Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:10 am  

Him wrote:

Which benefits do these 9 people receive?
Do you know of any more or is it just these 9 that warrant a nationwide real terms cut for millions of people both in and out of work?

Maybe you are right maybe these are only 9 in the whole of the UK, sadly we both know you are wrong.

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:20 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

Unfortunately, in the real world, access to your own transport is both desirable and in some cases absolutely necessary for job seeking, from experience I know very well that the first time you sign on at a Job Centre your declaration to actively seek work while on JSA is to seek work within a ten mile radius, which, when you don't find any, is quickly uprated to twenty, often thirty mile radius, thirty miles being considered to be a not too far radius in which an employee would commute each day.

There have even been press reports of job seekers being encouraged to apply for jobs 100 miles away, from memory one woman in Manchester was told to apply for a job on Teeside in the full expectation that she would travel to and from that job each working day.

Taking the extremes away though, even a ten mile radius is tricky on public transport, hence the need for your own means of delivery to an interview.

And as for clothing - believe it or not, that is one of the things that JSA is for, every idiot and his dog know that if you turn up for an interview looking like a tramp in old disheveled clothes then you aren't going to get the job, unless its for a position as a tramp, there are very cheap outlets for half decent suits, shirts etc these days and the JSA is intended to provide for this - you can't go to interviews wearing your kids school uniform.

The idea of a benefits system is to help people back into work, not keep them barely alive but unclothed and unsuitable for re-employment, that attitude is self defeating.

There are plenty of people who manage to find and maintain employment without the need for a car - to say it is essential is not true. Look at the people who come from Eastern Europe not many have a car when they get here, the first thing they find out is not where the nearest car dealer is but where the nearest employment agencies are.

On clothing - most people who were in employment will have suitable clothing - do their previous work clothes suddenly fall apart through lack of use.

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:35 am  

samwire wrote:

ah, someone else who thinks 2008-2010 should be erased from the record books. i'm sure the hundreds of thousand who lost their jobs will be pleased. a price worth paying? how very tory of you.

What does it take for you to grasp the point that the trigger for the recession was the banking crisis?
The year you mention (2008) was the very year that the banking crisis hit.

Now Cameron is saying that they are "paying down the debt" when government stats show exactly the opposite.

Is he thick or just a brazen liar?

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:53 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

There are plenty of people who manage to find and maintain employment without the need for a car - to say it is essential is not true. Look at the people who come from Eastern Europe not many have a car when they get here, the first thing they find out is not where the nearest car dealer is but where the nearest employment agencies are.

On clothing - most people who were in employment will have suitable clothing - do their previous work clothes suddenly fall apart through lack of use.

Your example of immigrants arriving here to find employment is not really what is being considered, if you or I decided to relocate to a European city to find employment today then we'd both be pretty stupid if on arrival we decided to find somewhere to live that wasn't within a public transport ride of our intended place of work, given the freedom to decide where to live on your "new start" isn't something that the vast majority of UK residents have when they find themselves out of work.

And I'm sure we don't need to start on how public transport doesn't really fulfill its brief in this country, but if you want just one example, when my wife was out of work the Job Centre that she was told to sign on at does not have a direct public transport link from anywhere near where we live - and yet that Job Centre is only five miles away from our house, half the distance that they insist is your starter point for a commute to work.

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 9:16 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

On clothing - most people who were in employment will have suitable clothing - do their previous work clothes suddenly fall apart through lack of use.

Most? What about builders? Or plumbers? Or cleaners? What about people who worked in shops where uniform was provided? Should they all attend interviews in their old work clothes?

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 9:54 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

On clothing - most people who were in employment will have suitable clothing - do their previous work clothes suddenly fall apart through lack of use.

They probably outgrow them?
Sat at home all day, the idle b@stards, filling their faces with buns, slurping down tinnies, and watching SkY TV, all on their £71 a week JSA.

Thrifty bunch aren't they?

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:34 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Maybe you are right maybe these are only 9 in the whole of the UK, sadly we both know you are wrong.

So how many are there? And how many would it take to warrant implementing a real terms cut for millions of people both in and out of work?

And which benefits are those 9 of your family receiving?

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:52 pm  

Him wrote:

So how many are there? And how many would it take to warrant implementing a real terms cut for millions of people both in and out of work?

And which benefits are those 9 of your family receiving?

My point about cutting benefits isn't to highlight abusers it is to ensure that the differential between the minimum wage and the benefits available doesn't continue - you should never be in a position where not working is more lucrative than working.

You obviously think the opposite - in the company I work for there have been no salary increases for 4.5 years during that time benefits have risen significantly - the firm I work for will not be an isolated case. So if benefits continue to rise quicker than wages will the incentive to work increase or decrease?

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:53 pm  

WIZEB wrote:

They probably outgrow them?
Sat at home all day, the idle b@stards, filling their faces with buns, slurping down tinnies, and watching SkY TV, all on their £71 a week JSA.

Thrifty bunch aren't they?

Idle - at last

Re: Cameron reprimanded for false claim on debt : Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:04 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Idle - at last

Only in your real world, where you consider people claiming JSA (£71-00 a wk, I believe) are sat at home, living it up, enjoying a life of riley.

Delusional.