It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Jobless to work 'clearing litter'

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Karlhungis
I think this is a good idea as well. However, couldn't the other side of the coin be the government looking to increase the unemployment numbers so that there becomes a large workforce of people doing menial labor for next to nothing? Kind of creating a workforce of slave labor, if you will...

It would be kind of like the prison industrial complex, without the prison.

Dude, usually I respect your posts. But on this one you are way off base.

We did this already with the New Deal. You ever been though a national parks? Built the same way. You see those highways? Built the same way.

It is very common practice for the US gov to do this in times of trial.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:37 PM
when gordon (dajall) brown was larging it up in his university daze he thought it was pretty leftie to be on the dole....he called it "FREE MONEY"

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:38 PM
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin

This is great news, i live in the UK. I have a full time job and i pay my taxes, which in turn pays people to do nothing ! This is great, they could pick up litter, clean graffiti, cut grass, empty bins well there are endless possibilities. Great


posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:45 PM

Originally posted by wheresthetruth
Well, I dont necessarily agree with forcing them to do the work

They're not being forced to do anything. They could always get a proper job. Or just not scrounge off the state. Simple.

Though I still question why anyone should have to pick up litter on the basis only a retarded dead slug would deliberately drop litter in the first place ..... ! There is no logical reason for there being any litter to pick up!

[edit on 21-7-2008 by Essan]

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by TheRedneck
It is not the state's responsibility to pay someone for doing nothing. There are provisions for those truly unable to work; they are exempt from the requirement, as they should be. But for those who are able to perform work, any productive work, they must be required to either work, or do without. Anything less is pure textbook Communism, and we all know how that tends to work out.

I'm not totally opposed to the idea, but I know like everything else the government administers, it will eventually be abused. The social security card is a prime example. It was supposed to be used only to obtain SS benefits, but today you can't work, get a license, apply for a loan, etc. without it. I'm all for convicts working for their upkeep, but not everyday citizens who have probably paid into the system at some point in their lives.

I am all in favor of a social safety net to help those who are down on their luck. It can happen to anyone, and has happened to me several times in my life. But each time, I either pulled myself up by my bootstraps or used enough social assistance to get myself back on my feet. Too many people are using the social safety net for a hammock. That hammock can only hold so many before it breaks, and then there is no help for anyone.

It goes without saying there will always be people who will abuse the system, but there are also those who don't. I simply hate to see the innocent suffer right along with the guilty. Sometimes it's necessary to allow a few cheaters to slip through the cracks to serve the greater good.

Yes, it sounds strange, but I support limiting social programs because I favor helping those who need help.


I may disagree with you on some points, but I always respect your opinions no less. You're usually spot on in your analyses of things.

[edit on 21-7-2008 by LLoyd45]

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 02:00 PM
When I left the Navy I worked for a job centre course provider for a year or so, teaching 18-24 year old that had been unemployed for over a year how to find work, write Cv's etc.
I have lost count of the number of people that I dealt with that were 24 years old and had never had a job since they left school at 16. In fact on one occasion one of them even said to me "Why should I get a job? my mum and dad have never worked a day in their life and it has never done them any harm"
Believe me a scheme like this is needed desperately, there are far to many people out there that believe that the world owes them a living. I have every sympathy for those people that have been made unemployed and are looking for work. But believe me, if somebody wants to work then they will. It may take a while but they will find job, it may not be their dream job but it will pay and put food on the table until something better comes along.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 02:53 PM
Social Security is becoming increasingly complex as it is, without these new proposals. At the mo' we have Income Support, Incapacity Benefit & Jobseeker's Allowance as being the main benefits available ... soon to be joined by Employment Support Allowance & the proposed Treatment Allowance (for drug users). There's half a hundred other initiatives on the go too targetted at specific groups such as lone parents, long term sick, over 50's etc.

How much more complicated can Social Security get ? You need to be a Philadelphia lawyer to get a penny "off the Social" nowadays. Combine these new changes with a system which has seen over 600 social security offices & job centres closed over the last 2 years & a department losing over 30,000 staff and I respectfully suggest the government's proposals are a recipe for administrative chaos. The Civil Service will have to recruit more staff ... or more likely the government will bring in "external providers" for specific areas and they're invariably more expensive than the civil servants they replace.

As to those who deliberately languish on the dole or swing the lead on Incapacity, frankly most are unemployable anyway. Few employers would take them, not that there's going to be many jobs available (apart from in the DWP, of course). Don't think of their benefit as free money ... think of it more as "Danegeld", as your insurance to prevent rioting in the streets.

And the danger with these proposals is that they're going to catch really genuine claimants along with the scroungers. Folk are falling through the net as it is ... ask any CAB about the problems they're having with Jobcentre Plus or the Pension Service at the mo'.

The sound bites sound good. But we're miles away from seeing anything on the statute books. Time will tell.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 02:55 PM

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin

Jobless to work 'clearing litter'

Benefit claimants could be forced to pick up litter and clean graffiti under plans to be unveiled by ministers.
(visit the link for the full news article)

i think its a great idea

i live in seattle and its pretty fairly clean, although of recent its starting to look like SF and im not blaming all the out of staters but its looking like a dump hole, i work 40+ hours a week and have been tempted to clean up on weekends cause im sick of all the filth that is lying around, its like this city isnt really caring anymore

it always reminds me of that sticker for lake tahoe, "keep tahoe blue"

i want signs saying "keep seattle green"

why else are we nicknamed emerald city?

ok i think i missed something, is this to be forced unpaid labor?

im not for that, work for pay or food or even rent, if monetary isnt being offered, government checks paid directly to certain aspects would be good

[edit on 21-7-2008 by MurderCityDevil]

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 03:00 PM

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
Does the word freedom even exist anymore?

Remember, remember the 5th of November.

Most people on welfare either lack the mental capacity to work, have disabilities, or some other mental disorder which is debilitating and prevents them from working a normal job. This kind of resolution is utter nonsense and nothing short of police state mentality.

Papers Please?

Next the government will be telling us when we can and can't take a dump.

totally agree with you
please take this into account when you get slashed by a schizo litter picker/graffiti remover

[edit on 7-21-2008 by CPYKOmega]

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 03:09 PM
4 years until you're forced to work full time? Good god. If you can't find a job in 4 years time then you have no interest in finding work period. I think the time should be cut down to 1 year. Not sure how it works out in the UK but here in the US they have tons of options available for Vocational Rehabilitation, publicly funded grants for tech schools and community colleges etc. I was out of work last year for 3 months, not very fun, hated having to go into the unemployment office. It amazes me how many people I saw that were perfectly willing to just sit there and collect the check each week. They gave me tons of paperwork informing me of the other options available to me. I couldn't believe that some of those people were willing to just sit there and do nothing for so long and not even try and find a job. Sorry 3 months of not working, I was bored out of my mind. Cut the time limit down to 1 year and get those streets really clean!

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 03:11 PM
O.K., Callous Heart symphony in just wrong! Every time some one doesn't suffer, mind you, like this so righteous tax payer, they must be enslaved. With all of the constitutional amendment, fighting for rights, type post, how is it that one loses their rights because they don't have income? The unemployed lost at finance. The game we play, remember? So sidelined is it, not oppressed. Is Mr. Taxpayer picking up the insurance cost? Some how the rules keep getting mixed up. Mr. Taxpayer elected government officials who allocated money from Mr. Taxpayer to pay for those who got sidelined. This does not mean that Mr. Taxpayer now drives up taxes more by insisting to go around the rules with his /her own slave racket. Where is the money coming from for this new community program? These are the rules you must pay for the people who get hooked by you crooked financial scheme.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by LLoyd45
Your opinions find respect here as well. I just thought it was strange, because I am usually on your side and not CC's.

I see your point about abuse, but so far the abuse has not occurred. This plan sounds to me like a really great way to get people off the public dole and get them to enter the world of reality, and there is some mention of safeguards to protect those who are truly unable to perform productive work.

Something simply has to be done to make welfare, unemployment, or prison uncomfortable. I don't want to see anyone go hungry or do without, but at the same time, I realize that a massive central government cannot fund everyone's life. All of that money is coming from the pockets of workers who actually want to improve their lot in life and pull their own weight. Why should it go to someone who doesn't want to work so they can be lazy? And what will happen when there are not enough workers to provide for the bums?

Better to save those we can than to all die trying to save someone who doesn't want to be saved.


posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 03:28 PM
The unreported reality of this situation is that a huge proportion of the people that will be working for their benefits will be working for the voluntary sector. The voluntary sector comprises of registered charities and unregistered community groups that rely on funding and donations to provide services to the community. The majority of their workforce consists of volunteers, ie unpaid workers who only receive expenses for travel to and from the organisation.

How do I know this? Because I work in the voluntary sector and we were made aware of the govt's intentions some time ago. We are already being forced into developing projects for this initiative called the "worklessness agenda".

Regardless of the soundbites regarding street cleaning and graffiti cleanup the reality is they will be working with large and small voluntary organisations who will provide training, mentoring, support and expenses to them. All this will be at the expense of the voluntary group; no financial assistance is being offered by the government other than funding or contracts which organisations will have to apply for in what is already a very competitive market. People will work alongside established volunteers providing a variety of services including health, environmental, education, community, art and heritage services. They will work with old people, young people, vulnerable people, disabled people, minority communities - you name it. All the associated background checks such as CRB checks will be conducted at the expense of the voluntary group.

Many volunteers volunteer because they are long-term unemployed and wish to gain skills, have mental health issues and want to reduce isolation and keep busy, are young people wanting to improve things for other young people, are retired people who would otherwise feel useless and are single moms or long-term unemployed moms who want to get back into the workforce. All of them volunteer sometimes for selfish reasons but mainly for good reasons and to make a difference to someone else's life.

The good side of this initiative is that long term unemployed people will gain greater skills and experience and hopefully an improvement in their self-confidence and self-esteem. The bad side of it is that people with no intention of working in any circumstance will ruin many a good project with their selfish attitudes.

Personally I don't want to see someone who's been on the dole since they left school because they'd rather breed and get everything for free being forced on hardworking, good natured volunteers and organisations that exist purely to benefit the community. The typical attitude at the nearest secondary school to me is a) why study or go to school when I can live on the dole like my mom or b) why study or go to school when I can sell drugs like my dad. I'm also surrounded by people with 'bad backs' (this is a derogatory term for people falsely claiming incapacity benefit who usually cite a bad back as their main reason for being unable to work. The people I know with genuine back problems do actually work and find it a great insult). Despite these people having bad backs they always seem to have enough money to go out drinking at the local pub, drive, smoke and breed. I don't want these people forced on me, and I don't want these people forced on the suffering communities I serve.

[edit on 21-7-2008 by MajjicMouse]

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 04:14 PM
i have just realized what the government is up to...the armed forces are seriously undermanned with at least 20 thousand places unfilled..recruitment is down because people dont want to go to iraq etc.they cant reintroduce drafting again . so by forcing the 16-21 year olds to do rubbish jobs instead of benefits they are pushing them into the armed services....

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 04:27 PM
I think its disgusting. Forcing people to work full time for next to nothing is wrong. People are up in arms about sweatshop workers earning a pittance for full time labour, so how is this any different?

Personally I think the entire work system is wrong. Why should people work a 9-5 job 5-6 days a week just to be able to eat and pay the bills, when fat cats in government and the companies they work for just get richer and richer while living costs go up for the average person, putting them further into poverty?

Can you blame people for wanting to abuse the system? I dont, I dont have a problem with people on benefits really as long as they are not illegally on them, such as recieving benefits while working. The simple fact is that people legally on benefits use less taxpayers money than the overly corrupt government does, local and national. Besides you cant live well on benefits, you barely get enough to eat and pay essential bills.

We are all slaves, whether we want to admit it or not. You can try starting your own company, but its most likely to fail (the system is set up for this). Personally I refuse to work in any form of company that has shareholders, companies who get rich off all the work their labour forces do while giving them the bare minimum they can get away with. Does this make me a bad person? Im sure people will hate me for it.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 04:45 PM
There is plenty of work out there.... if you want to work. My job might suck, but at least I am doing something and generating money for myself.

I hate lazy people.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 04:50 PM

Originally posted by Firefly_

We are all slaves, whether we want to admit it or not. You can try starting your own company, but its most likely to fail (the system is set up for this). Personally I refuse to work in any form of company that has shareholders, companies who get rich off all the work their labour forces do while giving them the bare minimum they can get away with. Does this make me a bad person? Im sure people will hate me for it.

Nice attitude. You fail before you even try.

As for the shares, you do realize that you can get in on the shares yourself, with any shady company you may hate (because they make so much money).

You could get a government job yourself.

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 05:01 PM
reply to post by Firefly_
I love it when people do all my hard work for me.

Personally I think the entire work system is wrong. Why should people work a 9-5 job 5-6 days a week just to be able to eat and pay the bills, when fat cats in government and the companies they work for just get richer and richer while living costs go up for the average person, putting them further into poverty?

In other words. "Why can't I just sit on my lazy duff and let everyone else do for me? I am special (spatial, maybe?
) and better than anyone else. Take care of me! Me! Me!"

Go take care of yourself. You're the very reason this has to happen.


posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 05:10 PM
firefly has a point
the way everyone is speaking on this thread sounds like the type of drivel thats churned out in the daily tabloids...
i say bolloxs to working for a living and lets all get drunk

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 05:14 PM
Well i became ill a little ofer two years ago now, i wish i coudl work as i detest sitting on my rase and getting Incapacity Benefit. I've done everything i can, i've tried phone support from home, part work days and all else inbetween and i simply don't have the energy to do it. My illness drains all of my energy and i don't get out much, a walk to the local park maybe once a week, less than a mile is enough to obliterate me for a few days.

However i don't look ill, i am seriously worried about this. Whislt i have long called for people on the dole to have this sort of treatment meated out to them, and have writen MP's about reexamining the Incapacity Benefit system, i never thought they'd take it to extremes.

I can't work, even volentarily, i would dearly love to as every day just sitting around annoys the hell out of me. No doubt i'll be thrown off my benefits soon enough.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in