David Cameron to axe housing benefits for under 25's

[ditch_drfc]

Anyone that thinks it's "a piece of piss" to get a job is just a nob that has never been in that situation! I hate when people say it's easy to get a job, it isn't easy at all. It's probably the hardest thing i've ever done. It's like a full time job in itself.

It is a piece of piss to get a job. It's not a piece of piss to get a good job. It should be a full time job getting a job if you haven't got one. Why would you expect it not to be? If you don't like the job situation start your own businesses.

It's when people say things like that, that it really infuriates me. I was prepared to do pretty much any job, I travelled from Leeds to Doncaster for just one day a week, to clean two churches for that one day, i got around £160 a month. I wasn't on any benefits because I lost them when I decided to move in with my girlfriend.

I've never been work shy, and in fact, i'm writing this before i go out to work. How could you possibly expect me to start up my own business? Should I do it with thin air? Be serious, have  a think before you judge people that are unemployed. It's by no means an easy ride, you have absolutely no idea what kind of emotional strain there is attached to being unemployed unless you've been there for any period of time yourself. 

[mjdgreg]

It's when people say things like that, that it really infuriates me. I was prepared to do pretty much any job, I travelled from Leeds to Doncaster for just one day a week, to clean two churches for that one day, i got around £160 a month. I wasn't on any benefits because I lost them when I decided to move in with my girlfriend.

I've never been work shy, and in fact, i'm writing this before i go out to work. How could you possibly expect me to start up my own business? Should I do it with thin air? Be serious, have  a think before you judge people that are unemployed. It's by no means an easy ride, you have absolutely no idea what kind of emotional strain there is attached to being unemployed unless you've been there for any period of time yourself.

It really infuriates me when people say there aren't any jobs. Are you telling me there aren't any jobs advertised in the Job Centre or in the papers?

I'll warrant starting your own business is an idea you've never even considered. There are plenty of ways of getting the money to do it. There are also plenty of businesses that require very little start up capital. Did it ever enter your head to save some of your benefits/wages to use this money to start a business or did you do as the vast majority do and spend every penny you get?

[ditch_drfc]

Sorry but who are you to judge me?

I didn't say there weren't any jobs, so I don't know where you get that one from. There are jobs in the job centres, very little that someone that's applying for their first proper job can apply for, due to lack of experience and so on, but the main reason for not getting a job is simply because I didn't have enough experience. I don't know why i'm even arguing this, but seeing as I am, i'll make a solid argument...

Between November 11 and January 12, I'd applied for 26 jobs at ASDA, not sound like a lot? It was every single job they posted on their website. I've probably applied for more jobs than you've done days work!

And what you're saying about companies isn't right at all! It's complete rubbish! Go read some statistics about most companies that are set up failing within the first 6 months or something! For god sake do some research before you spout rubbish off because you're probably sick of paying taxes towards people on benefits... Which may I add, isn't a lot in a year!

I'd love to see someone like you survive for any period of time without a job in this current climate!

[mjdgreg]

Sorry but who are you to judge me?

I didn't say there weren't any jobs, so I don't know where you get that one from. There are jobs in the job centres, very little that someone that's applying for their first proper job can apply for, due to lack of experience and so on, but the main reason for not getting a job is simply because I didn't have enough experience. I don't know why i'm even arguing this, but seeing as I am, i'll make a solid argument...

Between November 11 and January 12, I'd applied for 26 jobs at ASDA, not sound like a lot? It was every single job they posted on their website. I've probably applied for more jobs than you've done days work!

And what you're saying about companies isn't right at all! It's complete rubbish! Go read some statistics about most companies that are set up failing within the first 6 months or something! For god sake do some research before you spout rubbish off because you're probably sick of paying taxes towards people on benefits... Which may I add, isn't a lot in a year!

I'd love to see someone like you survive for any period of time without a job in this current climate!

I'm not judging you. You seem like a hard-working individual who has made a good effort to get a job in these difficult times. My main beef is that a lot of people throw their hands up in the air and state there aren't any jobs so I'll make the best of living on benefits. I don't give your lack of experience argument much credit. If you had to have experience for every job then no-one would ever have had a job because we were all inexperienced before our first ever job.

There are jobs out there but it appears that it's only Polish immigrants that are prepared to do them. It's a fact that they are better workers than the English which shows there is an underlying attitude problem. They turn up on time, they work hard, they're reliable etc.

I stopped working for 'the man' years ago and now run my own successful businesses. I put myself in a position to do this by saving money and using the skills I had developed in my life. I also invested in property and now can sit back and let my tenants line my pockets for me for very little effort.

Anyone can do what I've done but it means not spending every penny you earn. Unfortunately the vast bulk of the population don't have any will power and just get it all spent and then become moaning minnies when times get tough. Harden up and start saving. Do without Sky etc. and ensure a successful future for yourself.

[Barmby Rover]

After seeing a LOT of people over the past three years trying to get jobs it is plain to see the ignorance of certain people, yes there are a lot of jobs advertised, most of them are agency work with no guarantees of daily work, poor pay and absolutely no prospects. Other jobs are for the very specialised with unique skills that pay well, there are very few where an employer takes somebody on, pays them a decent wage and has some sort of structure in place to allow them to develop as an employee.
This is no fault of G Brown but part of the infrastructure developed under the umbrella of M.Thatcher in making employment "more flexible".
What you seem to be advocating is that people should take any job, not an unfair point of view, until it affects your own family, then it is "I don't want them going into a dead end job." Slightly hypocritical to say the least, but then do we expect anything less? 

[BillyStubbsTears]

Ignore him. He's talking his usual b*llocks.

There ARE plenty of jobs out there. Unfortunately, there are many, many more unemployed people out there than there are jobs. When you have 5-10 times as many unemployed people as you have vacancies, unemployed people cannot invent opportunities.

When you are in a paradox of thrift crisis, where EVERYONE is trying to reduce their spending at once, this wonderful right wing idea that every unemployed person should start their own business is b*llocks. There is no market.

There is and there always has been only one way out of the sort of crisis that the developed world is in. We have an able, willing and educated workforce (despite what bigots like Mick say, wanting to blame unemployment on idleness). What we don't have is demand for their labour. The way out is for Govt spending to drive up demand, get people working, get people spending, get people buying the thinks that other people make and get private industry growing as a result.

It's all set out in JM Keynes's masterwork and it is what pulled the world out of the Great Depression. But through ignorance or political ideology, we have right wingers in charge in UK, Germany and in Congress in the States who flatly refuse to believe the proven economic theory.

They prefer Mick's claim that dole wallahs are idle scroungers, that they have no skills (because the state has not educated them properly) and that they prefer to sit on high benefits than work. It's demonstrably shite, but it's a good tub thumping argument. It's what the Right always say because it fits their ideology - business and free markets are good, workers are idle, State is bad.

Here's a quote from a right-wing American economist in the mid 1930s, during the Great Depression, explaining why they had 25% unemployment.

"I believe that this current labor supply of ours is peculiarly unadaptable and untrained. It cannot respond to the many opportunities which industry offers."

Maybe he was Mick's granddad?

Of course it was utter b*llocks. They had unemployment because they had no jobs, not because the workforce was shit. And how did they finally get jobs? The Government poured money into the economy to pay for the military build-up to WWII. Then this feckless, untrained, unadaptable workforce all found work building the aircraft carriers, the Flying Fortresses and the bombs and bullets that won the war. Funny int it, how a feckless, lazy, unskilled workforce could rise to the challenge when jobs were made available.

[mjdgreg]

After seeing a LOT of people over the past three years trying to get jobs it is plain to see the ignorance of certain people, yes there are a lot of jobs advertised, most of them are agency work with no guarantees of daily work, poor pay and absolutely no prospects. Other jobs are for the very specialised with unique skills that pay well, there are very few where an employer takes somebody on, pays them a decent wage and has some sort of structure in place to allow them to develop as an employee.
This is no fault of G Brown but part of the infrastructure developed under the umbrella of M.Thatcher in making employment "more flexible".
What you seem to be advocating is that people should take any job, not an unfair point of view, until it affects your own family, then it is "I don't want them going into a dead end job." Slightly hypocritical to say the least, but then do we expect anything less? 

This is no fault of G Brown. Are you having a laugh? He was only in power for 13 years. It is totally his fault that the jobs market is so challenging. Anyone can get a job as proved by the huge influx of eastern Europeans (another great Labour policy). If you don't want a dead end job the obvious solution is to start your own businesses. We live in one of the few countries in the world where this is an easy thing to do. If you're not prepared to do this then you deserve a dead end job.

Is it so strange that I don't want my children to have a crap job? I am prepared to help them get a good start in life (unlike many parents) and they are lucky. Would you rather I let them start off life in a dead end job just to suit your political ideology? Typical leftie view.

[mjdgreg]

When you are in a paradox of thrift crisis, where EVERYONE is trying to reduce their spending at once, this wonderful right wing idea that every unemployed person should start their own business is b*llocks. There is no market.

What a load of leftie twaddle. Not EVERYONE is trying to reduce their spending at once. I am actually a good example of someone who is increasing my spending. Because I have been a paragon of virtue in the past I can now reap the benefits and help get the economy kick-started. I saved in the past and didn't spend more than I had coming in. It is losers that lived beyond their means that are now cutting back and rightly so.

I'm not saying every unemployed person should start their own business. If they don't want to do this there are plenty of dead end jobs they can do instead. 'There is no market'. What a defeatist statement. The whole world is a market. No wonder you are a leftie with such a depressing outlook on life. 

[mjdgreg]

There is and there always has been only one way out of the sort of crisis that the developed world is in. We have an able, willing and educated workforce (despite what bigots like Mick say, wanting to blame unemployment on idleness). What we don't have is demand for their labour. The way out is for Govt spending to drive up demand, get people working, get people spending, get people buying the thinks that other people make and get private industry growing as a result.

Let's get one thing straight. It's not Govt spending. It's taxpayer's money that the Govt spends. Where your ludicrous argument falls down is that Governments have spent and spent and spent. Why hasn't this worked as it is exactly what you are advocating? Where has your strategy got us? A terrible financial crisis. What is your solution? To spend even more money (that we haven't got). Unbelievable.

[Barmby Rover]

When you are in a paradox of thrift crisis, where EVERYONE is trying to reduce their spending at once, this wonderful right wing idea that every unemployed person should start their own business is b*llocks. There is no market.

What a load of leftie twaddle. Not EVERYONE is trying to reduce their spending at once. I am actually a good example of someone who is increasing my spending. Because I have been a paragon of virtue in the past I can now reap the benefits and help get the economy kick-started. I saved in the past and didn't spend more than I had coming in. It is losers that lived beyond their means that are now cutting back and rightly so.

I'm not saying every unemployed person should start their own business. If they don't want to do this there are plenty of dead end jobs they can do instead. 'There is no market'. What a defeatist statement. The whole world is a market. No wonder you are a leftie with such a depressing outlook on life. 

No, but maybe to suit your philosophy where everybody must look after themselves your children should take what they can get without Daddy having to pay out for them.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick

I'll repeat once again. In 2007, our Govt debt to GDP ratio was lower than it had been for all but 6 of the previous 60 years. The UK Govt did NOT spend recklessly before the crash. Let's just get that down for the record, because any further discussion is pointless if we don't start off with correct facts.
You can hammer on all you want about Brown spending manically. But it simply is not true. He may well have spent more than YOU liked, but he did not over spend between 97-07 by any historical comparison.

So that's that one nailed.

What happened AFTER the global crash in 07-08 was two things. Firstly our tax revenue collapsed, principally due to companies' profits falling through the floor. That happened in every single mature western economy. Every one.

Secondly, the Brown Govt employed the classic Keynesian response of a fiscal stimulus (Givt spending) to kick start growth. And it did. By summer 10, the economy had come out of recession strongly and was growing again.

Osborne wouldn't have done that. You wouldn't have done that. YOU. Would have kept interest rates high and cut back Govt spending. Can you explain what the consequences of that approach would have been?

[mjdgreg]

No, but maybe to suit your philosophy where everybody must look after themselves your children should take what they can get without Daddy having to pay out for them.

After my hobbies, my children are the most important things in my life. Thanks to my fine example and encouragement they have both gone to university and will both finish their degrees next year with a minimum of a 2:1 expected. I haven't given them a penny towards their education. They both took a leaf out of my book and got themselves a part-time job.

How many of you lefties out there sent your kids to university? Not many I suspect. I bet you fell for the leftie propaganda that it costs too much so you decided you couldn't afford it and discouraged them from going.

Due to the economy being totally wrecked by Mr Brown I don't hold out any great hopes that they will both end up with good jobs. So instead of waiting for the government to come and sort out the problem I have decided to have a plan B in place.

This involves lending them money (which I want back with interest) to get them started in their own businesses. That's what other parents should also be doing instead of washing their hands of the problem and sitting back and waiting for the government to run their lives for them. The problem is that most parents can't do this because they are too busy living beyond their means. It's time they hardened up and put their kids first.

[mjdgreg]

mjdgreg

I'll repeat once again. In 2007, our Govt debt to GDP ratio was lower than it had been for all but 6 of the previous 60 years. The UK Govt did NOT spend recklessly before the crash. Let's just get that down for the record, because any further discussion is pointless if we don't start off with correct facts.
You can hammer on all you want about Brown spending manically. But it simply is not true. He may well have spent more than YOU liked, but he did not over spend between 97-07 by any historical comparison.

So that's that one nailed.

Before the crash Labour spent an extra  £1.3 trillion on public services. That's an increase of 80%. Yes 80%. Unbelievable I know. That's an extra £73,000 for every household in the country. Yes £73,000. Unbelievable I know. After the crash they spent another huge amount. So whichever way you look at it they overspent wildly and we have very little to show for all this extra debt we have been burdened with. So that's the silly Billy myth that Brown did not spend manically put to bed. That's that one nailed.

Next he bangs on about Govt debt to GDP ratio as though that is the be all and end all of everything. He completely ignores the huge increase in private debt and the housing bubble. Taking all things into consideration, we as a nation ended up being seriously indebted thanks to Gordon. That's another silly Billy myth nailed.

This is where any serious debate about the economy should start from.

[bobjimwilly]

'There is no market'. What a defeatist statement. The whole world is a market. No wonder you are a leftie with such a depressing outlook on life. 

You do realise you keep contradicting yourself don't you Mick? You're telling people in one post to save and stop spending their money, then in the next post your asking the unemployed to start up their own businesses and sell to "the whole world"? You can't have both Mick, so which would you have us all do? Spend our money to help businesses, or save all our money? Coz at the minute mush you're just coming across as a bit of a tool...

[mjdgreg]

What happened AFTER the global crash in 07-08 was two things. Firstly our tax revenue collapsed, principally due to companies' profits falling through the floor. That happened in every single mature western economy. Every one.

Secondly, the Brown Govt employed the classic Keynesian response of a fiscal stimulus (Givt spending) to kick start growth. And it did. By summer 10, the economy had come out of recession strongly and was growing again.

Osborne wouldn't have done that. You wouldn't have done that. YOU. Would have kept interest rates high and cut back Govt spending. Can you explain what the consequences of that approach would have been?

You talk as if the coalition government have made drastic cuts. They are only spending 0.8% less than when Labour were in power. So they are spending the kind of money you want them to. So why isn't the economy growing as you say it should? Another of your myths exploded.

I would have kept interest rates at a level to keep inflation under control and had a short sharp recession to get our house in order. Then we could have emerged quickly from recession with huge tax cuts and powered forward. The current policy started by Labour is like death by a thousand cuts.

[BillyStubbsTears]

You don't go a bundle in cause and effect do you Mick. You think that upping interest rates would have given us a short sharp recession and then all would be fine?

God help us if peoe really do believe this when deciding who to vote for.

Recessions are not done sort of purgative process from which an economy naturally rebounds healthily. They are indications that the system has malfunctioned and they only ONLY end when the problems in the system have been addressed.

Your suggestion is like a doctor seeing a man have a heart attack and prescribing that we cut his legs off.

The current problem is that there is woefully insufficient demand in the economy. Not enough people and businesses are spending. How in the name of hell does increasing interest rates address that problem?

We're waiting with bated breath Mick. Enlighten us.

[wilts rover]

But what are they spending the money on Mick? Is it to the benefit of the greatest number of people by creating jobs, spending power and care services - or is it on pointless muliti-billion arms contracts for nuclear weapons that will never be used - and propping up the City banking industry where they have shares and directorships, hmmm let me see..

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick.

By the way, the coalition Govt is still spending at a high level, partly because unemployment has gone up since they came to power.

The critically incorrect thing that they did was to cut back drastically on infrastructure spending. Lunacy in a liquidity trap Depression.

What this Govt is categorically NOT doing is spending to kick start the economy. They are ideologically against that.

My policy?

1) Govt spending on new houses. Addresses a critical failing of all Govts in the last 30 years in leaving us with inadequate housing stock. This was a major factor in the over priced housing boom. It has also led to the development of a class of leech-like rentiers, who would go the country a better service investing their money in something productive, instead of buying houses to rent out. That's number 1.

2) Give small businesses a massive tax cut for taking on under-25 staff. I'm talking several billion overall.

3) Reduce VAT to at least 15%. We desperately need to get people and businesses spending and taxing spending is utter madness at a time like this.

4) A massive investment in Science and Technology PhDs for UK graduates. What is the point in the brightest young people we have ending up pot washing, sat on their arse or working part-time. Let's invest in them now so that when the upturn comes, we have the best educated technical leaders in the world. Let's turn out 100,000 Science and Engineering PhDs per year. That'd cost about £2.5bn per year in bursaries and University fees. But every penny of that would go straight back into the UK economy, because the students would spend every bit of their bursaries and the Universities would spend the fees on new buildings and labs. And we'd then have the best educated technical leaders in the world. Madness that we're actually hugely cutting back on our scientific research budget.

Total cost, about £25bn per year. About 2-2.5% of GDP. But every penny of that Govt investment would be repaid many times in its effect on the economy.

[mjdgreg]

You do realise you keep contradicting yourself don't you mjdgreg? You're telling people in one post to save and stop spending their money, then in the next post your asking the unemployed to start up their own businesses and sell to "the whole world"? You can't have both Mick, so which would you have us all do? Spend our money to help businesses, or save all our money? Coz at the minute mush you're just coming across as a bit of a tool...

It only appears like a contradiction if you are unable to understand what has been posted so I'll explain in simple terms so you can understand. If you are in debt then your first priority should be to clear that debt. Once you have cleared your debt then the next priority is to save some money. Once you have saved enough money then you can start your own businesses. Once you are financially secure then you can loosen the purse strings and start spending.

It takes discipline to do this and this is where many of you fall down. You live for today on borrowed money and wake up one day and wonder why you have nothing to show for your life. I on the other hand used my iron will power and followed this strategy and have managed to retire early without a pension. As you may guess I have never worked in the public sector. By the way I have never been in debt so my first point doesn't apply to me (except for a mortgage).

[mjdgreg]

You don't go a bundle in cause and effect do you Mick. You think that upping interest rates would have given us a short sharp recession and then all would be fine?

God help us if peoe really do believe this when deciding who to vote for.

Recessions are not done sort of purgative process from which an economy naturally rebounds healthily. They are indications that the system has malfunctioned and they only ONLY end when the problems in the system have been addressed.

Your suggestion is like a doctor seeing a man have a heart attack and prescribing that we cut his legs off.

The current problem is that there is woefully insufficient demand in the economy. Not enough people and businesses are spending. How in the name of hell does increasing interest rates address that problem?

We're waiting with bated breath Mick. Enlighten us.

As usual you ignore all my questions and have no comeback to the points I make which totally destroy your argument. I on the other hand will continue to answer all your questions and destroy your arguments one by one again.

Interest rates need to be raised to get inflation under control. No ifs and buts. I notice you never ever mention inflation because it doesn't suit your argument. Is high inflation a bad thing? It most certainly is.

The biggest problem of high inflation is that it reduces the purchasing power of money. With inflation at just 2.5 per cent a year, your purchasing power will halve in 30 years. If inflation is allowed to balloon out of control to nearly 25 per cent which we had in the mid-1970s - the purchasing power of your money halves in less than three years.

It's a big problem now for workers as their wage rises are not matching inflation, and for retirees and those nearing retirement it can be devastating. Their retirement lump sum is not getting any bigger, so if it shrinks because of higher inflation their future income shrinks too. Savers also get hurt. Other problems of high inflation include businesses becoming less efficient, and social problems because people can no longer afford everyday items. All this leads to less demand in the economy.

Raising interest rates is needed to get inflation under control. A sustained recovery will not happen until this happens. It is the first step that needs to be taken before other measures can be effective. It's that important.

Your medical analogy is a very poor one so I'll give you a much better one. Imagine you had bad toothache and nothing could be done to save the tooth. Your solution would be to keep on taking painkillers (spend more money) and hope the pain would one day go away. My solution would be to harden up and pull the tooth out myself (clear any debts) and then move forward pain free (no budget deficit) to a brighter future.

 

[mjdgreg]

But what are they spending the money on mjdgreg? Is it to the benefit of the greatest number of people by creating jobs, spending power and care services - or is it on pointless muliti-billion arms contracts for nuclear weapons that will never be used - and propping up the City banking industry where they have shares and directorships, hmmm let me see..

Over £40billion a year is going on just paying interest on our National Debt. That's more than we spend on defence. A lot of money is also going on the bloated public sector. I think if you check your recent history you will find it was Labour that bailed out the banks not the Tories.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mick

If you really, really believe that inflation is the enemy right now and that higher interest rates would set us on the path to recovery, then any further debate is pointless. You clearly haven't the vaguest comprehension of what the current Depression is all about. You clearly have no comprehension about monetary responses to economic contractions, never mind the limits that these come up against in a liquidity trap. Go and read up on basic economics before you waste our time any further and you make a fool of yourself any further by spouting such utter drivel.

But don't just take my word for it. Ask yourself why interest rates are at record lows in every developed nation on earth. Not just under the mad Scottish lefty did interest rates collapse. It happened under Dubya in America. It happened in Europe. It happened in Japan. Were they all mad lefties who didn't have your wisdom on inflation?

Raise interest rates in a liquidity trap Depression! f**k me sideways. The terrifying threat for the last few years, and still today, is DEflation. Strip out external cost increases in fuel and food and our economy is deflating. That is when things get really scary, because that is the scenario in which people simply stop spending. And if I stop spending, you stop earning. And if you stop spending, I stop earning. And how the f**k do you get out of THAT trap Mick? Enlighten us.

Raising interest rates. Jesus f**king wept.

[mjdgreg]

By the way, the coalition Govt is still spending at a high level, partly because unemployment has gone up since they came to power.

You omit to say that it started rising under Labour. Why did this happen if they were spending so much money as you advocate? Surely if your argument was correct then unemployment should have been falling under Labour. I'm not holding my breath for an answer.

[mjdgreg]

mjdgreg

If you really, really believe that inflation is the enemy right now and that higher interest rates would set us on the path to recovery, then any further debate is pointless. You clearly haven't the vaguest comprehension of what the current Depression is all about. You clearly have no comprehension about monetary responses to economic contractions, never mind the limits that these come up against in a liquidity trap. Go and read up on basic economics before you waste our time any further and you make a fool of yourself any further by spouting such utter drivel.

But don't just take my word for it. Ask yourself why interest rates are at record lows in every developed nation on earth. Not just under the mad Scottish lefty did interest rates collapse. It happened under Dubya in America. It happened in Europe. It happened in Japan. Were they all mad lefties who didn't have your wisdom on inflation?

Raise interest rates in a liquidity trap Depression! f*** me sideways. The terrifying threat for the last few years, and still today, is DEflation. Strip out external cost increases in fuel and food and our economy is deflating. That is when things get really scary, because that is the scenario in which people simply stop spending. And if I stop spending, you stop earning. And if you stop spending, I stop earning. And how the f*** do you get out of THAT trap Mick? Enlighten us.

Raising interest rates. Jesus f***ing wept.

There we have it. You think the biggest risk to all our futures - inflation, is irrelevant. Now I understand why your ramblings have made such little sense.

The reason other countries have low interest rates is because they too are scared to bite the bullet. It's not because they are all doing the right thing. Most of them also mistakenly believe you can spend your way out of a debt crisis. No wonder the world economy is in such a bad state.

Because my finances are in such robust health you needn't worry about me stopping spending. If only other people followed my excellent example we would not be in the mess we're in.