Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Cameron uses riots to target 'feckless' poor people 
Author Message
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepu ... kless-poor

Quote:
Seeking opportunity in a moment of crisis, David Cameron this week spoke of Britain's "slow-motion moral collapse". The prime minister sought to identify "deeper problems" and came up with a sociological canard: the culture of poverty.

This analysis is one that regards the chaotic lives of poor people as cause, not symptom, of the collapse of their communities. For the prime minister, these families and their children simply chose to be feckless, indolent or on the wrong side of police lines.

Such talk will do much to harden public attitudes – helpful to a prime minister who wants to push draconian social policy through the Lords in the autumn. The rhetoric will profit the contentious welfare reforms, a policy built on the idea that poor people are "culturally" unique and dependent on welfare by their own design.

Although a seductive line of reasoning, there is little evidence to support a thesis that poor people's behaviours and attitudes lie behind their plight. When proof is necessary to support this line of thinking ministers reach for beguiling figures. But in the welfare debate these numbers increasingly appear to be a mixture of lies and statistics.

Only last week, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) admitted that its claim that there had been a 30% rise in people on disability living allowance over eight years was in fact "distorted". Some in the media had confidently reported that people were either junkies, alcoholics or faking their disability to get the welfare payment – hence its supposed escalating cost to the taxpayer. In fact, the rise is closer to 16%.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Tue Aug 16, 2011 9:02 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:43 pm
Posts: 5048
Reply with quote
Well if poverty is the cause, which I have issue with as being the sole reason, why not create an economic boom and jobs?

I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.

Arse. One minute he goes on about 'broken' Britain, the next he's praising the solidarity of communities who helped clean up. So which is it?

_________________
Fogmeister I ventured into Solitude but didn't really do much.
jonbwfc I was behind her in a queue today - but I wouldn't describe it as 'bushy'.


Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:33 am
Profile
Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:13 pm
Posts: 7262
Location: Here, but not all there.
Reply with quote
adidan wrote:
So which is it?


Whichever gets the best feedback from the focus groups, pleases the Daily Fail readership and ensures people remember to vote Conservative at the next general election of course. :mrgreen:

_________________
My Flickr | Snaptophobic Bloggage
Heather Kay: modelling details that matter.
"Let my windows be open to receive new ideas but let me also be strong enough not to be blown away by them." - Mahatma Gandhi.


Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:41 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
adidan wrote:
I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.

I have and they had no intention of ever getting a job or being productive at all.

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Wed Aug 17, 2011 8:09 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:43 pm
Posts: 5048
Reply with quote
bobbdobbs wrote:
adidan wrote:
I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.

I have and they had no intention of ever getting a job or being productive at all.

Really? Jeez, I find that really sad TBH.

_________________
Fogmeister I ventured into Solitude but didn't really do much.
jonbwfc I was behind her in a queue today - but I wouldn't describe it as 'bushy'.


Wed Aug 17, 2011 8:18 am
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
bobbdobbs wrote:
adidan wrote:
I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.

I have and they had no intention of ever getting a job or being productive at all.

Yes but they are few are far between. I have met people who used to claim incapacity and still work as a painter and decorator. They did it because the they could get more money and not get hassled to go for jobs. Most struggle on benefits because they are so low.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Aug 17, 2011 8:41 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
bobbdobbs wrote:
adidan wrote:
I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.

I have and they had no intention of ever getting a job or being productive at all.

Yes but they are few are far between. I have met people who used to claim incapacity and still work as a painter and decorator. They did it because the they could get more money and not get hassled to go for jobs. Most struggle on benefits because they are so low.


Most should struggle on benefits, it only suppose to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice. The system has allowed a small minority to be better off not working, which is plainly ludicrous but without a wholesale change not only in the benefit system but in our society and work practices it is not going to change. This minority not only take money that could be better use elsewhere but ensure that everyone on benefits gets tarred with the same brush.

Its frankly an insult to those that "choose" to work and work damn hard to be worse off than someone who has decided that "its their right" to be supported in a manner that those people cant even afford.

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Wed Aug 17, 2011 9:57 am
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
bobbdobbs wrote:
Most should struggle on benefits, it only suppose to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice. The system has allowed a small minority to be better off not working, which is plainly ludicrous but without a wholesale change not only in the benefit system but in our society and work practices it is not going to change. This minority not only take money that could be better use elsewhere but ensure that everyone on benefits gets tarred with the same brush.

Its frankly an insult to those that "choose" to work and work damn hard to be worse off than someone who has decided that "its their right" to be supported in a manner that those people cant even afford.

Well it is not as if they are on a lot of money. The best part is that if you ever lose your job you will find out how tough it is on benefits. As for a quality of life that people who work cannot achieve that is a complete fallacy unless you are low paid. If you want less employment then higher minimum wages so that there is clear blue water between unemployment benefits and even the minimum wage. Just scapegoating one group of people is what despotic regimes do to take the pressure of their own incompetences. So rather than leaving unemployed without any support for 6 months before they qualify for assistance they should concentrate on getting them back to work as they would be the easiest and then give the long term unemployed more assistance.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Aug 17, 2011 10:17 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
bobbdobbs wrote:
Most should struggle on benefits, it only suppose to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice. The system has allowed a small minority to be better off not working, which is plainly ludicrous but without a wholesale change not only in the benefit system but in our society and work practices it is not going to change. This minority not only take money that could be better use elsewhere but ensure that everyone on benefits gets tarred with the same brush.

Its frankly an insult to those that "choose" to work and work damn hard to be worse off than someone who has decided that "its their right" to be supported in a manner that those people cant even afford.

Well it is not as if they are on a lot of money. The best part is that if you ever lose your job you will find out how tough it is on benefits.

I know how hard it is to live on benefits, that's why I chose to get back to work as quickly as possible and stay in work. I was brought up by my mother who refused to take benefits (both the ones that she was entitled to and ones she could of blagged!)and take work that some would consider beneath them because she had pride that she could support her family.

Amnesia10 wrote:
As for a quality of life that people who work cannot achieve that is a complete fallacy unless you are low paid. If you want less employment then higher minimum wages so that there is clear blue water between unemployment benefits and even the minimum wage. Just scapegoating one group of people is what despotic regimes do to take the pressure of their own incompetences.
A higher minimum wage wont by itself decrease unemployment, there are too many people that have too high aspirations ( Prince Charles got castigated recently for daring to suggest that kids shouldn't expect the high paying jobs as a matter of course, except for the lucky few most people need to work very hard to get those) and use that to refuse to work, saying its too little, they wont work for less than x amount.

Amnesia10 wrote:
So rather than leaving unemployed without any support for 6 months before they qualify for assistance they should concentrate on getting them back to work as they would be the easiest and then give the long term unemployed more assistance.
It should be both.

I know its a complex issue and I know I don't have the answers.
I also know our political masters (of all persuasions don't have the answers, they just pretend they do!).

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Wed Aug 17, 2011 10:40 am
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
A higher minimum wage will have two effects boost the incomes of the low paid which is very stimulative in terms of the economy overall. Secondly it will make the difference between a minimum wage job and a life on unemployment benefit even greater and so for those who think working is barely worth it, it becomes a much more attractive option.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Aug 17, 2011 11:30 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm
Posts: 8767
Location: behind the sofa
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
A higher minimum wage will have two effects boost the incomes of the low paid which is very stimulative in terms of the economy overall

Surely it will just reduce the number of full-time jobs available, and increase the number of "self employed" staff that companies hire to get around such rules.

_________________
jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly."

When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net


Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:45 pm
Profile WWW
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
Reply with quote
I'd rather call-me-Dave did something about the enormous income inequality TBH.

I've read many times that there's a link between perceived equality and happiness of the population. The larger the income gap continues to grow, the unhappier the peasants will be.

_________________
timark_uk wrote:
That's your problem. You need Linux. That'll fix all your problems.
Mark


Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:14 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
Reply with quote
adidan wrote:
I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.
True, but some of them won't be happy having to work either.

_________________
pcernie wrote:
'I'm going to snort this off your arse - for the benefit of government statistics, of course.'


Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:18 pm
Profile WWW
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 5837
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
adidan wrote:
I've never met anybody who is happy to be on benefits.
True, but some of them won't be happy having to work either.

Last I checked, most people weren't happy to have to work.

;)

_________________
Jim

Image


Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:20 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
JJW009 wrote:
Amnesia10 wrote:
A higher minimum wage will have two effects boost the incomes of the low paid which is very stimulative in terms of the economy overall

Surely it will just reduce the number of full-time jobs available, and increase the number of "self employed" staff that companies hire to get around such rules.

It would be best to make the change gradual so that everyone can adjust. If it doubled over night as an example it would be chaotic. Growing faster than the rate of inflation would be enough. Also by doing this you could easily scrap family credits.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:55 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.