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.
Originally posted by Gridrebel
reply to post by blupblup
My fail. Thanks.
Originally posted by americababy
I would call it capitalist entrenchment. The agenda is perpetuation. Continuity. A capitalist just happens to have more ways to survive. There's nothing saying you can't go out there and be a captalist with the intention of providing a better deal to people.
I don't agree with you that the worker should get 100 percent of his work if he is unable to make himself productive.
Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws.
Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws. Mayer Amschel Rothschild
In a context where you couldn't buy property I would say you were right. The only context where the inability of a private individual to own land should not exist is one in which the standard of living is above what could ever be had in a capitalist system.
It's a very difficult problem to solve. That's why no one tries to solve it. You have to have the plan that will work. I do think though that you could put me in the middle of a despotic third world country with 100 million dollars and I would have that country producing more than Chna within 15 years.
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
This is probably the last time i reply to this post, because i am amazed at how many people, just can not see past the wall, and the wall came down a long time ago fellas. Instead of paying the "Unemployed" lady a minimum wage, and giving her a job, they still took your "Tax" money instead and paid for the labour.
The reply about her not paying for education, well i guess her time being there and studying is worth air huh?
I guess the we should all be okay with our future children and now actually, we should all be okay with them being sweatshop workers huh, beat that young child into an audult, BUILD SOME CHARACTER! you serious?
I understand people on benefits that DO NOT WANT TO WORK, that i understand, lazy no, just unwilling to do anythihng, with lazyness comes invention on how to improve the process to make it easier, but you still gotta be willing, and shes not lazy. To take on a Tyrant at the heart of our children, that forces labour in a free country?
60$ a week, instead of a minimum wage, and she still did the work!!! and YOU PAID FOR IT, so what your saying is, let her work for 60$ a week, on YOUR money! instead of being paid by the "MADE IN CHINA" sweatshop owners, a minimum wage which is required by LAW!
Originally posted by quackers
If the Job Centre offered you a job using your tongue as a rich mans toilet paper you would have to take it. So much money is wasted by these morons and this is a perfect case in point. So there's two voluntary positions open and they want to push her into the irrelevent one? Why are people in this thread moaning about her not taking the short bus job and not moaning about how utterly rediculous it is that thousands of pounds worth of education is being thrown out of the window due to bureaucracy? Some poeple cant see the woods for the trees. Now if she had turned down a paying job then it might be a different story.
edit on 13-1-2012 by quackers because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ComeFindMe
Neither job was specific to her specialist field so at worst they are both irrelevant.
reply to post by mandroids
Let me make 2 valid points. 1, this work will not enhance her chances of finding the work she studied for. In fact, it’s an insult to a graduate. 2, would YOU enjoy being forced into work you knew would make you feel unhappy?
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
reply to post by andersensrm
Alright, screw everyone then, EVERY man for and child for themselfs!!! Our nations wage war on innocent country's and you wanna join that tyrany? wage war against your family and friends, its one planet for crying out loud, one rock, one ocean, we are all brothers and sisters, big family.
Shes taking action for her own LIBERTY, something i guess most of you forgotten, we always have choice, and no were not entitled to anything, i never used those words, but to stand up for your beliefs and right as a human being and individual has absolutely nothing to do with the system. Just because no one has an answer for people in her situation, doesnt mean there isnt one.
I remember being back in highschool, my parents started a divorce and i just didint feel like going into school, the principal sat me down and told me a nice story about how i need to go to a school thats for people who are "STUPID" and "LAZY", i simply said no, he couldnt do anything. No one taught me i have a choice in this world, but at that moment i got it, why would an actual audult, come up to a child and instead of helping, and working with the human being, the first response is to throw IT aside!
The only ones here that think they are entitled to something is you! most of you! just because you pay taxes? she could have been paid, and pay taxes as well, but it was taken away from her. what does money have to with this situation, they are being so open about cheap labour, that you think its part of life? some system to improve on it self?
reality check! they are robbing from you, and you pay a monthly bill for protection, so that no one else will rob from you but them! Most primitive instinct is anger, and waging fights, how does NOT helping you, or your sister, brother, a random person across the seas, improve anything?
What makes you less equal to her, or more ELITE then her? The powers that be have poisnoed their wells and now we must follow a standard to poison our own, im bedazzled by such thoughts of negative impulses, we dont even look at each other as people of earth anymore, everyone is an enemy and a thief, where do you people even get such ideas?
Originally posted by davespanners
Some of the replies here are a little misleading I feel.
The girl in question was NEVER offered paid work in poundland, she was made to leave one voluntary position (working in a museum) to go and work FOR FREE at poundland for 2 weeks in the run up to Christmas
She was told that she would then get an interview for an actual paid position there which never happened.
So she wasn't taken from a voluntary position in order to be given paid work, she was taken from a voluntary position in a job that was actually somewhat relevant to her career goal to work for free in another job that wasn't
I'm not sure when exactly the government started supplying unpaid labour to private companies.edit on 12-1-2012 by davespanners because: (no reason given)edit on 12-1-2012 by davespanners because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by blupblup
Originally posted by McGinty
I wonder how many great artists and academics who have enhanced society and our species over the years would never have done so if they had instead been forced to work mind numbing jobs because the masses wouldn't support them over the inevitable in-between stages of their worthy pursuits.
Well we always know that the Tories do not want people do better themselves....they have always tried to keep the gap between rich at poor at a huge distance.... they look after their own needs and never protect those in society who need it.
look at the people that their cuts have been targeted at.
Disabled
Pensioners/elderly
Single Parents
Charities
Inner city programs
Police
Teachers
The NHS
Students
Basically the poor, the vulnerable, public services and those who actually need help more than others.
Who doesn't feel the effects
Hmmmm
Bankers....
The rich....
Corporations....
edit on 13/1/12 by blupblup because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by andersensrm
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
This is probably the last time i reply to this post, because i am amazed at how many people, just can not see past the wall, and the wall came down a long time ago fellas. Instead of paying the "Unemployed" lady a minimum wage, and giving her a job, they still took your "Tax" money instead and paid for the labour.
The reply about her not paying for education, well i guess her time being there and studying is worth air huh?
I guess the we should all be okay with our future children and now actually, we should all be okay with them being sweatshop workers huh, beat that young child into an audult, BUILD SOME CHARACTER! you serious?
I understand people on benefits that DO NOT WANT TO WORK, that i understand, lazy no, just unwilling to do anythihng, with lazyness comes invention on how to improve the process to make it easier, but you still gotta be willing, and shes not lazy. To take on a Tyrant at the heart of our children, that forces labour in a free country?
60$ a week, instead of a minimum wage, and she still did the work!!! and YOU PAID FOR IT, so what your saying is, let her work for 60$ a week, on YOUR money! instead of being paid by the "MADE IN CHINA" sweatshop owners, a minimum wage which is required by LAW!
I don't think you understand how the real world works, you seem to think we are all entitled as well. Reality check, we aren't entitled to anything, not even to live so get a grasp on it and deal with it. And btw she is lazy, that simple. Shes lazy and she didn't really think about her future, so screw her, her problem now
Originally posted by mandroids
Let me make 2 valid points.
1, this work will not enhance her chances of finding the work she studied for. In fact, it’s an insult to a graduate.
2, would YOU enjoy being forced into work you knew would make you feel unhappy?
Isn’t that what ATS is all about…rights? Please refrain from tabloid ‘she gotta work’ posts.