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.

 

Jobless UK Youths To Be Put Into Camps

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Demandred
hahahaha halarious.


Hilarious?

How is effectively creating more homeless people hilarious?


we have a similar set up here in Australia though no boot camps. i actually work for a government funded organisation who runs "Work For The Dole" training programs and community services.

...


works well enough.


Obviously not, since the scheme has been axed under the rudd government.




posted on May, 27 2008 @ 05:56 AM
link   
wow,this is definatly a 2 sided coin.

On one hand training people up for work can be a good thing,both for the infrastructure and for the moral of the youngsters who find it hard to get into work and stay there.

On the other hand,it should be a choice,not an enforced law. This could be the start of a very dangerous thing. Where we're rounded up into camps if we don't fit the precise criteria that the goverments want us to.

I know that they're not going to do this for our benifit,although that's the angle it will come in under. Goverments never do anything to help you,without helping themselves a great deeal first.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 05:59 AM
link   
I have never posted on here before but have looked and read a lot.
I am from England and am unemployed.
I can not get a job that pays the same as I get for doing nothing.
I am constantly applying for jobs that pay 12k 10k a year that will be made up to around 15k by in work benefits.
As I am at the moment I am on around 18.5k a year next week I start a course of working for my dole money, I will be glad if it can help me get a job that pays as much as I get now but I think it wont.
All these schemes are to get you off of the jobless figures and to disrupt what routine you have gotten yourself into while being out of work.
This was said to me by an employee of the jobcentre.
I will be put in a work place for the next 11 weeks when I am finished if I'm not taken on I will be left alone for another 6 months, while the employer gets some one else for another 11 weeks.
I will get another £15 a week of which I will be expected to pay for travel to this work place that can be up to an hour and a half's traveling each way.
The 18.5k I receive isn't money in my hand it mostly goes to pay for rent and local council tax. This money is for my wife and 3 children also.
We have a reasonable standard of living as we are and do not want to go down.
When I was working it was 6 days a week inc all holidays and still only had 13k.
I know its wrong in many ways but I will do it for as long as I can as it's the best way for me to give my kids the best chance of staying on the straight and narrow.
A lot of people wont agree with this but I promised my wife that she would never be on the streets.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Or you go into a gang. Or you go to school. Or you have a boring life, having a minimum salary job. Government should STFU and stay the fark out of people's life. If people want to be worthless scum, let them be. Someday they will wake up.

And it's either you'll be a slave for the government or a slave to the big corporations. YAY liberty! UK has always been a fascist state, just hidden in some way. When you still got a queen, there's a HUGE problem.

[edit on 26-5-2008 by Vitchilo]

when your finished i'd like to say that most of the WORTHLESS scum are immigrants from other countries, most of us english need work but other countries keep sending there people here and whats worse is our country is letting them take the jobs, do you see a pattern here?

and also i'd like you to not be so disrespectful to our queen.
because there are plenty of things we could say about your country but we dont, we keep our mouths shut, its common courtesy.

remember this.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:15 AM
link   
firstly i should say that i am very anti-tory, so there will be an element on bias in the following.

as a UK citizen it's worrying that people coming out of education at 18 either immediately have to find work or go to university, or else face the consequences. finding work is fairly hard, especially when a young adult has no previous experience (a quality it seems appears to always be a necessity, but hardly available to the general public)

This idea may be stemming from the statistics that show there are higher numbers of 16yr olds leaving school and staying unemployed. however, most of my friends got themselves a job straight away or went to college. the rest who didnt would have an even harder time getting a job, because of the mountains of restrictions in place. For example, legally at 16, if one is in full time education, they can only perform 6 hours work a week. hmmmm (or at least thats what is was 4 years ago when i was that age)

As a undergraduate who has to manipluate statistics to present what i want them to, i know how easy it is to make figures mean whatever you want them to. Whats more distubing is that alot of the country is being sucked into beleiving this kind of action is appropriate by a potential government which has many more ideas that will sting the large majority, leaving the select members of society with money staying wealthy.

just my tuppence worth, sorry it's posted anonymously. Always on here, maybe I should become a member



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Wow you mean like those camps hitler had when he was in power?
Thats not a very nice thing to do...



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Grayling plans to ask private sector companies and voluntary organisations to run the intensive training centres - with the £5,000 it costs to support a single person on the dole being offered to the company or voluntary group once the person has been in work for one year. Individuals will be expected to report to the centre every day for an intensive training programme.

Source

OK - that's what the proposal really is.

Note where it says "Individuals will be expected to report to the centre every day for an intensive training programme."

Sounds like the training programmes that were run back in the eighties.

"Boot Camps" is the wrong description - people won't actually be living in camps, they'll be going to a training centre each day and their benefits will be dependant on attendance.


This is another classic case of people reading the headline and not looking at the actual story behind the headline.

It's also another case of the guardian using scare tactics because they hate the tories so much.
If labour had come up with this idea, the guardian would be applauding it as a great step towards reducing unemployment.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by tmcloud
 


What benefits are you on that gives you 18.5 k ? sounds a bit off touch to me, im not allowed to work anymore even though i would go back to work in a second if i could, i receive DLA and some income support , my wife is forced to be my carer because social services are so over run with smack heads with kids wanting holidays, wasnt my fault my body decided it was going to start dying, but i cant get help for my wife, she wants to go and work but cant because of me, she gets a measly £80 a week for a job which would pay over £300 a week, if i complain people think im begging, so lets see 3 kids a wife and my illness, and we live on a crappy £250 a week, as i said id go to work right now, im a fully trained and qualified Field Geologist, they wont even let me teach my knowledge.

AS for these boot camps , we all know here in the UK this is a load of tory crap, you cant go putting them in the army, because then they become a highly trained idiots, this problem was caused and still is by trade marks, ie the named clothing the kids demand off their parents, trainers for example at over £100 a pop, no wonder parents dont care anymore, all the family budget goes to whining little hoodies, for their clothes.

the only way to deal with the situation is to give them nothing when the leave school, give them a choice of college, staying on at school, or paid voluntary work to gain experience in a job they are interested in, its no good offering a job they are going to hate, that just causes a bigger problem.

Raise the drinking age to 21, and ban alco pops, a lot of kids only get drunk because of alco pops, they cant stand the taste of unflavored alcohol, think back a sec, a lot of our troubles only started when taste bud friendly vodka became available, ive tried this myself, i gave my 20 yr old step son some neat smirnof and he about puked, that told me a lot because he likes to go drinking, there is no easy solution to this, but being soft isnt the answer.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by azzllin

AS for these boot camps , we all know here in the UK this is a load of tory crap, you cant go putting them in the army, because then they become a highly trained idiots, this problem was caused and still is by trade marks, ie the named clothing the kids demand off their parents, trainers for example at over £100 a pop, no wonder parents dont care anymore, all the family budget goes to whining little hoodies, for their clothes.


Erm i'm not sure the tories are even mentioning the army, it says camps for education and training, not armed forces.


Originally posted by azzllin

the only way to deal with the situation is to give them nothing when the leave school, give them a choice of college, staying on at school, or paid voluntary work to gain experience in a job they are interested in, its no good offering a job they are going to hate, that just causes a bigger problem.


Absolutely and completely agree. This is what i've wanted for a long time, if they choose college then fine help fund it, or straight into a job and help them find one.


Originally posted by azzllin
Raise the drinking age to 21, and ban alco pops, a lot of kids only get drunk because of alco pops, they cant stand the taste of unflavored alcohol, think back a sec, a lot of our troubles only started when taste bud friendly vodka became available, ive tried this myself, i gave my 20 yr old step son some neat smirnof and he about puked, that told me a lot because he likes to go drinking, there is no easy solution to this, but being soft isnt the answer.



This is another thing i agree with. Raising the drinking age to 21 will help shopkeepers keep to people who are over age. However kids get booze from parents (yes that's true) and ask other people to buy it for them. Where there's a will there's a way.

Alcopops are a personal annoyance of mine, they're marketed to children. Of course the industry says they aren't but when did you last see an adult man or woman drinking them? The only ones that do are the ones trying to recapture their youth as it were. Whilst i don't want a nanny state i think a ban on these would be beneficial, however again, kids will always find something to get themselves out of their heads drunk. This ends up in the inevitable violence and often fights/stabbings.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 06:59 AM
link   
So long as the emphasis is on personal development, and not cheap labour then I really don't see too much of a problem with it. And it's also a pretty shroud move by the conservatives - I mean no one seriously thinks we will have another Labour govt. and the Torys are the only serious contenders, this will appeal to the majority of the voters - and the rule is the best voters are the morons who don't vote (me!) and 2nd the voters that vote for you.

I can see this working for the majority of people it is aimed at - they have a choice either way. I know I used to have a great work attitude, and I think a lot of that came from the amount of time I spent as an air cadet - I was up for everything until I outgrew it at about 16 - 17, by then the benefits were engrained. But then I had a lot of it knocked out of me by a string of worthless jobs, you could probably chart my confidence on a graph and it would look like a flipping roller coaster


And I quickly read an article the other day that said they have observed cognitive changes in people who have little power and control over their lives - at the time I thought 'and someone had to write that down!' but it is very true - some would never get off the sofa without either a carrot or a whip, and I say that sat on my arse at 1pm on Tuesday! (but then I just got a new job and I don't start till tomorrow)



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 07:05 AM
link   
I live in Birmingham UK. And I am all for this! I think people in the USA have to understand its alot easier to get benefits over here in the UK. This scheme is aimed at that small minority of people that refuse to work for a living but will quite happily spend the workers tax money on booze and cigs.
I know many people who refuse to work and the amount of benefits they get from the governement is crazy! I am sick of working hard everyday of my life and watching these people live an easy life without a care in the world from the taxes I pay. And thats why the UK has some of the hghest tax rates in the world.

elljay



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   
The story is a good example of the media in general stretching an idea and making a story.

Its not about camps as people are instantly jumping the assumption to orwellian and Nazi like ideas. Thats the story.

I work for the civil service and there is a lot of future changes on the way which dont really matter on what name is in government at the time as they essentially all plan the same way forward on benefits.

ESA Employment Support Allowance begins in October. This is the start of reducing benefit claimants and putting them back to work.

Providers, private sector companies, who will no doubt soon privatise the Jobcentre Plus section of the DWP, will be responsible for mandatory interviews and placement of positions of employment.

Think the bigger picture here, a network of pricate sector employment agencies with a large number of potential workforce offering basic to minimum wage employees.

That slightly increases competition and interest from businesses considering in which part of europe to build a new factory.

Before many people on Jobseeker benefits could sign on twice a fortnight and were never really pushed toward working. The attitude now will be if your seeking work then the agencies will do their job and get you a job within weeks.

The "camps" idea is not camps but an extension of some practices already ongoing. Say for example Joe Smith signs on and isnt any good at much of anything. Feels he cant work as he never has. Has no experience. To earn his benefit Joe Smith will need to go to school. AKA the "camp". This will then be used to train people for effective tasks or job types. Everything from basic interview practice, writing letters, even if needed for some folks how to read and write.

Already large companies work with Jobcentre Plus and provide specific training such as ASDA(Walmart) Tesco etc etc People earn benefits with a little top up to train for specific jobs then go onto full time with the employer.

These new changes are aimed at reducing the large volume of long term claimants and is designed to change a lot of problems that the "system" itself previously created.

The main issue is the massive looming shortfall in the pensions budget. This is caused by the many benefit claimants who have never worked and therefore cannot contribute into the tax or NI contributions piggy banks. So they have to be credited and supported from that same piggy bank. And over time the more being taken out and the less going in .......

So the changes are mainly to drastically reduce the unemployment figures but even more so to totally reduce the incapacity benefit figures. Its interesting the story doesnt also mention that the tories are considering making Jobseekers earn while they claim in doing community service work x number of days per week while they are seeking jobs.

Its also political points winning. What the article talks about in the private sector companies etc, the providers, is already in place. Already people are called in for Work Focused Interviews. And already can be referred to the pathways to work programme, which is predominantly ran with the company - Work Directions.

The tories will no doubt win this years election and are already making it look like they introduced the ESA programme. Even recently the tories announced a great idea in referring people to medicals that recieve Incapacity Benefit. Since December 5th2007 the fast track personal capability assessments began and people are referred mostly now within 4 to 10 weeks.

There is no labor or tory government
They are both running the same show. Its just nice for us to get fed up with one and change every 10 or so years.

As the matrix movie mentions - the subjects accept the programme when given a choice even at a sub conscious level. In this case the programme of democracy is accepted and we seem to have a choice.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Okay, this post will make me very unpopular but...democracy is a #ing joke.

In an ideal world, the people governing themselves would be utopian. Everyone makes the decisions they wish to make. Everyone does their bit, and everyone contributes, and everything runs perfectly.

Unfortunately, British society is not like this. As a British man of 28 years and a traveller of the length and bredth of our nation, I can honestly tell you that this latest initiative is not far enough, but it is a step in the right direction.

The major misconception comes from the fact that people don't seem to realise that society is not a natural, God-given occurence. Society only works when everybody makes it work. After millennia of strong, stable (albeit warlike) societies, it may seem like civilization is a constant and irrevocable part of life, but it is not.

For civilization to work, it requires people, and these people can initially be broadly categorised into two groups: those that see the system, and decide to support it, and those that see the system and decide to exploit it.

Luckily, the first group are the majority. If they weren't, society would collapse. These people work hard, contribute taxes and ensure that those who are incapable of doing so should not die of hunger or exposure.

The second group are the parasites, who take but do not give. They are the ones who see the laws of the land, democratically chosen by the people because that is how they want their stable society to function (these parasites actually have the option of changing this and, with the current democratic system in place, could actually vote to remove it), and deny their place in that society.

Remember these people are actively working against the progress and success of Britain today by being a drain on its resources. I might not do much to advance the cause of British Civilization, but I do work and pay my taxes. I do what is required of me and reap the rewards of doing so.

Why should those who decide they shall simply exploit the system share in those same benefits? More importantly, why should they be allowed to reduce my standard of living and quality of life?

They make a point of avoiding the cultural traditions of our country to make a mockery of our benefits institution, an institution we set up to help those members of our society who are unable and not simplyunwilling to contribute.

Remember, this option is only available to them because we have deigned it to be so. There is no natural law forcing our hand. We, the law-abiding, tax paying majority, do this out of the kindness of our hearts via the government we have chosen.

So what is a society of like-minded people to do with these wayward types who take advantage of our good nature?

Well, that's the big question, but first there is something to consider.

Democracy is not fair, period. There is no opt-out clause when two mutually-exclusive viewpoints are being decided upon. The third option, neither party's preferential choice but more acceptable to both than the opposing party's view, is never chosen, and cannot be.

This means that if 51% of the people decide they prefer blue, the 49% who preferred red will be utterly marginalised and their opinions ignored, when purple would have suited both parties better than having their preferences rejected due to chance and numbers, despite the fact it was neither's first choice.

Of course, the Americans believe this automatically means the only other form of government is a Nazi-esque state in which the populous must suffer, because of their unending campaign of brainwashing their country, and the rest of the world, into thinking what they do is automatically the correct and best option.

Democracy is a popularity contest, in which the candidates with the prettiest manifeso wins. It does not judge on merit or ability, but purely on likeability and charisma.

Democracy means you are as totalitarian as any despotic government in history. If you have decided it is acceptable to ignore the opinions of the minority, then you have decided that might is right, regardless of the direction in which it heads, because as long as the strongest party is in the lead then it must be heading in the right direction.

So to return to the main issue, how should it be decided how society functions? Since we have decided to ignore the votes or opinions of the minority that have decided they do not want to help British society work, we are now morally no better than tyrants.

But why is that wrong? After all, if the majority has decided that the minority do not know what is best for themselves (those who say "all must work" vs those who say "I don't want to work"), and therefore have their opinions ignored utterly, then why should the minority get a say in what happens next? We have made the judgement when we called the vote.

If the parasitic section of people have chosen to ostracise themselves from the society that beget them, so be it. They have decided it, it was not forced upon them.

Why should we have to deal with them at all? Why shouldn't we just round them up, dump them naked on an island and say "fine, if you don't like our civilization, make your own"?

If a person is on benefits unlawfully, why should we punish them any further than exile? It is not our responsibility. It is entirely theirs, as sensible, intelligent human beings. If they are not capable of this decision, they are infirm or mentally deficient and should be taken care of accordingly, as we do any mental disorder sufferers. The responsibility of decision should not be on their shoulders.

We do not do this, because we think it would be inhumane. This implies society itself has failed the parasites, as it implies they do not fully understand the consequences of their decisions. They don't understand that if they do nothing, they shall starve, because they have never been taught it by life.

The only solution to this is tough love. These parasites are actually society's mercurial children, who need to be brought back to the fold. They may be entirely resistant to it, but we know that it is for their own good. Their rights as individuals must be suspended, so that they do not starve nor cause others unnecessary suffering through criminal activities to those who support our way of life.

Cont. next post.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Democracy is not freedom, you must never, ever delude yourself into thinking it. Just because you are voting for the winning side, does not make you free, because an accident of chance could have put you on the losing side.

Since we have already decided it is acceptable for the majority to impose it's view, for better or worse, on the minority, we now need to take up the reigns and accept the responsibility we have claimed.

This means, yes, forced labour camps and forced work for those who do not want to work, because their only other alternative is starving to death.

And we are all sitting at our computer screens collectively thinking that we are better people than that. If you want to be a good person, do not neglect your moral responsibilities to ensure EVERYONE has the same opportunities you do, regardless of how they must be shown it.

Rant over. Those who, in a knee-jerk reaction spouted "oh Nazi fascism blah blah...", please tell me you've all learned something from this.

Apologies for any typo's but I'm not going over this again.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
This means, yes, forced labour camps and forced work for those who do not want to work, because their only other alternative is starving to death.


The only reason this has come about is that people are abusing that freedom. Whilst i love freedoma nd want it to continue, hate the idea of ID cards or being tracked wherever i go. I dislike the idea of good, hard working people paying for other healthy people to sit on their backsides all day out of choice. People who are unwell are a different matter and should be supported whenever possible.


Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
And we are all sitting at our computer screens collectively thinking that we are better people than that. If you want to be a good person, do not neglect your moral responsibilities to ensure EVERYONE has the same opportunities you do, regardless of how they must be shown it.


They have the opportunities, they are given the chance at a free education up until the age of 18. After that they can choose t fund themselves through university, something many people do. They simply have to make the choice to work hard. If they don't have the brains for university then they can choose to work in a shop, or as any number of jobs, prime minister maybe
(ok cheap shot)

The point is if you're healthy then why should you suck up resources, sitting ona couch, scratching yourself and watching tv? Although it is your choice it will eventually lead to growing numbers of people doing this and then the system collapses, unable to support the welfare payments. Schools, hospitals and other institutions suffer due to of lack of funding. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:44 AM
link   
/Rant Mastah 7000 Engaged -

in USA we have Un-employment But after a set amount of time, Prolly 3 months You need to get the people your applying with, to sign a paper with their info on it stating thats who youve been applying for an making a effort to find a job....

Thats what this sounds like to me.
can create a system where its more enjoyable to do nothing, or else thats what your gonna get, IMO this should be a boycott everywhere to not work, untill our pay all around in increased to a point where Working a normal 40 hour a week job yields alot Higher Salary.... Then Making the same on welfare an on a 40 hour a week job wouldnt be so enticing.....

Think About it, as we move forward in this world, we have to pay More an more for things we want while the rate at which we are paid grows further an further apart from what we need.....

If you ask me, they need to raise the salaries of everyone, cuz I mean even in the Eighties I was watching as a kid the Employment pay gap grow......


/Rant Mastah 7000 Disengaged.

This Rant has been brought to you By the Letter ?



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by RedGolem
 


First thing first. Noone is actually quoted as saying this proposal is a live-in scheme. The writer of the article applies "boot camp" to this on-the-surface seemingly good idea. The plan is to stop this Labour induced dependance on the state that our younger generation sees as free cash. The start of the article states this is aimed at those who REFUSE to work. I agree with the other poster (apologies I haven't noted your name) who said it was up to governments to provide jobs.

From what I can deduce from this article, the scheme will be more nothing more than what we already have, but with a large proportion having to attend compulsory training to give them skills they can use in future employment. So no more excuses for not being able to find work. I will expect there will be a recognised qualification for those who complete training. This way it will be a breeze for people to find employment.

What a load of bollox. It sounds good on paper but so did New Deal, and Tony Blair's Money for Musicians thingy-ma-jig. We also had YT stopped and Skillseekers introduced under the Tories, which was nothing more than the former being revamped and did fcuk all for the majority. It was a job lottery. Depending on who your family worked for or the luck of finding something in an industry that'd last. My area was booming in electronic and computer manufacturers and thelikes. My company (American), just suddenly closed and moved all it's factories out east for obvious reasons. Leaving me in employment limbo.

New Deal - well the article explains that when a Jobseeker (pffffft!) reaches 6 months unemployed, they are to have a review and go onto a New Deal job working for an extra £20 a fortnight in some jobs. The "employers" sign up for this for cheap labour and exploitation.

I agree a lot of the youth today are scum. Not all, but a majority. But it's not only the young who need targeted. There are many adults out there too who sit around doing nothing. People who sit online all day using chat rooms etc. Who says disabled people can't work? What about those who post on here? They can use a computer so why not start an internet-based business? And there are loads that do! So if a disabled person can run a successful business why can't they?

As you might guess I have been through these schemes in periods of unemployment. They rarely work and again it's a job lottery. I've been through government schemes to get training for work only to find the qulaifications aren't worth the paper they're written on. I done almost 3 years in total at college. Music for 2 years after which I, like 80% of my classmates, came out with no job prospects. The course was a sham. Studied sociology, psychology and english after returning from a spell in portugal, in college for 5 months when I was told I wasn't to receive funding for the course or living costs (which I waited 5 months to hear about) and subsequently had to leave a course I was enjoying. The reason? I had lived outwith the UK within the last few years and wasn't entitled to course fees being paid. Yet the college was full of foreign students? Living in college-funded accomodation?

You've got to love Britain. Being British is all about driving a German car, to an Irish pub for a Belgian beer. On the way home grab an Indian meal or a Turkish kebab to sit on a Swedish sofa watching American TV shows on a Japanese TV and most of all being suspicious of anything foreign.

Oh and only in Britain can you get a pizza to your door faster than an ambulance or Police Officer. Only in Britain do banks leave both doors open and pens chained to the desk. Supermarkets make sick people walk to the back to collect prescriptions whilst healthier people get their cigarettes at the front of the store? We might be British but by fcuk are we funny!



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


*APPLAUDS*

Someone who actually reads the articles rather than reading everyone elses posts AND done some research. Cheers budski
The evidence is there people, just read it. There are no plans for Detention Camps for the unemployable just yet.

I find this happens on a majority of threads on here. People skim over the top or headlines then have an opinion.

Just an observation.

Peace out hombres



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by RedGolem
 


admit when i was 17 i did use the job seakers allowance
for 4 months while looking for a JOB,

its not really healthy not working (gained weight)
working ensured i got more money
and kept me active
its not a good feeling

anyhow this is a good idea, those who can work and abuse the system should be made to do something in return.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I'll start by saying I've not read through the entire thread. I should have done, but I haven't.

I'm 19 years old and live in NW England. I went to school, to college, got decent grades. Whilst studying I was working and earning not-too-bad money.

However, I ended up losing my job and leaving college round about the same time. Not my fault, just the way things went.
And now I'm on welfare. But I'm not some freeloading scumbag whos laughing at people who pay their taxes. I paid taxes when I worked, and it bloody crippled me sometimes.

I WANT to work. But you try and find a job that doesn't involve walking an hour and a half to start a factory shift at 6am then finding you have to walk home for that long again, because public transport to the industrial areas stops at 5pm. Which is what its like in my area.

Basically, I decided against going to university to study for a degree, so the system has done me over. So has my old boss, I was fired for something completely beyond my control, I'd admit it if I'd fecked something up.

So, because I've had some bad luck the last few months I ought to be shipped off to a concentration camp?
The worlds gone beyond mad. I can't think of words to describe how insulted I feel now.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join