Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

campaign against welfare cuts and poverty

Posts on local forums are claiming a street in Woodthorpe, Sheffield is being 'approached as the next ahem location(target) for Benefit Street. Hope they tell them were to go.
 
More unpleasant tinkering ..............
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27289148

How can they say, "average of 25 hrs / week" ?
Zero hours contracts (even non-exclusive ones) are no use if you have any sort of fixed outgoings.
How are you expected to budget (or keep up your Wonga repayments - so they can fund the tory twunts) on a variable wage ?
Was it ever otherwise? Any claimant who refuses a job will always get sanctioned. They have never cared what the circumstances are, they just hit the big red SANCTION! button.
 
More unpleasant tinkering ..............
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27289148

How can they say, "average of 25 hrs / week" ?
Zero hours contracts (even non-exclusive ones) are no use if you have any sort of fixed outgoings.
How are you expected to budget (or keep up your Wonga repayments - so they can fund the tory twunts) on a variable wage ?

Do a survey with a big enough sample size of people who have zero-hours contracts, asking them how many hours they worked last week (or if you wanted to do it properly, track people through a year and record their hours each week), average out the answer.

Awesome - you can currently refuse zero-hours contracts jobs, they want to change this. You can refuse jobs for a limited set of reasons which are set out in the JSA regulations, guidelines or legislation. It includes things like sex work or allowances of refusal on religious/ethical grounds eg: vegan should be able to refuse to work in an abbatoir (I say "should be" because I think it's definitely true that they can but I'm not certain enough and can't be bothered to check).
I bet lots of people have been sanctioned for refusing a ZHC job, but it's one that should be won on appeal (not that I'm saying it's ok because of appeals, they take fucking weeks or more and you don't get money in that time, plus HB stops which you have to sort out etc).
 
Duncan Smith's ears may be deaf, but there will be people who will listen to what Jackson says - it's all part of the steady drip-drip that will eventually see him buried. Not soon enough for me or a lot of the country, sadly, but we are getting there.
The only way to bury him is to vote him and his government (which would include this repugnant Benton character) out.

Unfortunately that means voting labour.
 
What if you live in a safe tory seat, as you do? This daft approach means that millions of people, including you, cannot participate in politics.
 
Smith's 'Centre For Social Justice' is proposing stopping benefits for under 25 year olds.

btw, why does it need a think tank to investigate this, cutting benefits doesn't need research, these think tanks are dangerous.
 
I live in a very safe tory seat, however I vote, we'll not unseat the twunt.
No possible protest / tactical / alternative choice available for my vote.

So what should I do ?
 
I live in a very safe tory seat, however I vote, we'll not unseat the twunt.
No possible protest / tactical / alternative choice available for my vote.

So what should I do ?
I don't know.

I wish there was an alternative. Despite my asking, noone has provided one.
 
Is it the job of other people to provide you with alternatives?

Sometimes, the answer is to find different ways of looking at the problem, and nobody else can really do that for anyone.
It's not a job, it's what people do when they talk and discuss things. I don't pretend to be an expert and have never professed to be. Ever. So if there's a better alternative - tell me! That's dialogue.

All I get from this site it seems is "FUCK OFF YOU CAAAAAAAAAAAAAHNT LABOUR ARE SHITTERS!!"

Where are the solutions? DOes anyone have anything better to offer? I'm not criticising people who don't unless they dish out that kind of shit as a response. We're not all experts and we don't all know the answers, but the problem is that if you don't vote Labour or if you don't vote then the TOries will get back in, and we enable the likes of Benyon by legitimising them through a position they don't merit, we enable that fucking maniac IDS to continue to bash and sneer at the less well off.

I think it would be the worst outcome for that to happen and I am willing to risk a vote for Labour, safe seats notwithstanding (which is out of our hands), if that keeps the Tories out.
 
I cannot stand either of them and am seriously hoping for a YES vote at Indyref. If it's a NO vote I will definitely vote labour as there's a better chance of them listening to those most brutalised over recent years than trying to make IDS and his cohorts take any notice.

It's shit that there's only a choice of two and the one most likely to lend an ear can be the only option.

In any/all events I, and others, will still need to rant. I've no answers, but, I've a whole barn full of questions.
 
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014...s-iain-duncan-smith-s-welfare-scheme-in-doubt

Last month, employment minister Esther McVey insisted to parliament that the Treasury had approved the government's flagship welfare reform.

In a written answer to Labour's Rachel Reeves, she claimed that "the chief secretary to the Treasury has approved the [universal credit] Strategic Outline Business Case".

Speaking to MPs yesterday, the head of the civil service admitted that the Treasury have still not signed off the scheme.

"We shouldn't beat about the bush," Bob Kerslake told MPs. "It hasn't been signed off."
 
BsQTL2SCUAI8kaF.jpg


any more on this?
 
Back
Top Bottom