It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Is The End Game, Mr Cameron?

page: 6
18
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: surfer_soul
Haha, few and far between? Lol, OK.




posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: stumason
I think solo's point is that the rate of sanctions has gone up at a remarkable rate since 2010. As you point out out the number would we would expect to go up as unemployed rose but so to has the rate. If you take into account that the new unemployed are more likely to be actively seeking work compared to the long term unemployed then the frequency of sanctions has clearly risen even more.
Now you can argue about if increasing sanctions is a good or bad thing but I don't think there is a argument that it hasn't happened.
That said I still don't think that sanctions are a bg part of the decline in unemployment.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Bleating about sanctions is lame for JSA.
What's the current deal, apply for 4 or 5 jobs per week, attend a weekly appointment at a specific time?
WTF is so hard with that for the majority of people who are fit for work?
Whenever I've needed work I've made an 8 hour day looking for it, registering at employment agencies, cold calling, blah, and then I've always found some minimum wage crap job, as the Poles, Czech, and Romanian folk do.
I've worked in factories where the majority were Eastern EU workers and a Brit would start, do one or two days, then phone in sick...yes, lazy bastards.
If you can't apply for 4 or 5 jobs a week and/or attend a job centre appointment on time then I don't want my taxes funding your lazy arse.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

I believe Solo was totally unaware of the "rate" but simply focussed on the raw numbers, to try and push home a point that 2 million people (or whatever number he chooses to use today) have been sanctioned in some attempt to make out there is an army of people having their benefits taken away.

I, however, did mention the rate going up (see my comment about raising from 2.6% to 4.6%) but even then, 95% of claimants get no sanction at all, so it is also a small minority of JSA claimants being sanctioned and they get several sanctions a piece, hence me arguing the toss with him that he was misrepresenting the figures and also, it seems, wilfully ignorant of the 500,000 a year who used to get sanctioned under the previous Labour Government.

As for what the actual unemployment rate is, anecdotally there seems to be plenty of jobs around and plenty of people are finding work. Obviously, I can only say what is happening in my area and there will be variations of the whole UK, but generally things are on the mend it seems.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: ScepticScot but generally things are on the mend it seems.

Nurse, Nurse..I think i may have pished my pants again.



posted on Dec, 11 2014 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Then may I suggest a trip to the GP and in the meantime, they have products available to people in your position to avoid embarressment



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
Unemployment is probably going down. A degree of the decrease is due to reclassification and sanctions but the general trend is certainly downwards. However income tax receipts have not increased which seems to confirm that the jobs created are mainly low paid. There might be a recovery but it is not one experienced by the majority of people.
Also could be wrong but pretty sure that solo is no fan of Labour.



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Indeed, but to be honest, for the past 20 years (and even today) people have been complaining of the "low-skilled" (I dislike the term, every job requires skill) or "low paid" work being shipped overseas. What we're actually seeing now is a repatriation of a good many jobs - my own employer is doing just that - from places like India and the manufacturing sector has been increasing overall in the past 5 years too.

It's this low-end work that gives youngsters their first step on the employment ladder, something which again has been derided as lacking of late, but now we are seeing these jobs being created, it's a bad thing. I do understand, however, that it's made worse by the cost of living but as I said earlier in this thread, a low oil price might keep inflation down for a while helping wages catch up.

I think low pay is only a bad thing if your in your 30's or older with a family and have to take a job like that when you may have been earning more previously - younger, single people can keep costs down (exactly as me and my mates did when we were young) by sharing houses etc.

But then, if you are older and lack any marketable skills to get the higher paid jobs - which again are being created, my own employer once more is hiring several new positions paying well but is having trouble finding suitable candidates - then you should look at some form of training. Take the bricklayer fiasco, one can go to college for a quite small sum and do a reasonably short course. H ere is one such course from a simple 5 second search at a local college to me. If you're willing to tighten the belt and pull your socks up (although there is financial help for adult education as well as help for childcare costs and travel if you're really strapped for cash, then inside a year you could go from being only eligible for minimum wage to earning that "£1000 a week" we're paying the Portuguese.

As for Solo, we all know who he supports, I just thought it mighty hypocritical to only focus on sanctions for the current Government when the previous Government were doing it at a fair rate of knots as well. It's just like the "bedroom tax" he and others harp on about, no one batted an eyelid when Gordon Brown introduced it for private tenants (back in 2007 or 08, I think), they (and Labour, who bloody well brought it in) only focus on it now as it's those "evil Tories" doing it, when all they actually did was make the rules fair whether you were a social or private tenant in receipt of Housing Benefit.



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud

Household bills now do not only have to pay for the cost of the services, maintenance and ongoing development, but feeding an ever more demanding shareholder who wants his always better prospect slice. He is unchecked by the voters and now even unchecked by any national government. He can manoeuvre through the whole world of business, always on the hunt for profiteering where labour costs are cheapest and obstacles of rights are least.




Good point
Radio 2 had some insider on yesterday stating how pharm had infiltrated the NHS with doctors now prescribing drugs to virtually everyone, costing everyone loads through their taxes



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Apparently 51% of the population is now on at least 1 prescription med a week - it is higher among women, apparently they take a lot of anti-depressants.

Personally, I keep well clear of the GP unless I really have to go and even then, that usually warrants bypassing him altogether and going straight to A&E. They're bloody useless. I had one once prescribe me anti-depressants as I had a chest pain... WTF?



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 09:08 AM
link   
They all piss in the same pot mate. Stealers of hard working taxpayers earnings.

a reply to: stumason



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: stumason

Also could be wrong but pretty sure that solo is no fan of Labour.


The Party or Hard Graft?
edit on 12-12-2014 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Well I think there is a definite irony in the party name.
Was of course refering to your political allegiance not your work rate. (unless I have remembered wrong and you are IrnBru Murphy's number one fan?)



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Well I think there is a definite irony in the party name.
Was of course refering to your political allegiance not your work rate. (unless I have remembered wrong and you are IrnBru Murphy's number one fan?)


Labour are finished here in Scotland. Roll on the next elections when we will see them fall left right and centre.

Not sure what the Irnbru Murphy reference is though.
edit on 12-12-2014 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol
www.heraldscotland.com...
The next illustrious leader of the labour party branch office (Scotland)


edit on 12-12-2014 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol



posted on Dec, 12 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Soloprotocol
www.heraldscotland.com...
The next illustrious leader of the labour party branch office (Scotland)


Arse. Should have been Hard boiled Ostrich eggs he was pelted with.




top topics



 
18
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join