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.

 

UK Wants Unemployed Youth to Do Unpaid Work for the State. State Sponsored Slavery or.....?

page: 12
25
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: pavmas
a reply to: pavmas

The USA government have figured this out that's why the ordered all these bullets and giving them to staff at IRS etc as if they will defend the country, A government has a duty to care and treat all its people decent not punish some and let others do as they please as anything else will lead to downfall and you just have to look at history to see that.


I disagree. a government DOES NOT have a duty to care for its people. It has a duty to protect its people, provide a stable and fair framework for them to live and maintain the "big" framework. (IE highways systems, long haul electric system, Waterways etc.)

YOU have the duty to take care of yourself and your family now and in the future. That's the problem now we have let the government get into CARING for us. Well if that is what you want then they have the right to tell you how to live your life and what you can and cannot do. You can't have it both ways.




posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:19 AM
link   
Good move uk..

This benefits culture must end. Oneway or another. free handouts and no responsibilities fueling more benifits babies, racism, anti social behaviour, major crimes, and of course terrorisam. . Its a runaway train.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: dismanrc



Don't know about the UK, but in the states there is plenty of work that could be given to these people.


If there is 'plenty of work that could be given' shouldn't people be given real employment earning a real wage to perform this work thus taking them out of the benefit system?
This would both increase the person's self-esteem and get them off benefits and into a tax paying job instead of paying what is legally below existence level wages for performing the same duties?

Most of the work that will be done was once carried out by local council employees.
Due to the austerity cuts imposed on these councils due to the greed, avarice and incompetence of bankers and politicians these positions have now been made redundant and the employees placed on benefits.

The proposals would mean that these self same duties could well be performed by the individuals made redundant for what is effectively significantly less than minimum wage - that is definitely morally wrong and should be illegal.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Pandaram

How on earth do you equate benefit claimants to racism and terrorism etc?

MSM seems to have done a very good number on you my friend.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:33 AM
link   
It was the Labour party and bloody Tony Blair that created this benefit culture and lifestyle. If we didn't have all this immigration, also coused by the Labour party and bloody Tony Blair, then there would be plenty of jobs we could force the lazy, workshy, drunked, drug riddled scroungers to do.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Your mate should never have been allowed to stand in the dock while under the influence of any substance. Turn Keys and Police should have kept the person in question locked up until he was sober/straight enough to answer for his crimes. Is there no chance your friend can lodge an appeal on the grounds that he was under the influence, possibly get a reduction in sentence? Especially so if his Jelly habit was already on record.

(Sorry this is a little off topic)
edit on 20-2-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc
So basically, terms of the agreement is
"I will give you your dole money if you work for less than the minimum wage"

Wont be surprised when young men start choosing to go to prison rather than "work" because they know there's no real jobs available to them and this working for your dole money is just a farce while the government laugh's it way to its banker's houses to beg for political donations.

The rich are screwing this country. Its appalling.


Whilst middle aged ones are increasingly choosing death. The Independent reporting today on the rise of suicides amongst men living in deprived areas and Brighton University as well as the Samaritans linking the rise in male suicides to austerity.

www.independent.co.uk...
edit on 20/2/2015 by teapot because: sp



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Aspie

You seem to be falling for the 'blame game' that our party political system encourages.



It was the Labour party and bloody Tony Blair that created this benefit culture and lifestyle.


They didn't help things, but I assure you, it existed well before Blair ever got into power.



If we didn't have all this immigration, also coused by the Labour party and bloody Tony Blair,....


Much of the legislation that resulted in the recent influx of immigrants from Eastern Europe came about under the Tory's terms in office.
Yes, we have immigration issues - something that despite Cameron's soundbites he has actively refused to do anything about at all - but surely you aren't inferring that all the problems with the benefit system are due to immigration?



.....then there would be plenty of jobs we could force the lazy, workshy, drunked, drug riddled scroungers to do.


You really need to stop reading The Sun and The Daily Mail.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Your mate should never have been allowed to stand in the dock while under the influence of any substance. Turn Keys and Police should have kept the person in question locked up until he was sober/straight enough to answer for his crimes. Is there no chance your friend can lodge an appeal on the grounds that he was under the influence, possibly get a reduction in sentence? Especially so if his Jelly habit was already on record.

(Sorry this is a little off topic)

He turned up late and sober, he was thrown in the cells for his lateness. he had the Jellies secreted in his arse and decided to gub them whilst waiting. After the "Old Paedo bastard" incident the judge banged the gavel and sent him downstairs. he was sentenced in his absence. The judge also told the jury to disregard his defence.

Yeah, he was wronged, but never underestimate how slow the wheels of justice turn once you get banged up. he has one of the best QC's working on his case, but it looks like he will serve his normal sentence because paperwork mysteriously goes missing or someone forgot to do something...

Lesson learned, never ever annoy a judge at the high court. they can throw the book at you and there is very little even the best QC can do for you.

The best part about this is his Lawyer at the original trial had came to a Deal with the PF so he wouldn't do any time or very little if any.

It was a Assault, a 70 year old man came to his door with a baseball bat and cracked him over the head with it. my mate wrestled the bat from him and knocked out the guys eyeball....Self defence, but when you are in the High court claiming self Defence it's best not to threaten to put a witness "in a Box"...The paedo thing kinda sealed his fate...

I hadn't seen him in years, i only started visiting him because i worked with his sister and she made me feel a bit guilty as none of his junky friends hadn't once visited him. so i got the gig.

known the guy since we were kids but lost touch over the years as you do. I wont judge him. he was a great guy before his life of drug taking. he's still a great guy. he just made a mistake....ok, numerous mistakes. but as i said, i wont judge him...he might call me a old Paedo bastard..

edit on 20-2-2015 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-2-2015 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-2-2015 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Have to agree when claiming self defence its never a wise idea to appear confrontational or be verbally abusive. Especially so in a court that has the sentencing powers that the high court does. I got some crazy mates from my past myself, sometimes i think its a real shame that they cannot seem to screw the nut and pull themselves together. Some things in life however seem to be rather immutable especially so for those who suffer from substance abuse and Temazepam a particularly nasty addiction.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

This maybe true; the problem is that the grunt job of cleaning up trash and such is not a profit producing job.

This would be a service provided by the government. In which case if it was done by paid government employees YOU as the tax payer would have to pay for this which would require you to pay more taxes.

A very circular affair. Which comes back to one of my other post. We should be working to keep the government OUT of caring for us. Let them handle the big picture item (IE defense, national highways, power grid. etc) Let the people take care of their own health, retirement and well being. Outside of BASIC emergency medical issues the government should be hands off personnel lives. Local church's, charities and other local orgs can be used for help when needed.

BUT if you CHOOSE to let the government care for you. Then you get what ever they policy is.

Can't have it both ways.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   
I saw this debated on tv by leading politicians.

Obviously this is bad for employees because they'll have to compete with this slave labour who'll be paid far less - half the minimum wage. Their current jobs will be lost in favour of the cheap slave-youth.

This is glaringly obvious and thus no fix for unemployment as it will undoubtably displace the same number of jobs as it creates.

The big winners are the corps who will get to pay a fraction of the current wages for those positions.

A kid in the tv debate audience said this to the panel and was shouted down by an adult in the audience who changed the point of his argument (a plant? Who knows, buy indeed very convenient). The panel then ignored the kid's argument and moved on to another question.

This is an incredibly dangerous, insidious and brazen move towards a very different social model that will heavily favour the rich. You think it's bad now, just see where this goes.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: dismanrc

originally posted by: nullafides

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: jude11

In a country with a supposed minimum wage this is simply illegal.


They should be getting £5.13 or £6.50 per hour depending on there age and even then its quite frankly nowhere near enough to live.



You've got a very good point there! Someone should be fairly compensated for their work....



Well if they get government subsistence like housing, food, transport. is that not compensation?


If they were paid a proper wage they'd be able to pay for their own housing, transport, and food, with their wages, AND ALSO CONTRIBUTE TAXES!!!!!

Why do you prefer that working people continue to be a drain on the taxpayer for all their needs?

I don't get it. Some of you resent people having to claim benefits, and in the next breath you say they should continue to be paid benefits in return for their labour.

Do you want people to get off benefits, or don't you?
edit on 20-2-2015 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Sorry Freeborn but I do not read any newspapers. AllI have to do is walk down the main street of our town to see all these no good benefit scroungers, especially on Wednesday when it's methadone day at the chemist and the local drug dealers usually have a delivery.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: dismanrc



This maybe true; the problem is that the grunt job of cleaning up trash and such is not a profit producing job.


Firstly; there's a lot of money in waste.

Secondly, and more importantly; one of the fundamental differences between the USA and the UK used to be that not everything here was about profit.
Unfortunately since Thatcher that seems to have changed and governments are obsessed with seeking profit in everything, even things like collecting waste and the NHS.
Personally I don't think its coincidental that this preoccupation with profit has occurred at exactly the same time we have seen the lowering of the average standard of living, the increase in the gap between the wealthiest in our society and the poorest and the general decline and erosion of British standards and ethics.



This would be a service provided by the government. In which case if it was done by paid government employees YOU as the tax payer would have to pay for this which would require you to pay more taxes.


As a rule local councils collect waste - a service funded through council tax etc.

The point is, councils have had funding from central government capped and reduced due to their austerity cuts - which are as a direct result of the incompetence and greed of our national politicians and bankers.
As a result of these cuts councils have stripped to the bone services they provide and most have made employees redundant.
Much of the work that it is proposed these benefit claimants will do will be work previously carried out by paid council employees who have been made redundant.

So effectively work previously performed by paid employees at least minimum wage may now be carried out by benefit claimants at a rate substantially lower than minimum wage.
Do you not see the immorality of that?

I guess many in the US view the way things are here in the UK and Europe as being 'socialist' - if that means caring for the most needy and vulnerable in our society then despite my intense dislike of labelling and stereotyping, so be it.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Aspie

There is an old saying Aspie, "dont hate the players, hate the game". Those people lives are not exactly a picnic, of that you can be sure.

If these drug dealers are known to you then why not do something about it? Because selling Smack ruins peoples life in ways you can only imagine. Just like our government, Heroin dealers profit at the expense of other people's misery. If you are looking to lay blame there is your culprit right there. Think on this however the U.K has no Poppy fields, how do you think the smack gets into our nation in the first place? The answer is corrupt government officials and politicians who are up to there neck in it!
edit on 20-2-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Aspie

So ALL benefit claimants are drug addled addicts or alcoholics?

So ALL benefit claimants are scroungers?

And again I ask you - do you believe that all the problems with our benefit system are due to immigration as you previously implied?



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

I am not into msm.. or watch anti poor, anti Muslim tv shows..
if you research, i mean case by case, most convicted racists and the terrorists are on doll.... almost ol ov em.. big time.

edit on 20-2-2015 by Pandaram because: none



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I have already written to my local councillor as we run a neigbourhood watch scheme. As it happens he replied last night and is forwarding my complaint to the police.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

The vast majority of immigrants in the past few yeaars are only here because of our over generous benefit system.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join