Ethos83

"The reason the government keep so many people unemployed..."

That's when I know when to stop reading.

Boomhauer

Might be that the government does not know what jobs to create and how to go about creating jobs. If the government was successfull, they would be competing with private business, leading to said businesses hurting.

Ethos83

Why....should the government be in the business of creating jobs (I infer from your message these would be public sector jobs).

Millhouse

It is obvious - It gives them a guaranteed vote.

Boomhauer

I didn't say they should. I was responding to Norm's post with a guess as to why the government doesn't create jobs for the welfare recipients.

Ethos83

There's an easy solution.

It's called domestic service.

But too many people would rather collect benefits than scrub floors.

So it's no surprise all these Poles and now Filipinos are flocking to our beloved shores.

Tockalosh

Found in the local Spinneys. Somewhat concerning to us Englishmen but maybe of joy to the Jocks

littlejimmy

Badly worded, I accept. Maybe should read: "The reason the government allow so many people to remain unemployed..."

Paracletus

When un-employment is running at the rates they are doing, you are proposing slave labour essentially? I know plenty of people at all levels who are out of work currently. I somewhat doubt my old bosses would even toy with the idea of cleaning the streets...yes, 2 both of them. There just simply isn't the work to be had..

Sure prime minister scamp would not survive the next election.

But I would agree that there are plenty of wasters on the system, but identifying them..walk past a JobCentre and it doesn't take a genius to figure out who wants and does not want to work. They may be executed.

auzdafluff

Slave labour? No. Simply shifting the perception of benefits as a way of not doing anything, to becoming an employee of the government via community service schemes / big society etc, yes.

Paracletus

Forced labour...sorry. I wonder what the 7% of the un-employed portion of the population would think..Sounds like regression. Having paid so much in taxes, I'd expect to get a bit more if I ever was made redundant. Better models than the UK in dealing with this. They pay pittance for people on the dole anyway..single people get £67 a week compared to 90% of previous salary in Denmark (initially). Just saying...

Norm_uk

They shouldn't really - but they shouldn't be in the business of using taxpayer's money to support people who are not working either.

But already they do so the can of worms is already open - therefore it's time to debate which method is best for society, which one costs less and keeps people away from crime, laziness and in better health.

Certainly the old way of subsiding wasn't good - but neither is the current system of supporting the lazy and unwilling...there has to be a better way.

N.

littlejimmy

Who here really wants to work in a shitty 9 to 5 job anyway? It's more of a means to an end, in my book. One has to pay the rent and feed and clothe the family, so one has to go to the strip-lit hell that is the office or factory. I was unemployed for nearly 2 months after my abortive AD experience and applied for dozens of jobs, because I had to. If we had the choice, we'd do something we liked for a maximum of 3 days a week. Curse the Protestant Work Ethic!

Maybe it's just me...

typical

"Rising unemployment and the recession have been the price that we have had to pay to get inflation down. That price is well worth paying."

Norman Lamont, 16 May 1991.

Hello.Kitty

But there's more to "community service" than sweeping streets. There's a huge amount of voluntary work that would be appreciated and that ties in to various different interests at various different levels - just think of all the different charities that are out there.