working for your dole......

realBabelfish · 2 Oct 2013 at 16:52

Lazder said:
With that kind of grammar coming from you, I guess the tutor bloke did not speak a word of English??

im sick today and struggling a bit (had to come in though) and to be honest, my written work is a bit better than fast typing on a forum

dont assume my CV is abbreviated to hell like my forum typing

gothic_hobbit · 2 Oct 2013 at 17:44

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24369514

Call me Dave wants to remove all benefits for those under 25.

Nix · 2 Oct 2013 at 17:50

TheLegendOfMart said:
I'd rather work than be bored off my **** at home, even if its only £10 better off there are still overtime opportunities and such.

Whilst I agree I'd always much rather be working than claiming, it simply isn't true that overtime opportunities will always exist. It's far more likely you'll find yourself on a <30 hour contract without available overtime these days.

Nix · 2 Oct 2013 at 17:52

gothic_hobbit said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24369514

Call me Dave wants to remove all benefits for those under 25.

That's right Dave, let's make things even harder for those just starting out.

****ing pleb.

Ceryndrion · 2 Oct 2013 at 17:52

And so he should, all under 25s should still be living in their parents homes, I thought he made that clear last year..

ShakenNstirred · 2 Oct 2013 at 18:07

a good idea in principle if they can get it to work.
I know of 2 guys(brothers) one hasn't worked in 35 years the other 20 years
they just seem to get away with it, so something like this will be good if it get them working instead of carp fishing all week.

spankingtexan · 2 Oct 2013 at 18:30

Nix said:
That's right Dave, let's make things even harder for those just starting out.

****ing pleb.

Yep, this is worrying, if they have difficulties in finding work it could cause serious issues within the family leading to the under 25 being kicked out with no job, no benefit and no where to live.
Cameron is a complete idiot who just engages the mouth before the brain.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/

Schlong&Stable · 2 Oct 2013 at 18:32

amigafan2003 said:
I did - and you're wrong. For example - 3 bed apartment in capital city (Berlin) is 800eur. Same in London is 1600eur.

Comparing London to Berlin is not a fair analysis of the situation. Population density alone makes direct comparison absurd, not to mention the impact of the City of London etc.

A more accurate comparison would be at a national level. Using your source:

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_result.jsp?country=Germany
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_result.jsp?country=United+Kingdom

Germany is only 35% cheaper. Which may sound like a lot, but consider that most of their population lives in state housing. House ownership is very low. But British people want to own their own homes. The price of cheap rent is living in social housing... not an attractive option.

matty114 · 2 Oct 2013 at 18:32

realBabelfish said:
nice one mate. when do they teach you all to vanish when a customer needs something?

every time i go in my local one i see loads of staff but as soon as i need something its like they all hide in the wardrobes or something

haha it does happen a lot, the stores seem to be understaffed and staff like to take their breaks at the same time

most of the time it is just me and someone else in the whole department. I work in the garden centre so we have a big area to cover.

Caged · 2 Oct 2013 at 18:36

Woden said:
If there it's work for them to do it should be done by paid staff. Reducing unemployment.

All the way from page two. This is the crux of the whole thing - if you're just making busy-work for people to do then there is absolutely no benefit to it at all, except that people won't be able to take on voluntary work that actually does make a difference or perhaps trying to better themselves in other ways.

If streets need sweeping or graffiti needs cleaning then someone should be employed to do those tasks. And not on a zero hours contract.

FoxEye · 2 Oct 2013 at 19:51

Thompson_NCL said:
Germany is only 35% cheaper. Which may sound like a lot, but consider that most of their population lives in state housing. House ownership is very low. But British people want to own their own homes. The price of cheap rent is living in social housing... not an attractive option.

My line of thinking is that it's totally unfair to ask people to pay rent which amounts to 50% or more of their after-tax income. In my neck of the woods it's terrible - we have people from London coming down to buy up property, then renting it out to the locals at truly extortionate prices.

Seriously, a 1-up-1-down where I live is £500 - £800 pm. I take home £1k pm. If I wasn't living at home, I'd be living on the breadline. In fact I'd be *way* better off living on benefits.

If I ever have to move out and find my own place, the most sensible thing I could do would be to get fired, and start signing on.

If I had to pay rent down here I'd probably end up starving. And nobody in Westminster would care a jot.

Rroff · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:03

Nix said:
Whilst I agree I'd always much rather be working than claiming, it simply isn't true that overtime opportunities will always exist. It's far more likely you'll find yourself on a <30 hour contract without available overtime these days.

We don't start anyone (non-management) on full time contracts any more due to the current economy, etc. even though a good number will be doing over 30 hours a week. Which really isn't a way for people to live on :|

All the seasonal temps will be on IIRC 13-18 hour contracts rather than 25-40 hour contracts in the past.

estebanrey · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:11

Thompson_NCL said:
If I bought my house for £150k and the price shrinks to £140k, that is £10,000 lost. If it goes to £250k, I have notionally increase my personal wealth.

You do not apply to anything else you own do you? If you buy a brand new car for £20k, you lose around £4K as soon as you drive it off the forecourt. Even with second hand cars the extra owner depreciates the value but no one actively thinks that they've lost money, so why do it with a house?

Bear · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:25

estebanrey said:
You do not apply to anything else you own do you? If you buy a brand new car for £20k, you lose around £4K as soon as you drive it off the forecourt. Even with second hand cars the extra owner depreciates the value but no one actively thinks that they've lost money, so why do it with a house?

Probably because when it is time to remortgage, you have a lower LTV so may not be able to get as good a deal as before so costing you more.

nick.lidgett · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:39

I cant believe how much hate there is in these forums towards home owners and landlords.

estebanrey · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:45

Bear said:
Probably because when it is time to remortgage, you have a lower LTV so may not be able to get as good a deal as before so costing you more.

But why would you "re-mortgage"?

Infidelus · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:47

nick.lidgett said:
I cant believe how much hate there is in these forums towards home owners and landlords.

To a point I can understand it. For those on low wages that can't get on to the housing ladder, it's quite an annoyance, especially when you see others (not on here) bragging about buying a second home just to let.

On the other hand, fair play to those that have done well enough, but it's unlikely to win them any brownie points with those forced to rent or stay living with parents.

Bear · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:48

estebanrey said:
But why would you "re-mortgage"?

Because your current deal ran out ? Usually to save yourself some money or lock yourself in so you know how much you have to pay out every month.

FoxEye · 2 Oct 2013 at 20:54

nick.lidgett said:
I cant believe how much hate there is in these forums towards home owners and landlords.

Because of the fallacy that many spout (without thinking?) that they got what they have purely due to "their own hard work". Which is insulting to people who work hard for very little money, or simple couldn't buy a house before the market went mad.

Some people are good enough to acknowledge that they got lucky. Bought their house at the right time, when conditions were favourable. A lot of people who bought at the right time will tell you that they couldn't have afforded to do so at today's prices.

But sadly people who have financial security, own their own home, then think it's reasonable to buy more and more property for the purpose of profiting from others misfortune. Because that's what Buy-To-Let mostly is.

Azza · 2 Oct 2013 at 21:01

nick.lidgett said:
I cant believe how much hate there is in these forums towards home owners and landlords.

My parents rent two other houses out and in 3 years they'll have no mortgage(s) and will be retiring, my Dad will be 55.

Though I'm sure people on here will still bemoan them for doing that, even though my Dad has worked 12 hour shifts for the past 25 or so years. Hard work and being careful doesn't seem to count for a lot to quite a few people on here when it comes to buy to letting.