Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by TheCenturion, Apr 11, 2009.
To be honest, I don't understand the idea of making "voluntary work" compulsary.
It'd make more sense to promote the ability to do so whilst at school and sixth form (i.e. the school gives a large degree of help to getting those interested involved) rather than attempting to force anyone; it takes the 'charity' element out of it and merely becomes a form of forced labour.
If they did the former, I imagine it may help society in terms of its perspective and altruism. The latter I feel (that is, what they have suggested) will only be detrimental or at worst, counter-productive.
To me, this seems like it's just half way to a new national service.
compulsory == slavery
Which is probably why Gordon Brown has described it as "compulsory community service", leaving it to the sensationalist media to describe it as "voluntary"
I suspect that many working people consider it as slavery when they have to fund the drunken excesses of workshy chavs.
Speaking as someone that had already done 50 hours of community work before I was even 16 how about a big No. You do not get to dictate what my child does thank you very much.
Ridiculous! It's just the same as having two weeks work experience on the national curriculum.
as said it's pretty much the same as work experience. It's not like 5 hours every week. Don't see it as a good or bad step.
They should have chain gangs for trouble making kids at weekend. With 24hour prison sentences for parents.
This won't be a good thing. People do charity work because they want to, not have to. Making kids do something that they really don't want to will just end up causing havoc...
You wouldn't want to employ someone that doesn't want to be there, they'll just do a crap job. Same thing will happen here...
I love this kind of generalisation. Essentially, all kids have to suffer because of a few old people's narrow-minded stereotype of "chavs" and the blanket association applied to all youths that comes with it plus the idea that only teenagers are the one's getting drunk and causing all the havoc.
Don't we already have this? I think we do. It's called Compulsary Work Experience.
I can't believe our PM can be this daft.
could be good.....promote some sense of community value etc.
then again it could be viewed by the youth as just another thing to try and get out of at school. You can definitely see this as another Gordon Brown initiative to get the Tory vote.
I think calling it slavery is a little odd though....especially considering that the whole ethos of school isn't exactly freedom of choice.
Suffer, what do you mean suffer?
Poor lambs, they will probably need counselling if they are to have any hope of leading a normal life without resorting to a life destroyed by the demon drink.
Most of the governments ideas are good in theory but they tend to fail when you apply them to the realities of our society today.
Im not entirely convinced that a bunch of kids that dont want to work at school ( which is compulsory) and dont turn up to school all the time are going to suddenly turn into little worker bees when faced with charity work.
On the other hand, maybe they should make them all go and work in the E.R on a saturday night and work at a drug rehab clinic in the week. That might actually do some good.
Why do people on here suddenly puff out their chests when someone tells their kids they are going to have to do something they dont like. That IS Life and the sooner some people learn the better. No one wants to pay taxes but we have to so that lazy ***** can mooch off the system. If everyone actually looked at the bigger picture and the happiness of others a little more often then the world might be a better place.
So basically unpaid work.
Theres a reason why people are paid wages. It allocates the best skilled individuals to their best roles. If the government feels that given charities deserve certain individuals then they should be able to pay for it and the government should fund it. If in reality these cases are only worth it if they can get free employees then they should be run on a completely voluntary basis where they only offer a job satisfaction.
Why are kids any different then adults as far as work is concerned? Why should they be forced to work? Secondly those saying, but school is compulsory. It is compulsory and is funded via taxation on a value for money basis. If schools were crap, I guarantee that the electorate wouldn't be happy spending taxes on a useless system. A compulsory work scheme has no gauge to measure it. There is no value for money proposition, and therefore is likely to be a hugely innefficient system. If there is a return to labour then they should be paid (efficient wage). If there are external benefits (very dubious and hence shouldn't be done) to this scheme the they should actually be paid more i.e. subsidy. A zero wage is simply a huge distortion.
Hardly, work experience is to educate the child for their benefit, this is forced labour of adults (note "before they reach 19") for the governments benefit, importantly however you aren't actually legally made to do any work on work experience, what is being suggested here is a system where there would be legal consequences of not doing the work. I'm just glad that labour won't be re-elected, yet another nail in the coffin for them tbh.
What exactly has this got to do with drinking btw? Or is the thought behind this just some blanket legislation to deal with kids that cause trouble? What about those kids that don't cause trouble? A couple of weeks community work is hardly going to instill community values on troublemaking kids and is going to do little for those that aren't troublesome.
I would tend to disagree, quite a few of their ideas aren't even good in theory.
Why? Why the rush to force kids into adulthood? If the government is going to force my child to do something I would like to see what the benefits are, I am not really seeing what this scheme is meant to acheive other than win some votes from the "Bring back National Service" brigade. Do you have kids?
Dont Germany enforce either national service or community service for a few years?
should just force them into the army for a year or two once they leave school
That's my understanding. But then they have National Service and we don't. If you look at any of the stories of people who have done NS, it's just an extension of school bullying for another two years. If you were a bully at school, you'll be one on NS; if you were a victim at school, NS will be hell. And at the end, instead of a load of thugs, you'll just have a load fit thugs who know how to kill people - it's far too late to be instilling civil virtues in people: that needs to be done from the age of about four onwards.
This is a silly idea designed, as RDM says, to appeal to the people who think NS is a good idea.
Yes because that is just what the army wants, thousands of short term soliders that really don't want to be there!
Separate names with a comma.