Conservatives Forcing People To Work

[La_Dolce_Vita]

The irony is that LDV probably dosn't realise that his "socialist" views in reality are profoundly anti-social.

I am interested, why?

[spook]

The irony is that LDV probably dosn't realise that his "socialist" views in reality are profoundly anti-social.

As you do not realise that your 'Christian' views are profoundly anti-Christian?

 

No they are not. YOU don't understand Christianity. It is NOT the soft gentle-touch easy thing that so many people think it to be. It is strong, there are values, there is a morality and a code associated with it that is very hard to live up to and yet we try.

[Chinahand]

LDV - you've been challenged on this multiple times.

 

Because the productive people in society support the unproductive.

 

You seem to think it is the right of the unproductive to demand society keeps them as they want to be kept and that they are being exploited if they are expected to be productive and contribute.

 

Most people see it totally the other way round with the unproductive exploiting and sponging off the hard work of the productive.

 

Believe it or not it takes the effort of hard working people to create a welfare state etc and when people take advantage of it and simply become parasitic on the work of others people get pissed off.

[jimbms]

The irony is that LDV probably dosn't realise that his "socialist" views in reality are profoundly anti-social.

As you do not realise that your 'Christian' views are profoundly anti-Christian?

 

No they are not. YOU don't understand Christianity. It is NOT the soft gentle-touch easy thing that so many people think it to be. It is strong, there are values, there is a morality and a code associated with it that is very hard to live up to and yet we try.

No, you and your loonies try the rest of us don't bother with that load of bollocks, even LDV's ideal society is better than christianity which is saying something.

[jimbms]

LDV - you've been challenged on this multiple times.

 

Because the productive people in society support the unproductive.

 

You seem to think it is the right of the unproductive to demand society keeps them as they want to be kept and that they are being exploited if they are expected to be productive and contribute.

 

Most people see it totally the other way round with the unproductive exploiting and sponging off the hard work of the productive.

 

Believe it or not it takes the effort of hard working people to create a welfare state etc and when people take advantage of it and simply become parasitic on the work of others people get pissed off.

CH I think that short statement just about sums up the views of 90% of poster here and there is no real way there can be a valid argument to refute that.

[MilitantDogOwner]

LDV - you've been challenged on this multiple times.

 

Because the productive people in society support the unproductive.

 

You seem to think it is the right of the unproductive to demand society keeps them as they want to be kept and that they are being exploited if they are expected to be productive and contribute.

 

Most people see it totally the other way round with the unproductive exploiting and sponging off the hard work of the productive.

 

Believe it or not it takes the effort of hard working people to create a welfare state etc and when people take advantage of it and simply become parasitic on the work of others people get pissed off.

CH I think that short statement just about sums up the views of 90% of poster here and there is no real way there can be a valid argument to refute that.

 

But by Jingo he will give it a bloody good try.

[jimbms]

I await that moment with eager anticipation.

[P.K.]

LDV - you've been challenged on this multiple times.

 

Because the productive people in society support the unproductive.

 

You seem to think it is the right of the unproductive to demand society keeps them as they want to be kept and that they are being exploited if they are expected to be productive and contribute.

 

Most people see it totally the other way round with the unproductive exploiting and sponging off the hard work of the productive.

 

Believe it or not it takes the effort of hard working people to create a welfare state etc and when people take advantage of it and simply become parasitic on the work of others people get pissed off.

CH I think that short statement just about sums up the views of 90% of poster here and there is no real way there can be a valid argument to refute that.

 

Actually there is a valid argument that refutes it. Well, I think it's valid anyway. See if you agree.

 

Whenever you analyse a business you can always divide the staff up into three levels. These who are very good, those who are very bad, and then the rest which will probably make up at least 90%. The very good pull the very bad into the median.

 

When times are tough, like now, business sets "performance targets" which is a way of getting rid of folks that don't meet them. So you end up with folks who are not very good falling back on the welfare state, which is EXACTLY what it is there for. But trying to define "not very good" can be bloody tricky. I once worked with a guy who was really excellent, he produced excellent work, it just took him forever to produce it in a level of detail that simply wasn't needed. Clever guy, no doubt about it, but he would produce reams of numbers and verbiage and at the end of it conclude that what he was looking at wasn't relevant! He went in a purge as well.

 

Now I have a social conscience so I'm happy to support the most vulnerable and those who for whatever reason need assistance. Where it all goes wrong is with families like the Bardsleys. Read the link and weep. Now every town has families like them. Some places Liverpool have lots of them. These are the folks that the tory press, which is to say most of them, scream hysterically about in order to try and get Joe Public to think that the majority on benefits are like the Bardsley's so IDS and Osborne are doing what's required. In my experience that's complete and utter bollocks. The Bardsley's are the exception but the weak-minded let rags like The Wail make their minds up for them. So they end up in favour of the majority of the most vulnerable in our society getting a good kicking because of a few very well-publicised scroungers.

 

Not a very good reflection on our society. They say you get the government you deserve. Well right now I feel that we must deserve not very much at all...

[pongo]

Because the productive people in society support the unproductive.

 

What about the more productive and the less productive ? I bet that lots of the people posting on this thread work at less than the maximum achievable efficiency. Perhaps even for the state. What hypocrites !

 

Any system needs slack, which means that slackers are an important and integral component of the system. But if these people must be made to work then why punish them by making them pick up litter ? Why not, as I suggested, appoint them as non-execs at banks or put them on quangos. They might suddenly shine or become enthused - and most of us are equally as unqualified as the sorts of people who normally get appointed to these roles.

 

Not forgetting that lots of great businesses were started by people who succeeded because dole scrounging or the black economy gave them an unofficial leg up. It is the economy in total which matters, not the micro detail.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

...You seem to think it is the right of the unproductive to demand society keeps them as they want to be kept and that they are being exploited if they are expected to be productive and contribute.

 

Most people see it totally the other way round with the unproductive exploiting and sponging off the hard work of the productive...

It think it is the responsibility of those who do produce to fund the survival of those who do not wish to enter the job market and the take part in the forms of work available.

If the productive make a conscious decision to support the established system then should not force those to enter into a form of work that the productive people support.

 

Nevertheless, it is far from an ideal situation and it is only in this particular respect of assessing the current politico-economic order that I think that people have this responsibility. But it is indicative of a serious problem with the system. And I choose the lesser of two evils.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Anyway, in the current system, maybe we need slackers for everyone to vent some frustration at.

[HeliX]

It think it is the responsibility of those who do produce to fund the survival of those who do not wish to enter the job market and the take part in the forms of work available.

 

You've blown it now, too obvious that you're trolling.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

And you haven't read many of my posts before.

Honestly, it's a rather conservative bunch on MF, I would hardly need to be subtle if I wanted to troll.

 

Why do you think it would be right to allow people to starve if they won't work?

 

Three options: 1) Let people starve 2) Drag them down into the current world of work

3) Assume the responsibility that comes with supporting the current political and economic system.

[Addie]

I object vehemently to people who have made the lifestyle choice, at other people’s expense, never to do a tap of work in their lives.

 

I would very much hope that no one will be getting a ‘good kicking’, but what I would hope is that the idlers occupationally naive will be getting an introduction/education into the world of work.

 

It’s not going to be easy for them. They’ll have to learn how to take direction; be reliable and be self disciplined. It’s hard to imagine what it must be like to have to do a full weeks work when you have never had to make any efforts whatsoever, for years.

 

If able people don’t work, they can’t contribute to the welfare of those who genuinely need and deserve care, support and protection.

 

There are people out there who aren’t getting the drugs they need, the personal assistance they need, the operation they need and the hospital bed they need.

 

If the welfare state could stop haemorrhaging money on the idle, we could maybe finance more nurses or doctors. We could have more drugs allowed on the NHS.

 

There's only so much money in the pot.

 

But it seems that because of some idle scroungers, who are perfectly able to do whatever it takes to put a roof over their heads, food on their table and clothes on their children, others must suffer.

 

I don’t see the slightest problem with the habitually unemployed having to earn their income in the same way as those who work. They could earn credits too.

 

To be fair, all this is years too late. Steps like this should have been taken in the good times when jobs were plentiful. As it is, Britain is left with a great many people who don’t know how to work. They’ve never done any – they haven’t needed to. And that’s the point, surely? Now they will need to.

[P.K.]

To be fair, all this is years too late. Steps like this should have been taken in the good times when jobs were plentiful. As it is, Britain is left with a great many people who don’t know how to work. They’ve never done any – they haven’t needed to. And that’s the point, surely? Now they will need to.

 

Oh really? So what are you going to do if an ex-soldier refuses to collect dogshit in his local park - let him starve or something?

 

Ill-thought out political Daily Wail bollocks.