were competitive then you would be soon back in a job, likely one that paid better.
Frankly, the reason why I cannot accept this line of argument is because as a child I lost my brother. When he died I realized that as long as I had the gift of life I could achieve whatever I wanted.
If you have breath you have opportunity.
Frankly, the reason why I cannot accept this line of argument is because as a child I lost my brother. When he died I realized that as long as I had the gift of life I could achieve whatever I wanted.
If you have breath you have opportunity.
If you were a carer for a disabled family member?
If you were in your mid 50s and maybe not capable of working 18 hours a day?
Or if you were a man in his 50s who had worked all his life in a hard physical job (that had left him with health problems) and supported a family then been left with no job in an area of 25%+ unemployment?
MItch
If you were in your mid 50s and maybe not capable of working 18 hours a day?
Or if you were a man in his 50s who had worked all his life in a hard physical job (that had left him with health problems) and supported a family then been left with no job in an area of 25%+ unemployment?
MItch
boohbahs
Member
- Mar 12, 2008
- 33
- 0
- 6
Very skilled.
Don't we all have skills?
Don't we all have skills?
But that's what I'm saying - skilled professions often have problems finding staff, but unskilled jobs have hundreds of applicants for every post.
I get between 3 and 5 calls a month from headhunters offering me jobs (and if I ever found out who gave them my personal number, I'd kill them), but if I wanted bar work, or retail work or cleaning toilets work - I'd be lucky to get called for an interview.
I get between 3 and 5 calls a month from headhunters offering me jobs (and if I ever found out who gave them my personal number, I'd kill them), but if I wanted bar work, or retail work or cleaning toilets work - I'd be lucky to get called for an interview.
chocolatesyrup101
New member
- Apr 14, 2008
- 19
- 0
- 1
I'm curious. But who here has said they wouldn't get out of bed? I think you're totally misunderstanding what Thatcher and ever other government has done since.
Rather than retrain the people they made redundant. They parked those people on benefits. They actively encouraged those people to remain on benefits. And then demonised them and started taking the benefits away.
everybody who is on benefits is there for different reasons. Some people genuinely need them. Others see it as an easy meal ticket. While others have been shepherded there to hide the true scale of unemployment. Which is also why Labour created the EMA schemes.
They were designed to keep 16 year olds in school because there were no jobs available for them. So the plan is keep them in school. Send them to college. Send them to university. Put them in a training program. Do anything but let them sign on for Job Seekers allowance.
Rather than retrain the people they made redundant. They parked those people on benefits. They actively encouraged those people to remain on benefits. And then demonised them and started taking the benefits away.
everybody who is on benefits is there for different reasons. Some people genuinely need them. Others see it as an easy meal ticket. While others have been shepherded there to hide the true scale of unemployment. Which is also why Labour created the EMA schemes.
They were designed to keep 16 year olds in school because there were no jobs available for them. So the plan is keep them in school. Send them to college. Send them to university. Put them in a training program. Do anything but let them sign on for Job Seekers allowance.
sportsrock14
New member
- Mar 21, 2008
- 27
- 0
- 1
God. You are so out of touch with reality.
For someone who is obviously quite intelligent, you have some awful blind spots.
Do you really think all poor people are that way by choice? That they are just lazy?
For someone who is obviously quite intelligent, you have some awful blind spots.
Do you really think all poor people are that way by choice? That they are just lazy?
He's a miner. He's worked hard to support his family and raise their educational standard. He lives in the same village as his grandparents, siblings, cousins etc.
He is extemely skilled and vastly experienced. But his Govt has decided that his job is irrelevant, mainly for political reasons.
By the time they have met living expenses and looked after their family they have little spare.
Much of your argument seems to rely on being single and able to move anywhere there is work. And I agree with that to some extent, I've done it myself.
The reality of life however is that people are simply not that flexible. Particularly the most vulnerable, like those with relatives that they care for. Exactly the people now (and then) being penalised.
Mitch
He is extemely skilled and vastly experienced. But his Govt has decided that his job is irrelevant, mainly for political reasons.
By the time they have met living expenses and looked after their family they have little spare.
Much of your argument seems to rely on being single and able to move anywhere there is work. And I agree with that to some extent, I've done it myself.
The reality of life however is that people are simply not that flexible. Particularly the most vulnerable, like those with relatives that they care for. Exactly the people now (and then) being penalised.
Mitch
ivanmyheart
Member
- Mar 18, 2008
- 30
- 0
- 6
Honestly I think choice. A choice not to be financially intelligent and manage debt and contingency plan correctly.
Again, from experience when I chose not to, but later realized it was not worth hiding from.
Again, from experience when I chose not to, but later realized it was not worth hiding from.
My dad has worked his whole life in the building trade. He still tries but he's not really up to it now. He has no savings and no pension other than the state pension. Which he's no old enough to claim yet.
Not everybody's job pays them well enough that they can put money aside. Especially if they have a family to raise.
Now you could say, "well people shouldn't have kids then". And you might be right. Except the free market economy which you are such a fan of relies on the next generation of consumers coming through and buying more stuff. If people stop having kids. Your pension plan is worthless and you're left scratching your head for a new plan.
Not everybody's job pays them well enough that they can put money aside. Especially if they have a family to raise.
Now you could say, "well people shouldn't have kids then". And you might be right. Except the free market economy which you are such a fan of relies on the next generation of consumers coming through and buying more stuff. If people stop having kids. Your pension plan is worthless and you're left scratching your head for a new plan.
Here's a guy with a skillset that is attached to a certain field too much. If they cannot move and cannot change jobs they are at the whim of whomever is in control, the govt or the mine company if privately owned.
At some point they should realize that if they are trapped like this they should acquire new skills in order to protect their family.
If they do not, then they have a benefits system to support them whilst they figure out how to be competitive again.
I agree it sucks, but it's also not all the fault of a govt for cutting the cord on the guy who didn't see fit to adjust.
Separately I believe two things:
Firstly the mines were running out of coal, it is a finite resource that was fast disappearing. Therefore all involved should not be surprised by the closing (though I admit it might well have been faster than necessary from her Ego)
Secondly I don't like mining. It's not good for the planet.
At some point they should realize that if they are trapped like this they should acquire new skills in order to protect their family.
If they do not, then they have a benefits system to support them whilst they figure out how to be competitive again.
I agree it sucks, but it's also not all the fault of a govt for cutting the cord on the guy who didn't see fit to adjust.
Separately I believe two things:
Firstly the mines were running out of coal, it is a finite resource that was fast disappearing. Therefore all involved should not be surprised by the closing (though I admit it might well have been faster than necessary from her Ego)
Secondly I don't like mining. It's not good for the planet.
PenguinBoy
New member
- Mar 1, 2008
- 17
- 0
- 1
Sucks. I'm sorry for him, and you. Genuinely.
I have Zero pension.
I have Zero pension.
So we agree that he was forced out of his skilled trade before it was necessary and left without the means to support his family through his skilled and difficult, dangerous job that he has performed for decades, to massage the ego of a prime minister.
And the argument in this thread is about what again?
After this he is left, in his 50s, with a family to support, in an area with 25%+ unemployment and no saleable skills, whilst benefits are being cut. If there were other employers in the area they won't look at him because of his age, even if he could retrain into anything meaningful.
We're not even mentioning the emotional impact on him or his family of a decision taken for the purposes of ego by a remote Govt.
I'm curious as to what other skills this highly qualified, experienced, skilled and dedicated professional should have invested in? What should he have been doing whilst working underground with a specialised team that would make a man in his 50s with a family employable? In what time should he have been doing this? Around the rotating shift patterns he worked?
Mitch
And the argument in this thread is about what again?
After this he is left, in his 50s, with a family to support, in an area with 25%+ unemployment and no saleable skills, whilst benefits are being cut. If there were other employers in the area they won't look at him because of his age, even if he could retrain into anything meaningful.
We're not even mentioning the emotional impact on him or his family of a decision taken for the purposes of ego by a remote Govt.
I'm curious as to what other skills this highly qualified, experienced, skilled and dedicated professional should have invested in? What should he have been doing whilst working underground with a specialised team that would make a man in his 50s with a family employable? In what time should he have been doing this? Around the rotating shift patterns he worked?
Mitch
If it makes you feel better the company they have doing it now are almost clinically retarded and do their best to make sure you don't get put on it. THey then get screwed over in appeals where its revelaed they suck at their job, but for a couple months they save some government pennies.
We agree he was forced out yep.
We don't agree that every woe that he and his next 2 generations have underwent are because of Maggie.
We also don't agree that as a person who is the patriarch he should rely on the whim of any external force for his success or failure. That lies at his door.
We don't agree that every woe that he and his next 2 generations have underwent are because of Maggie.
We also don't agree that as a person who is the patriarch he should rely on the whim of any external force for his success or failure. That lies at his door.
Nope, never said the next 2 generations, though you are certain to be disadvantaged and have to work harder if from a poor background, as you seem to say.
Similarly I never said he relied on external whims.
We agreed he was a skilled worker with long experience who was rendered unemployed by an action taken before it was necessary to satisfy the ego of a politician.
Perhaps you could explain what you think his course of action should have been in the circumstances? No glib replies, detailed advice relevant to a man in his 50s with a family to support who is left with no job and shrinking benefits? Kids at school, mortgage, that sort of thing.
Mitch
Similarly I never said he relied on external whims.
We agreed he was a skilled worker with long experience who was rendered unemployed by an action taken before it was necessary to satisfy the ego of a politician.
Perhaps you could explain what you think his course of action should have been in the circumstances? No glib replies, detailed advice relevant to a man in his 50s with a family to support who is left with no job and shrinking benefits? Kids at school, mortgage, that sort of thing.
Mitch