Off Topic Great Britain General Election May 7th 2015.

You may well be right, but that statement is not substantiated by itself. For example, there could have been a change in how people were classified as long-term unemployed. The question is also how those figures look now. (I have no idea; just playing devil's advocate.)

 

Out of all of this its pretty clear, whether it's Milliband or Cameron at Number 10, **** all is going to change

 

The figures are doctored to look better which makes it even more stark, because you know there is more suffering than the government stats show you.

London's homeless issue has grown such that they have started installing spikes everywhere ffs

 

Hmmm...I'm not sure that is a great way to base your conclusion of the vast majority being Mr A. What percentage was the increase? For example if it rose from 2.5m to 3.5m, the original 2.5m unemployed is still the vast majority?
Also, I'm not just talking about the unemployed, but those on low income or those who still receive benefits of one sort or another including free housing. Now, before you go off on one Sisu, I am NOT questioning their right to benefits (they may very well deserve them and rightly so), but do they really value the benefits the country provides when they perceive them to be free, an automatic right?????? And if not, how do we get them to value it????

 

Of course there's probably a certain degree of doctoring, and whatever comes out, the government wil generally mispresent them as best they can.

Still, I'm guessing they're more reliable than in certain other countries (not that that's the point).

 

When there's a war, it's always the grunts who are cannon-fodder.

 

please log in to view this image

@Treble

2012 there was an extra 1.6 million long term unemployed due to the jobs markets
The original 1.2 in 2008 were not "all" slackers, a portion is slackers but other categories too, but you can bet almost all of the 1.8 extra in 2012... hardly any of them were slackers, mostly those that lost jobs and school leavers.

Lets not forget the government puts the best possibe spin on these stats.

 

Out of interest, how's the political situation in the crepuscular gloom of Finland?

 

To be honest, some will, sone won't I would have thought. I don't think there's much of a way of measuring it beyond going round asking everyone.

As to how to get those that don't value them to do so, that's tricky. Any threat to remove the benefits will either not be taken seriously, or is inhumane (assuming that they're necessary).

 

Stop calling them slackers That's not the argument here.

 

The ones that don't want to work, what else should I call them?

Remember too that anyone who managed to get 2 weeks work lifting boxes goes missing from the long term unemployment stats

 

Would you believe it is pretty similar, we even have a ukip type party here gaining ground, as are all the nationalist parties in Europe. Finnish politics is just as much an illusion of choice as anywhere else saint.

We only get to vote because if we don't have that illusion we revolt, that and only that is why this fiction continues.

 

How about those receiving benefits, being paid a set amount separately towards educating their children (based on the number of chn they have) and they use that money to pay school fees/books? This wouldn't apply to taxpayers earning over a certain threshold who would be paying the same amount through the tax system? My purpose is to change the mindset so they value the education system, not reduce their benefits. Schools would still be compulsory for all.

 

There is nothing wrong with putting everyone on benefits to work but the cost will be more than the benefits you are paying out, unless it is a commercial enterpeise but then it is slavery.. it's tricky because it get exploited like in Ireland.
All the local councils were forced to hand over their funding to the new Irish water company to cover installing meters in everyone;s home, so to make up this shortfall the goveernment introduced a scheme to get people to work for local councils for 50 quid a week on top of your dole. Thing is, the water company is a quango for the guy who owns most of Irish media and even a judge said he bribed the current leading party in the 80s to get a license.

In Finland if you long term unemployed and are not adhering to an employment plan or in full time education, you don't get ****.

 

What happens when the irresponsible amongst them spend that money on other things? Do the kids go without or is there a safety-net provision for them?
Aren't we then back to square one?
Also, the money required to implement and manage the scheme would be counter-productive- just more bureaucracy to clog up the system.

 

I'm not suggesting any change to the benefits system i.e. I'm not saying they should be forced to work (that's a separate argument and I don't want to go there). Have you heard of Pupil Premium for disadvantaged children? It's a means tested benefit they receive IF they work/earn below a certain amount? It goes directly to schools at the moment. Why not give that to the parents and tell them they have to use that to pay. OR...why not cost the budget for educating a child from age 3 to 18. Then break that down and pay those parents to spend on school fees?

 

You see this is where I have more faith in parents. I believe the vast majority want their children to receive an education, they just don't appreciate its value because they don't see the costs. My only example is to point to other countries where they do pay for it. I'm talking about both developed and developing countries where people do have to pay for it. I accept that a small percentage will be completely irresponsible, and I don't have all the answers, but I am sure that can be dealt with.
The bureaucracy thing is a bit of a cop out. IF it has an impact on parents attitude towards education, it will be worth it in the long run and truly for the overall benefit of the country.

 

They're still dancing around in forests wearing antlers on their heads, skins on their backs and painting themselves with animal blood in Finland

 

Government is already massively oversized. If you look at any nation, if it's government is hugh it's economy performs badly. This is the main reason why the US economy has shat itself,why UK economy is stifled. Secondly, the financial sectors of the US and UK make up too big a portion of the money generated because they don't make anything and they don't create many jobs, trading doesn't actually need people at all, currency speculation, food speculation, how many jobs does that create yet the numbers are added up anyways. I think the financial sector in the US makes up nealy 40% of all profits made No idea what % the UK financial sector makes up but it must be significant.

The government in Finalnd is damn big and it has a bad effect on the economy... but there is a difference.
While jobs are less than say the UK market, it is true. You are not worried about college fees as it's all free, creche is free and it is of a very high standard, the carers have degrees and the facilities are exceptional with football ground, indoor gymnasium, they're same size as primary schools back home, focused on the kid's development not they're not just amused for 8 hours, the funding must be epic. Healthcare free. Electricity, well let me say I paid 74 Euro for my last 3 month winter bill, for a family of 4 with fish tanks and an electric sauna that gets used 3 times a week. Free public transport if I have my daughter with me. If I am out of work and not getting the dole, I can mind my kid full time instead of sending her to creche and they give you just over €500 a month income.

So you can see, things are hard in the UK and Finland, Ireland too but.. out of the three there is only one actually puts the taxes back into the country, and gives the most economically vulnerable in society, even if only briefly broke, a bit of ****ing dignity.
The stuff I talked about, it's for everyone, not just the unemployed ect, a millionaire can go to a gp and pay nowt too, they get what everyone else gets or they can pay private themselves.

This I like, in Finland traffic tickets are a % of your salary unless it's the min or max offfence fee.

One thing to take from Finland's lesson really is, if you are someone who works and pays taxes, you can either A bitch about the people not on their knees in the dirty because of your taxes or B be happy that your taxes are used to stop society crumbling around your nice home.

I'll take a B please Bob.

Cameron gives your taxes to banks and bankers, then he borrows more with interest. How on ****ing earth did they cut 80 billion from public expendature in 6 years!!!

 

This is what Brown Blair Cameron and his successor will allow to continue.. no difference. £4.7 trillion is sitting in British overseas territories and Crown dependencies. That's a lot of untaxed ££
See, on the real matters concerning the money people, no one will touch this with a barge pole, wonder how much the queen owns of that 4.7 trillion, probably moved it there in 91 before kindly offering to pay tax



















I'll **** off now, I don't even live in the UK