james purnell hate thread
- Thread starter killer b
- Start date
_angel_
.
Call me old fashioned, and I aint a mum, but I believe a kid needs a parent home for the first few years, at least.
I used to feel exasperated at colleagues who shoved their babies in nursery, then whined because the fee took up thier wage.
I don't blame anyone for doing it! People need to live.. but it's sad it's forced, basically. I question the now automatic 'work is good' mantra even when it's separating mums and babies (and I know everyone will say 'dads too'!).
Apart from anything else how are you meant to breast feed if you're apart from your child for that long?
work work work is preferable to unconstructive idleness.
Nothing at all but if you and your family are being supported by the state or the collective community then you also have responsibilities to the collective.
Nor would I but many people do. Mostly because they cannot afford to survive on one income. Why should those who work be punished by having to put their young babies into childcare whilst those who don't work get to stay at home?
Agree with you there. But as long as this isn't seen as encouragement for people to have children that they couldn't otherwise afford. I'm always saddened to see people who would love to have children but cannot afford it and take the responsible route and not creating life they cannot support whilst those who are not responsible are rewarded.
Sadly the suicide statistics should be monitored very closely .......
and this mythical childcare......I am yet to meet a mother who actually received these so called childcare vouchers.......
like slimey salesmen they whine at the Joblesscentre ........oh and you get 85% childcare vouchers...........
some got lovely part time jobs, organisedd the child care......paid for the childcare......waited for promised vouchers......eventually out of pocket....unable to work......not cost effective....operating at a loss.....then to add to the pain...........all income stopped whilst they sort out the wretched child tax credits.........
the system does not work......
and this assuming that disabled people have little or no intelligence........what about Stephen Hawkings.......sometimes they talk down........there is little communication
DWP = Die or Work Posse........
and this mythical childcare......I am yet to meet a mother who actually received these so called childcare vouchers.......
like slimey salesmen they whine at the Joblesscentre ........oh and you get 85% childcare vouchers...........
some got lovely part time jobs, organisedd the child care......paid for the childcare......waited for promised vouchers......eventually out of pocket....unable to work......not cost effective....operating at a loss.....then to add to the pain...........all income stopped whilst they sort out the wretched child tax credits.........
the system does not work......
and this assuming that disabled people have little or no intelligence........what about Stephen Hawkings.......sometimes they talk down........there is little communication
DWP = Die or Work Posse........
I agree with you on this one. Fuck childcare vouchers the only way to get parents back into work or contributing to their society in some other way is to have state provided childcare available to all as of right.
I almost bolted, almost almost...
I don't have anyone I could have taken unfortunately.
The whole interview has left me very uncomfortable. I don't mind discussing my problems, but these people have an agenda which makes it impossible to do so. The moment you start conceding ground to them is the moment they, unqualified frontline staff who are not medically trained or even (perhaps) knowledgeable at all, will impose sanctions. Furthermore they posit their opinions about work/life/health/whatever as actual fact. Discussion is then impossible and yuo feel there is no point in opening up to them or showing any willingness to participate - of course this just polarizes their view of you.
The whole thing is nasty and insidious, but being almost forced to want to agree to working as a carer I found ridiculous. Her attitude toward care work was entirely mercenary, even ignoring the fact that I don't feel up to it. And to suggest it's something you can do casually without any emotional attachment is, IMO, balls. This also ignores the reality that no care work boss is going to a)hire someone who isn't interested in the job properly and b) hire someone who isn't up to the job.
It's these attitudes that make the whole thing a cosmic joke. She didn't even know why i was claiming IS and wanted me to explain it in my words. This made me very uncomfortable. Even when I persuaded her to actually look up the reasons as provided by my GP through the sick notes, she still wanted to believe that it really meant nothing and that i should explain it all myself. It's been very difficult explaining these issues to even qualified people, never mind in the middle of the jobcentre surrounded by people i don't know. I'm damned if i'm going to get caught out by not explaining things properly to someone whose attitude toward the nebulous nature of mental and emotional health is so black and white as to presume that if you're well enough to see a provider/come for an interview then you can hold down any job etc etc.
It's hard to explain all this properly, sorry if it reads poorly or is irrelevant to the communal hatred of Fuhrer Purnell. All i can say is god help him if he ever fell foul of the system. But of course that ain't likely.
I think that would stir things to be honest. That's how the system works. But the advisor does a very good line in making small chat while actually trying to catch you out. It's a very snide and sly tactic, but it's also very real. She's one of these people who does that thing where she agrees with her own statements in a way intended to get you to agree as well, you know? Yes? *nods head and smiles*
Ugh.
_angel_
.
Awesome: is there a friend or someone from a support group you could ask for advice?
I still would put in writing everything you said here about your interview and send it to the job centre manager to try and get an improvement. If nobody complains about their treatment nothing will be done. (or your MP??)
you replied at the same time I typed this....
I still would put in writing everything you said here about your interview and send it to the job centre manager to try and get an improvement. If nobody complains about their treatment nothing will be done. (or your MP??)
you replied at the same time I typed this....
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Oh didn't he have the highest expenses of any MP?? Or something?
He did.
what is unconstructive idleness?
or is that shorthand for the assumption that all people out of work are watching trisha all day long before going to the bookies by way of the pub?
I have a provider i see and will see next week with whom i will discuss things. Unfortunately they are somewhat beholden to the jobcentre as the hand that feeds. Maybe they will help. Part of my issue with this interview was the mandatory referral would screw p my relationship with this provider, though tbf that might not be the case.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
One way of doing this would be to get all the unemployed single mums working as childcarers, only not with their own children. Brilliant.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
What the smegwits mean by "more universal childcare" is:
"We'll up the number of childcare places in each area slightly, so it'll be more universal than it was before we added a few extra places", I suspect.
_angel_
.
What the smegwits mean by "more universal childcare" is:
"We'll up the number of childcare places in each area slightly, so it'll be more universal than it was before we added a few extra places", I suspect.
There are no breakfast/ after school clubs in any of the special schools I've come across. Playschemes are like hens teeth as well, my son has never been offered a placement on his school playscheme.
None of these things apply to special needs kids...
Basically claiming your money but doing fuck all for it. This is not a criticism aimed at those who have mental and physical ailments only at those who are unconstructively idle.
Those who are unemployed and are not sick should undertake training, community work etc. Preferably for benefits plus so that there is a reward for responsibility.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's also preferable to sitting on one's arse pontificating about "unconstructive idleness" when very few benefits claimants actually indulge in that.
So, how do you quantify what these responsibilities are?
I think NL lost a major chance when they were elected to pay for proper childcare available for all on a universal basis. Instead it opted for the cheaper (not in the long term though) of childcare vouchers which are useless if the care available is more than the voucher or there is no accessible care available.
I would like to a add that universal Child care should encompass facilities for those children with special needs.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Which is a fucking crime, given that parents of children with special needs are likely to be more in need of such schemes than standard "service users".
panpete
Blokes name, birds body.
Morbid as it sounds, I think James Purnell could be, in future looking at suicides. I hope not mine, as I nearlywent down that route a few rush hours on the way to work.
I hope not anybody really, but this dude Purnell sounds unhinged.
Unworkable is what I say.
panpete
Blokes name, birds body.
A one or two kid mum, might not want a load of screaming brats around her ankles, or other mothers.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Tough. If you're not prepared to look after everybody else's children for minimum wage then you shouldn't have any of your own. It's time to kick selfishness into touch and roll out more community spirit. If you can look after two kids, you can look after 20.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Crap troll is crap!
Get with the programme. I reckon you could look after a few dozen whining youngsters yourself.
''One way of doing this would be to get all the unemployed single mums working as childcarers, only not with their own children. Brilliant.'
'
Actually, for New Labour this may be ideal, for them work is the answer, any work, doesn't matter how it is structured, the DWP is also a truly Orwellian organisation
btw, Awesome, that is a well written, incisive and powerful piece, why not send it, with no names, to the new welfare campaign,
http://www.compassonline.org.uk/news/item.asp?n=3463
'
Actually, for New Labour this may be ideal, for them work is the answer, any work, doesn't matter how it is structured, the DWP is also a truly Orwellian organisation
btw, Awesome, that is a well written, incisive and powerful piece, why not send it, with no names, to the new welfare campaign,
http://www.compassonline.org.uk/news/item.asp?n=3463
There needs to be a total rethink of the UK Benefit system. We need a system that doesn't penalise the thrifty and the responsible but which is there to give a hand up to those who have fallen on hard times through circumstances or illness.
At the moment the benefit system does none of this. It punishes those who are honest or who want to improve or who are sick and desparate but appears to give a free pass to the professionally idle, the antisocial and the crafty who play the system.
All blame for this cock up must rest with this and previous governments who haven't carried out root and branch reform but have just indulged in poltiically motivated tinkering round the edges.
At the moment the benefit system does none of this. It punishes those who are honest or who want to improve or who are sick and desparate but appears to give a free pass to the professionally idle, the antisocial and the crafty who play the system.
All blame for this cock up must rest with this and previous governments who haven't carried out root and branch reform but have just indulged in poltiically motivated tinkering round the edges.
People receive benefits to live on, it's nothing to do with 'working'. Here we go again!
What is your problem with someone having enough to live on. That's the safety net. What else would you propose: people be left to starve, or freeze? Do you think that if we did that we'd spend less?
If there were job available people wouldn't need to 'work for benefits'. What you are proposing is manipulative and evil, and you still haven't explained what unconstructive idleness is? Are you the arbiter of all human function? Perhaps we should empty all the call centres of the useless people who do nothing but field pointless calls that help noone and get them cleaning the streets for £60 a week - after all plenty of paid employment is unconstructive. Work that doesn't help or further society.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
The first thing that needs to change in the benefits system is the use of 'sanctions', ie withdrawing all of someone's benefits at the drop of a hat upon the merest suspicion that they are being 'idle' or 'playing the system'. As things stand the smallest violation of a JCP diktat can leave a claimant penniless for weeks, even months, on end. In no other sector of society is 'guilty until proven innocent' an acceptable way of dealing with transgressions, but this is exactly how the worms at the jobcentre behave towards claimants. Once sanctioned there is a lengthy and complex appeals process that doesn't allow a claimant to simply take the matter up with the individual responsible for placing the sanction on them in the first place. Even prisoners know they'll get three meals a day, but a sanctioned benefits claimant has no such certainty in their life. This is not an acceptable way to treat people, no matter how idle you consider them to be.
The state of the benefits system tells us a lot about the state of our society and the relationship between the public, the state and the economy. The contempt with which the unemployed, even those with a cast iron excuse for being unemployed (sick relatives needing 24 hour care, severe disabillities etc) are treated arises from the total subservience of human life to economic forces. A human being who is not sufficiently economically productive is less than nothing in the eyes of the state, and increasingly in the eyes of other members of the public. It's not a question of work ethic, nobody vicitimises rich people who sit on their arses all day long because they (allegedly) are good for the economy. And even a belief in work ethic doesn't stand up to much scrutiny in our society, considering the huge amount of quote unquote work people do that has absolutly no purpose whatsoever besides propping up the big consumption machine in some form or other. I'd rather be idle on my own terms than spend my days shovelling coal into the furnace that is slowly destroying everything I hold dear in the world. People are people, no matter what their situation they deserve the means to live and care for their families without coercion or fear or pointless toil. This should be the foundation stone not only of the benefits system but of the whole of society, for once we decide that numbers are more important than people (numbers which ostensibly exist to serve the people i nthe first place) then we failed utterly and no longer have the right to describe ourselves as 'civilised', for we are no better than a barbarian making a human sacrifice to some unseen, elemental force.
I dont' have any problem with people having enough to live on I just think that basic benefits for the fit unemployed should be less than for those who put something back into their community. I would propose a basic benefit package of dole money and space in a communal housing facility for those who are single and dont' contribute and increased benefits and access to better housing for those who work for the community in addition to benefits.
There are many people who in the current job market wouldn't be able to get a job. Therefore its the duty of a caring society to provide work for these people. This payment for this community work should be benefits + minimum wage for all hours worked + other benefits.
This would incentivise people to take part in community work and get the extra money.
Unconstructive idleness is quite frankly being trisha trash and not using your time constructively. Idleness causes crime and that applies whether the idle ones are doleys or the offspring of the aristocracy.
I'm not an arbiter of all society I just feel that there must be another better way to support people without damaging them with enforced idleness. The biggest victims of mass unemployment are the unemployed themselves.
Similar threads
