The EU debate - Part III

so you think people should be given big houses by the state and not have to work?
you are the moron

 

No I don't think that. But people who can't get work need to be properly looked after by those who have wealth. Not 'given work' by some process that you've dreamed up but not revealed

 

Roll Up Roll Up to PowerSpurs La La Land
His government will give five bedroom houses to every person who is willing to have five children and not work
Those of you who are working better work harder so you can afford the taxes to pay for these people
It's a socialist layabouts paradise

 

what's wrong with cleaning the streets?
or is that beyond your brainpower to think about?

 

That's remoanians for ya,

Cheese on the right side of the road and no jocks in charge.

 

Who is going to pay them to do that?
Your policy is to create state funded jobs for all the unemployed?
What wages will be paid?
Will they be sufficient to stop their children starving?
Who will provide childcare when their children are ill?
Actually if we are going to create public sector jobs for the unemployed, tax inspectors would be my choice.

 

And how does that enable them to afford a five bed house?

Which they wouldn't get even with five teenagers. Most would be 4 as 2 teens with same gender are expected to share under housing rules.

 

It would be more productive for the unemployed to improve basic skills like English and maths than mindlessly breaking rocks or whatever Pete would have them doing.

 

Not all unemployed need help in the basics mate.

Plenty get made redundant and are plenty skilled enough.

 

Of course. Those people could learn a skill of some sort to increase employability too. Computer skills, languages or whatever. Anything to stop the brain turning to mush.

 

are you mad? for a start I didn't say for all the unemployed. I would do it for the long term unemployed who can work. secondly, why should it cost anything - they wouldn't get more than the benefits they get now
when the children are ill the state would provide childcare
they would pay other unemployed people to look after ill children if the people were appropriately trained
I dont think you have the ability to think about this matter
tax inspector isnt the sort of job you pick up in a matter of weeks
give up on this thinking lark, it doesn't suit you

 

yes, it's better that the short term unemployed spend their time looking for a job

 

How many couples not working with five teenage kids do you think there are.
Going to make bugger all difference to the unemployment numbers or the cost of supporting that family.

It's all mute anyway as the benefits changes coming in next April will restrict benefit to a maximum of 2 kids and there is already a cap of £500pw on the total benefit any family can recieve plus the overaccomodated restrictions that make it no longer affordable to have a large family solely on benefits.

 

The LONG TERM unemployed, will need to work 2 days a week for benefits, cleaning streets etc.
Not hard to set up and not much extra cost to the tax payer.

 

If it's such a great idea, easy to implement, cheap and has been needed for so long, why hasn't it happened?

Why two days a week? Is this another made up Kustard figure like the 80m population we can't sustain?

 

Except for the unemployment benefit for those who currently clean the streets etc.

 

Would you give them yellow jump suits and chain them together so they couldn't run away?

 

So now the Council staff can be utilised elsewhere.


Try harder C-

 

Hello Snowflake Boy,

Indeed why two days a week how about seven days a week, I dont care how many days they are forced to do, just get them doing something.
Ask the Gov why its not been implemented, im not an MP, infact why dont you pop and ask your MP.

Feel free to offer a better alternative, can you do it before you go to your safe room.

 

Why not utilise the unemployed elsewhere. Much less training and disruption