re: Post EU Referendum
 

No, that would compromise their freedom. Or greatness. Or something.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Seems like a flimsy argument, doesn't it?

re: Post EU Referendum
 

A nice pair of these, maybe.

http://thumbs2.ebaystatic.com/d/l225...z0rxV3bJkw.jpg

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Never mind about that, just go shopping and buy a pile of stuff you don't really need until you stop thinking about it.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

I'll have you know I only buy stuff that I do need, but just don't have room for.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

That's very un-American of you.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Some might argue I don't need it, I suppose, but I enjoy it and that's really all that matters to me.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Not sure :confused: I can't see pularkson putting those on in public.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Yet another madcap Eu proposal dreamt up by a lefty nutter who would even make old Junkie seem quite intelligent by comparison.

Probably playing politics rather than making a serious properly researched credible proposal, with the main intention of increasing the outrage of the already outraged Remoaners.

Anyway if such a thing ever did come to pass, I wonder if those opting in will be happy to continue funding the corrupt Brussels fat cats lives of luxury and forking out more good money after bad, while much of the Eu is on the breadline and getting poorer ?

Personally I would be totally ashamed to be even remotely associated with the rotten to the core Brussel scumbags one day longer than was absolutely necessary,
though having said that I'll probably still enjoy my Brussel sprouts for Christmas Dinner. :cool:

re: Post EU Referendum
 

It took me a while that you can return almost anything you buy in the US. Up to a year in some cases. So just buy,buy,buy and return what you don't want/need.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Only a minority choose to live off of benefits, despite shows such as Benefits Street. Many more are stuck in a vicious cycle of having never had a job yet can't get an interview because they haven't any experience. Yet another group (and this has happened to me previously) have been told at interview that they want a less-experienced employee because they are easier to train the way the company wants them (with fewer bad habits). Not a good reason to not employ someone, but there you go. Others can't get a job because of a criminal record, which leads them to committing more crime to pay for things they want such as drugs.

There is no over-supply of labour, only an artificially low wage. The government could make the National Minimum Wage £10 an hour any time they want to, which would force employers to pay more (and the additional cost to the employer could be reduced in the amount of tax paid by them to HMRC).

When you have companies such as Sports Direct and Amazon treat workers like just another item of stock to be meticulously tracked and monitored, why would anyone want to work for them?

I worked via a temp agency at our local Amazon warehouse four years ago, and actually enjoyed the work. I was sick for a few days, and followed both the Amazon and temp agency's rules for sickness absence, but when I went back I was told I hadn't phoned Amazon to tell them. The temp agency and the Amazon team leader I had been assigned to both proved to Amazon HR that I had phoned in as required, but the HR dept decided that they weren't going to change their mind, and told the agency that. A few months later later, the DWP stopped my money because they'd been told by Amazon that I'd quit my job there. The temp agency wrote a nice letter to the DWP with proof of what actually happened. I am on a 'do not employ' database for Amazon (as are many who were let go by Amazon), and will never get a job there. Yet any time I'm unemployed and there are Amazon vacancies, the Job Centre insists I apply. And every time I end up taking them another letter from the temp agency.

Unemployment benefits are less simple than they used to be.

1. Unemployment Benefit.
There is single-person rate (£73-ish per week) and a couples rate (£113 pw) . If there are dependant children, then additional money is also added on.

Current rules require claimants to look for work for at least 35hrs a week, covering an area of up to 90mins travelling time (not including waiting for connections/transfer waiting times (so if you're offered a job interview involving travelling 45 mins by train, waiting 45 mins for your connection then another 45 mins on another train just to get there, they don't include the 45 mins each way in your travel time. So if you get the job, you're commute each day is going to be a 4.5hr journey.

2. Universal Credit.
Similar rules to the above, but part-time workers are required to look for more hours to get them working more than 35hrs pw, even if their personal circumstances do need that many hours.

As many of these part-time workers are on zero-hour contracts, they aren't always going to be available for interviews/work when the jobs they're required to apply for want them to attend.

Missing an appointment at the Job Centre, failing to look for enough jobs or get enough interviews, or to refuse an offer of employment results in losing your money for one month. A second time is for three months, and a third time is loss of money for 1 year. They term these 'sanctions'.

Here is a Google search on the stupid reasons some claimants have been sanctioned. This one Benefit sanctions: the 10 trivial breaches and administrative errors also includes evidence given to a Parliamentary committee.

Claiming benefits isn't as simple as it seems, and officially there's no requirement to take zero-hour contract jobs, but Job Centre staff still try it on with those they are sure don't know this.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

I don't recall any problems in my European travels before 1972 using nothing more than a passport.
A passport I still need to access Europe.

re: Post EU Referendum
 

The remoaning continues

BBC

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Gambian leader Yahya Jammeh has rejected the result of the presidential election held earlier this month, a week after admitting defeat.

Mr Jammeh cited "abnormalities" in the vote and called for fresh elections.

Gambia leader Yahya Jammeh rejects election result - BBC News

Does this sound familiar to Remainers and Clinton supporters?

re: Post EU Referendum
 

I am not saying UK benefits too generous, just that unless there is a decent incentive to get off benefits many will stay on.

The article refers to .5% wage growth I am unsure what the supporting data could be for that. I remember years ago I lived in a Canton in Switzerland and used to hear the argument all the time that the Swiss wouldn't do certain jobs- the Canton put in some very stringent measures for foreigners. The Canton itself then had problems finding people for certain jobs, so just raised wages enough until they could find locals willing to do that work.

I noticed in an area of Midwest the roofing business and effects on workers of more immigration of lower skilled workers- many local roofing contractors simply cant compete or do so by laying off local workers and hiring the newcomers, or holding wages down of existing workers. Rather hard to see what the benefit is of putting people out of work. I just question the economic models that defy common sense, and laws of supply and demand.( Whether overall effects of Brexit positive or negative is another matter).