Here are the facts. There are just under half a million job vacancies in this country at the moment. (Click 'vacancies and unemployment' for a pdf file.) According to the coalition government there are at least 5 million people who are ‘economically inactive’ – the euphemism for being out of work.
Let’s be generous and assume that the 5 million figure is correct and all these vacancies are in the right places and they are filled. That leaves 4 and a half million people with no job to go to. But like with the argument for the existence of God, some people will insist that a lot of vacancies are not advertised. I don’t know whether we are expected to have faith that they are out there, never mind how we are supposed to apply for them if we don’t know they exist. But again, let’s be generous and assume that there are a million unadvertised jobs out there (and they’re in the right places, etc, etc.) That’s still three and a half million people with no job to go to.
But hang on a moment, isn’t the coalition government slashing jobs? Half a million jobs, to be exact. And do they not expect another half a million private sector jobs to fall as a result? Oops! Looks like we’re back at 4 and a half million.
It’s no wonder that this government adores the game of ‘blame the victim’ and wants to reintroduce slavery, feebly relabelled as workfare. It’s so much easier for the party of blame, stick and judgement to attack the poor for being poor instead of acknowledging the failure of capitalism and putting right its many vulgar faults.
More:
Harpymarx
Edit: The bully of disabled people, Danny Alexander, has declared that these spiteful reforms are not to punish and humiliate people. Yes they are - that is precisely what they are for - to punish and humiliate people.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
There's so many parallels to the workhouse days.
19th century Dickensian "welfare" for the 21st century. Next...it'll be Serco run workhouses :(
Thanks for link btw :)
My pleasure, Harpy. By the time the coalition government is finished I'll have to rename myself 'Tiny Tim' and hobble about town with crutches and a begging bowl.
5 million migrants working in the UK... now remind us why we need these people?
Lazy, work-shy, benefit scrounging, disability claiming tossers should get working in some field, and will once they are made to get off their arses instead of sitting playing on the net all day.
WE can then get back to normality and the country can get rid of so many migrants.
But that wouldn't fit in with your agenda would it diddums?
Hi there. Houdini!
"5 million migrants working in the UK... now remind us why we need these people?"
But I don't think about whether we "need" them or not, I see them as people.
"Lazy, work-shy, benefit scrounging, disability claiming tossers should get working in some field, and will once they are made to get off their arses instead of sitting playing on the net all day."
Well, I have applied for a few jobs working in a field - I quite like the idea of working in the open air - but the employers didn't want me. Perhaps you should get angry with them?
"WE can then get back to normality and the country can get rid of so many migrants."
But your idea of normality is not mine.
"But that wouldn't fit in with your agenda would it diddums?"
I don't have an agenda. I am just reacting to those who have an agenda against people.
Hi there. Houdini!
Hi!?
"5 million migrants working in the UK... now remind us why we need these people?"
But I don't think about whether we "need" them or not, I see them as people.
I see everybody as people, foreign or British, but differentiate depending on their specific value to society or their entitlement within society. You should too before making sweeping statements and think carefully. You it was who made the sweeping generality that we have far more people than jobs, but we don't do we because we need to import workers to fill the jobs. If we didn't need to import them then we would have more than sufficient jobs for the work-shy to fill and your whole argument would fall down.
"Lazy, work-shy, benefit scrounging, disability claiming tossers should get working in some field, and will once they are made to get off their arses instead of sitting playing on the net all day."
Well, I have applied for a few jobs working in a field - I quite like the idea of working in the open air - but the employers didn't want me. Perhaps you should get angry with them?
Why would I get angry with employers? I am one and know the difficulties of keeping a business afloat and pandering to the work force. You applied for a few jobs? Apply for a few more, then a few more then. Perhaps you should consider how someone can come half way across the world, unable to speak or read the language here, and still get a job while you can't.
"WE can then get back to normality and the country can get rid of so many migrants."
But your idea of normality is not mine.
Undoubtedly. Normal to me is go out, work, come home, eat, sleep and then go back. Pay taxes and provide for a family, all without whining and ever having been on the dole. Work, to army, to work, and still working.
"But that wouldn't fit in with your agenda would it diddums?"
I don't have an agenda. I am just reacting to those who have an agenda against people.
Every post you have is attacking specific groups, and ensuring others are left alone. Now, let's see if everyone can guess who and what.
Thanks for the reply, Anonymous.
“I see everybody as people, foreign or British, but differentiate depending on their specific value to society or their entitlement within society. You should too before making sweeping statements and think carefully. You it was who made the sweeping generality that we have far more people than jobs, but we don't do we because we need to import workers to fill the jobs. If we didn't need to import them then we would have more than sufficient jobs for the work-shy to fill and your whole argument would fall down.”
But this doesn’t change the maths, does it? There are still not enough jobs. I and the “work-shy” did not import anybody, nor nudge anybody to come.
“Why would I get angry with employers?”
Because they keep people like me out of work? Please see here, showing that three quarters of employers would not hire disabled people:
http://www.iosh.co.uk/news_and_events/news/latest_news_releases/25_back_to_work_plans.aspx
“I am one and know the difficulties of keeping a business afloat and pandering to the work force. You applied for a few jobs? Apply for a few more, then a few more then. Perhaps you should consider how someone can come half way across the world, unable to speak or read the language here, and still get a job while you can't.”
I meant that I applied for a few jobs which involved working in a field. I’m not fussy. I have qualifications, which mean that I try for other jobs mostly. Ones with which I am more likely to succeed. How is your example possible? They can’t communicate with the employer any better than I can.
“Undoubtedly. Normal to me is go out, work, come home, eat, sleep and then go back. Pay taxes and provide for a family, all without whining and ever having been on the dole.”
That's what I would like too. But if people like Vicky Harrison can’t get it, than what chance do disabled people have? :
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267953/Job-seeker-Vicky-Harrison-commits-suicide-rejected-200-jobs.html
“Work, to army, to work, and still working.”
How did you get your first job? I could probably do with some army discipline! ;)
But I notice that you went to work first. Are you disabled and did you ever try to convince an employer to take you on when you were disabled twice over? Please see the link, second last.
“Every post you have is attacking specific groups, and ensuring others are left alone. Now, let's see if everyone can guess who and what.”
But didn’t you do the same, albeit from a different perspective?
(Meant amicably.) :)
Post a Comment