Poundland Girl Wins Forced Labour Ruling

Angilion said:
I'm curious as to what effect you think a petition will have.

We're talking about someone who lies publically in pursuit of a political agenda and has the support of the government of which he is a part because that agenda is the government's agenda.
Click to expand...

If the protest was ONLY against long term unemployed being used as means to provide temp workforce for private companies - I bet my hard earned sterlings - spankintexan would have everyone attention and support.

But the protesters don't want to stop there. They protest against workschemes in general. They do not want long term benefits claimants working full stop. Not for charities, not for councils. Not for society. They want work scheme/program stopped as a whole. They go for complete bobcrowism. Have cake and eat it all. Their stance is "want to be able to freeload as long as we want and we will byte the hand that feeds us if you force us to work for it". And that's where they bleed support and alienate the rest of the us.

spankingtexan's petition won't have any effect not because IDS lied and will ignore the action, but because the numbers required for his protest to make a dent will never be there. The simple truth is - IDS and other politicians do what they do at the moment because that IS what the nation wanted.

It's done in the worst possible way, and most of people opposing spankingtexan's view in this thread agree on that. But supporting most anti-workfare movements, like the one spankingtexan spams for, would be worse. It would go against everything that most of working people in Britain want today.

Blunt statistical numbers that led to .gov undertaking this "reform".
- 78% of Britons would prefer if benefits were docked when people turn down work that pays the same or less than they get in benefits.
- Whooping 84% wants stricter work capability tests for disabled.
- 72% want politicians to do more to cut the benefits bill.
- 64% think the current benefits system does not work well or is failing.
- 62% want handouts to be capped if people on benefits choose to have more children.
- 40% of nation think that majority of benefit recipients are scroungers.
- Only 29% of the nation would oppose those on housing benefit being forced to move if they live in expensive areas.

In moments of austerity people do not shed tears for who they perceive to be alleged "workshy". On one hand the .gov reforms and programs might be unethical in some aspects, but they do put cane to the back of the non working minority. Which is what "the people" wanted. On the other - the only alternative - the "Coach Potato Militia" - would scrap it all. And then stretch their palms for more handouts.

This won't find any wide support. Certainly not outside the crowd that already relies on taxpayer sponsoring their lifestyle. This flame will never become wildfire. Between rock and hard place, between IDS' way or spankingtexan's way - for most of us - it's pretty much going to be "send them to Poundland".
 
Last edited:
v0n said:
Blunt statistical numbers that led to .gov undertaking this "reform".
- 78% of Britons would prefer if benefits were docked when people turn down work that pays the same or less than they get in benefits.
- Whooping 84% wants stricter work capability tests for disabled.
- 72% want politicians to do more to cut the benefits bill.
- 64% think the current benefits system does not work well or is failing.
- 62% want handouts to be capped if people on benefits choose to have more children.
- 40% of nation think that majority of benefit recipients are scroungers.
- Only 29% of the nation would oppose those on housing benefit being forced to move if they live in expensive areas.
Click to expand...
From whom was this data collected? I don't recall being handed a survey.
 
v0n said:
- 78% of Britons would prefer if benefits were docked when people turn down work that pays the same or less than they get in benefits.
Click to expand...
The fact that it's possible to find full time work and be worse off than on benefits is a sad indictment of the current system.
Whooping 84% wants stricter work capability tests for disabled.
Click to expand...
No, it's the people who claim to be disabled but in all reality are fine that are the problem. The people gaming the system. We should not be hounding genuinely disabled and making their lives a misery, for political gain.
72% want politicians to do more to cut the benefits bill.
Click to expand...
Thread has already shown that JSA is a tiny, tiny fraction of the "benefits bill".
64% think the current benefits system does not work well or is failing.
Click to expand...
Agreed the whole system is FUBAR. What about the benefits that you are entitled to claim regardless of income? It was only in Jan this year that we stopped paying child benefit to literally anyone that wanted to claim it...
62% want handouts to be capped if people on benefits choose to have more children.
Click to expand...
Not really anything to do with JSA or workfare.
40% of nation think that majority of benefit recipients are scroungers.
Click to expand...
I wonder of that 40% how many of these respondants are basing their opinion purely on prejudice, and what they read in the Daily Mail? I'm not sure how those people would be qualified to make judgements on "the majority of claimants", given that they probably have no evidence beyond their gut feelings.
Only 29% of the nation would oppose those on housing benefit being forced to move if they live in expensive areas.
Click to expand...
Reasonable, but again not workfare related.

Between rock and hard place, between IDS' way or spankingtexan's way - for most of us - it's pretty much going to be "send them to Poundland".
Click to expand...
So it's wrong for an individual to take taxpayer's money and contribute nothing in return, but it's perfectly acceptable for Poundland to do the same. Because, let's face it, that money we're giving to Poundland to take on free labour... we might as well be burning it.

And you're saying those are the only two choices. Well, in that case, I'm emigrating.
 
FoxEye said:
So it's wrong for an individual to take taxpayer's money and contribute nothing in return, but it's perfectly acceptable for Poundland to do the same. Because, let's face it, that money we're giving to Poundland to take on free labour... we might as well be burning it.
Click to expand...

how so?

they get a reference at the very minimum and recent work experience, great if your long term unemployed and a fair few even get taken on permanent
 
We've been through this before.

1) Stacking shelves is not work experience.
2) You give Poundland free labour they don't have to hire as many paid staff
3) It's more expensive to have Workfare than not to have it, because you end up paying Poundland *and* paying JSA *and* potentially reducing the number of (paid) jobs available.

It's lose/lose/lose.
 
FoxEye said:
We've been through this before.

1) Stacking shelves is not work experience.
Click to expand...

yes it is, its work, and you're now able to prove to an employer that you're capable of turning up on time and not being useless. given places like primark and most high street stores list "must have past retail work experience" means that yes it is useful.

also get a reference


2) You give Poundland free labour they don't have to hire as many paid staff
Click to expand...

so how come pound land haven't laid off loads of employes, its mroe likley they're just reducing over time hours.

3) It's more expensive to have Workfare than not to have it, because you end up paying Poundland *and* paying JSA *and* potentially reducing the number of (paid) jobs available.

It's lose/lose/lose.
Click to expand...

well aside from the ones who now use their reference to get a job, or realize that getting jsa and working suck and go get a job instead.


if it costs slightly more to have them working, ratehr than just sat at home it's still worth it.

as shown by the woman this whole thread is about, shes now stacking shelves an d paying tax, either because shes now got references or now realizes that jsa + work is worse than working so got rid of her "i wont do a job thats beneath me" attitude.
 
Last edited:
Tefal said:
so how come pound land haven't laid off loads of employes, its mroe likley they're just reducing over time hours.
Click to expand...
Overtime=paid work for somebody who needs the money. Less overtime because of free state-provided labour is wrong.

if it costs slightly more to have them working, ratehr than just sat at home it's still worth it.
Click to expand...
Not really, for the reasons mentioned above.

Remember that in the longer term there are going to be fewer and fewer jobs. Automation is going to further reduce the need for unskilled labour, as it already has done.

The idea that we can have low unemployment and most people in full-time jobs is going to be increasingly unrealistic. More people are going to be long-term unemployed. Can't put them all on Workfare.
 
Angilion said:
I'm curious as to what effect you think a petition will have.

We're talking about someone who lies publically in pursuit of a political agenda and has the support of the government of which he is a part because that agenda is the government's agenda. They're hardly likely to care that people have clicked on a button on a screen. Tens of thousands of people disapprove of their actions...people who have no power over them and who they don't care about.
Click to expand...

Do you suggest we do nothing then?
Do you think it is acceptable for political parties to deliberately deceive the public?

Petitioning, protesting is a way of hitting back, if everybody took the attitude "It's a waste of time" then we would be at the mercy of a ruling elite who could do whatever they wanted whenever they liked.

If every one stopped rolling over whenever these vile ******** clicked their fingers to unfair treatment then we would be much better off.

I just want people to be PAID for working, benefits are not wages, you can't treat JSA claimants like criminals, the DWP should not have the power to sentence claimants to community service.

I want Politicians to stop deceiving the public and punishing the poor and vulnerable.

http://www.boycottworkfare.org/

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...ld-ids-to-account-for-his-use-of-statistics-2
 
Last edited:
spankingtexan said:
Do you suggest we do nothing then?
Do you think it is acceptable for political parties to deliberately deceive the public?

Petitioning, protesting is a way of hitting back, if everybody took the attitude "It's a waste of time" then we would be at the mercy of a ruling elite who could do whatever they wanted whenever they liked.

If every one stopped rolling over whenever these vile ******** clicked their fingers to unfair treatment then we would be much better off.

I just want people to be PAID for working, benefits are not wages, you can't treat JSA claimants like criminals, the DWP should not have the power to sentence claimants to community service.

I want Politicians to stop deceiving the public and punishing the poor and vulnerable.

http://www.boycottworkfare.org/

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...ld-ids-to-account-for-his-use-of-statistics-2
Click to expand...

We live in a democracy, small minority protests should be ignored in the vast majority of cases.
 
All protests are ignored!, I dont how people havent got the message by now of how useless protests are.

I guess its one way of placating the masses, letting the gather to chant every so often.
 
Calabi said:
All protests are ignored!, I dont how people havent got the message by now of how useless protests are.

I guess its one way of placating the masses, letting the gather to chant every so often.
Click to expand...

The masses, at least in western democracies, aren't involved in protests. Those involved in protest tend to be a small but vocal minority demanding changes that the rest of the country either don't want or don't care about, and back it up with disruption and violence. in many cases it's only a couple of steps down from terrorism trying to control the streets, disrupt legal businesses and so on.
 
Dolph said:
The masses, at least in western democracies, aren't involved in protests. Those involved in protest tend to be a small but vocal minority demanding changes that the rest of the country either don't want or don't care about, and back it up with disruption and violence. in many cases it's only a couple of steps down from terrorism trying to control the streets, disrupt legal businesses and so on.
Click to expand...

lol
 
Democratic right to peaceful protests now classed as a step below terrorism, are you serious?
I do not support violent protests but can't be held responsible for heavy handed Police tactics at peaceful protests.
 
spankingtexan said:
Democratic right to peaceful protests now classed as a step below terrorism, are you serious?
I do not support violent protests but can't be held responsible for heavy handed Police tactics at peaceful protests.
Click to expand...

ah, the classic blame the police approach. sit ins, attempts to disrupt peoples lives and businesses should not be considered peaceful protest, they are concerted attempts at disruption with the offer to stop disrupting if people give in to your demands. that isn't peaceful.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom