Sick of Unemployed People Getting abuse on

puffishoes

Gurgle wrote: »

But all of this is irrelevant really, the current system sets no conditions on how people spend their welfare.

If the system paid out the correctl levels of SW people wouldn't have a choice how to spend it.

daltonmd

Gurgle wrote: »

Most of the country has no useful public transport whatsoever. A car is a necessity.

Not if you cannot afford it Gurgle. That's the point. I mean ask people how they came to afford a car in the first place? They got the job first and then the car in most cases.

Gurgle wrote: »

The internet doesn't quite rate necessity, but its damn close.

Again it's down to affordibility.

Gurgle wrote: »

A TV is not, especially if you have internet access.
A big fancy new TV is an unnecessary luxury whatever way you look at it, as is a subscription to Sky / UPC.

Absolutely.

Gurgle wrote: »

But all of this is irrelevant really, the current system sets no conditions on how people spend their welfare.

No it doesn't. But there is an underlying issue here and that is what some people expect from the SW system. In an earlier post I said that it's not that people complain about SW being too low - it's that it doesn't ( and is not supposed) to cover a certain lifestyle that people had when they worked.

A lot of people had/have personal loans, car loans etc and when they meet these financial obligations, then they can barely live on the remainder.
So SW in a lot of cases is being used to repay credit card companies, car loans and the like. It's not that we should tell people how to spend their SW - it's up to individuals to prioritise what they need as opposed to what they'd like.

Tony EH

How does one find a job without access to a phone or the internet? They are absolutely essential instruments to getting a job these days. It's utterly ridiculous to slam people on welfare for wanting these items.

Also, the salient point is that there aren't enough jobs to go around for our unemployed people. That's really it in a nutshell. If there were the jobs out there, then the vast majority of people availing of social welfare now would be working. Most people haven't "lost" their jobs...their jobs lost them and if given the choice would happily be back in the situation they were in prior to having to go on the dole.

Ireland, I believe, has been officially recognised by the EU as being the hardest country within the union in which to get a job. I recall reading somewhere (but I cannot vouch for the accuracy) that in the first 6 months of 2011, 6000 job vacancies were made available in Ireland. That was go around the near 400.000 unemployed people that we have. If there's any truth in that maths, then the odds are very much against unemployed people genuinely seeking work and our government(s) don't seem to have the political will to try and do anything about it...to any real degree anyway. Fas and Jobsbridge are a joke and if that's what the powers that be have in mind as a remedy to the current jobs crisis, then the need to try harder. MUCH harder. Jobsbridge is an especially vile contraption and an example of government/employer cronyism at its worst, allowing employers to ditch paid (and tax paying) employees and bring in Jobsbridge interns and do the same job for free. It also allows the government to massage the "people in work" figures into more favorable terms for themselves. I personally know of one person who was let go from her job as a PA, only to hear that the week after, her job was filed by a Jobsbridge "intern".

I agree with the OP. I find it incredible that some people, both here on Boards and elsewhere have this fetid, little begrudging view that unemployed people are scroungers, or wasters and as I've said before, I hope those people get made redundant in the coming months, then find it hard or impossible to get a job and I guarantee you they'll be singing a very different tune.

Gumbo

Also a TV on its own is of no use to anybody nowadays, what with the digital switch over. So people need to either upgrade their TV's to a soarview equipped TV or invest in a soarview box/receiver.

puffishoes

Tony EH wrote: »

How does one find a job without access to a phone or the internet? They are absolutely essential instruments to getting a job these days. It's utterly ridiculous to slam people on welfare for wanting these items.

This has been covered in on a daily basis here. No one said not to have a phone they suggested a basic phone on basic package e.g. 20e a month free calls and texts etc.

For internet you can go to the local library the majority of these now have access to free wifi internet. you can also use wifi and the phone's and the FAS centre's all over the country.

If you happen to be the one in a million not near one. Cycle. will keep you fit and out of hospital. There is loads of ways to get around this. how do you think people managed before the Internet? It's essential to search for a job from your bed probably but it's not essential for job hunting.

Tony EH wrote: »

Also, the salient point is that there aren't enough jobs to go around for our unemployed people. That's really it in a nutshell. If there were the jobs out there, then the vast majority of people availing of social welfare now would be working. Most people haven't "lost" their jobs...their jobs lost them and if given the choice would happily be back in the situation they were in prior to having to go on the dole.

Well if we were not paying out 25%+ of GDP on SW maybe we could create some jobs instead?

Tony EH wrote: »

Ireland, I believe, has been officially recognised by the EU as being the hardest country within the union in which to get a job. I recall reading somewhere (but I cannot vouch for the accuracy) that in the first 6 months of 2011, 6000 job vacancies were made available in Ireland. That was go around the near 400.000 unemployed people that we have. If there's any truth in that maths, then the odds are very much against unemployed people genuinely seeking work and our government(s) don't seem to have the political will to try and do anything about it...to any real degree anyway. Fas and Jobsbridge are a joke and if that's what the powers that be have in mind as a remedy to the current jobs crisis, then the need to try harder. MUCH harder. Jobsbridge is an especially vile contraption and an example of government/employer cronyism at its worst, allowing employers to ditch paid (and tax paying) employees and bring in Jobsbridge interns and do the same job for free. It also allows the government to massage the "people in work" figures into more favorable terms for themselves. I personally know of one person who was let go from her job as a PA, only to hear that the week after, her job was filed by a Jobsbridge "intern".

Didn't read all this, we're creating about 1k job a week. a lot of the people on the SW at the moment are not qualified for these types of jobs a lot are in "IT" so mixing cement may not be of any use. This is why we need the current people on SW re-trained so we can meet the needs of these copanies coming in and providing jobs.

Tony EH wrote: »

I agree with the OP. I find it incredible that some people, both here on Boards and elsewhere have this fetid, little begrudging view that unemployed people are scroungers, or wasters and as I've said before, I hope those people get made redundant in the coming months, then find it hard or impossible to get a job and I guarantee you they'll be singing a very different tune.

I find it in incredible that people thread after thread won't educate themselves on the basics of our current economic situation read past posts before posting complete irrelevant tripe.

Sleepy

A car is a necessity that we must provide via welfare?

Jaysus, I must have been some fool working for 4 years to save up to buy my first one. All I needed to do was elect Gurgle and he'd have had the taxpayers give me one.

:rolleyes:

If you can't find work with your current qualifications (or lack thereof): upskill.

If you can't find work where you live: move.

There's no denying that there's less job positions available than there are people claiming welfare. Just as there's no denying that many of the vacancies that do exist are being filled from abroad because those who are on the welfare queues consider themselves to be above those jobs, those jobs not to pay enough to make it worth their while to work or they've refused to retrain in the misguided notion that we'll have a need for thousands of unskilled labourers again when the housing boom kicks off again.

The government cannot create jobs (outside of further bloating the public sector and that's not going to help anyone). They can create the environment to support job creation by reducing taxes on employment, reducing minimum wage, reducing welfare so that it's no longer the more lucrative option for some people, reducing the costs of the services it's semi-state bodies provide (e.g. power), reducing business rates etc.

Increasing their own expenditure is neither effective in a small, open economy with a high propensity to import and nor is it possible when we're committed to balancing our budgets in the medium term as a condition of the assistance that's being provided to our country by the troika. The previous administration tied their hands on the bank debts and even if they could renege on that portion of our sovereign debt, the current deficit is the much greater problem anyway.

We need to learn, both as individuals and as a country, to cut our cloth to fit our measure. We don't take in enough money to spend what we currently do on welfare. We can't increase the amount we're taking in much further without risking or outright destroying the productive parts of our economy which represent our only chance of slowly growing our way out of difficulty. As such, we need to cut our expenditure. When Welfare and the PS paybill combined account for the vast majority of that expenditure, there's little choice but to reduce spending in these areas.

Tony EH

puffishoes wrote: »

This has been covered in on a daily basis here. No one said not to have a phone they suggested a basic phone on basic package e.g. 20e a month free calls and texts etc.

For internet you can go to the local library the majority of these now have access to free wifi internet. you can also use wifi and the phone's and the FAS centre's all over the country.

If you happen to be the one in a million not near one. Cycle. will keep you fit and out of hospital. There is loads of ways to get around this. how do you think people managed before the Internet? It's essential to search for a job from your bed probably but it's not essential for job hunting.



Well if we were not paying out 25%+ of GDP on SW maybe we could create some jobs instead?



Didn't read all this, we're creating about 1k job a week. a lot of the people on the SW at the moment are not qualified for these types of jobs a lot are in "IT" so mixing cement may not be of any use. This is why we need the current people on SW re-trained so we can meet the needs of these copanies coming in and providing jobs.



I find it in incredible that people thread after thread won't educate themselves on the basics of our current economic situation read past posts before posting complete irrelevant tripe.

Your replies are tripe.

daltonmd

Tony EH wrote: »

How does one find a job without access to a phone or the internet? They are absolutely essential instruments to getting a job these days. It's utterly ridiculous to slam people on welfare for wanting these items.

One uses gods transport (yer feet), the phone issue has already been dealt with, the internet? Not a neccesity. Buy papers, go into internet shops, go to FAS, ise the tools that are already there. No-one is slamming anyone - just pointing out that SW is not for these items.

Tony EH wrote: »

Also, the salient point is that there aren't enough jobs to go around for our unemployed people. That's really it in a nutshell. If there were the jobs out there, then the vast majority of people availing of social welfare now would be working. Most people haven't "lost" their jobs...their jobs lost them and if given the choice would happily be back in the situation they were in prior to having to go on the dole.

I agree, so you can see the problem that we have. The longterm problem.

Tony EH wrote: »

Ireland, I believe, has been officially recognised by the EU as being the hardest country within the union in which to get a job.

Post a link or it's a meaningless statisic.

Tony EH wrote: »

Fas and Jobsbridge are a joke and if that's what the powers that be have in mind as a remedy to the current jobs crisis, then the need to try harder. MUCH harder. Jobsbridge is an especially vile contraption and an example of government/employer cronyism at its worst, allowing employers to ditch paid (and tax paying) employees and bring in Jobsbridge interns and do the same job for free. It also allows the government to massage the "people in work" figures into more favorable terms for themselves. I personally know of one person who was let go from her job as a PA, only to hear that the week after, her job was filed by a Jobsbridge "intern".

If that is happening then why didn't your pal report it? Or why didn't/doesn't the intern report it? I'm calling foul on it to be honest.

Personally if I was unemployed then I would take one of these internships to help myself, gain some experience and hopefully when the economy turns around then I may gain employment from it.

Tony EH wrote: »

I agree with the OP. I find it incredible that some people, both here on Boards and elsewhere have this fetid, little begrudging view that unemployed people are scroungers, or wasters and as I've said before, I hope those people get made redundant in the coming months, then find it hard or impossible to get a job and I guarantee you they'll be singing a very different tune.

Wishing that taxpayers lose their jobs just to "prove" a point? Nice.

The point is that we can't afford the SW system that we have. More should be done, no-one disputes that. But if SW isn't cut then taxpayers/essential service has to be.

Gurgle

Sleepy wrote: »

A car is a necessity that we must provide via welfare?

Jaysus, I must have been some fool working for 4 years to save up to buy my first one. All I needed to do was elect Gurgle and he'd have had the taxpayers give me one.

:rolleyes:

Oh come on, way out of context.

If you're not in walking or local bus (hah) distance of supermarket & schools (depending on your needs obviously), a car is a necessity.

Elect me and I'll remove the necessity, not provide the car.

Gurgle

puffishoes wrote: »

If the system paid out the correctl levels of SW people wouldn't have a choice how to spend it.

If the system paid out SW in the form of appropriate vouchers, then that money would be guaranteed to stay in circulation within our economy instead of ending up in the hands of American / German / Japanese multinationals.

If the system changed from welfare to community employment at minimum wage, I wonder how many people would 'discover' that they actually weren't available for 20 hours per week.

If welfare was cut by 20%, we'd be close to breaking even straight away. And that's before we take into account people who suddenly realized they could find a job after all.

If anyone in the D`ail had the nuts to tackle the welfare issue... If we could export 'if's...

daltonmd

Gurgle wrote: »

Oh come on, way out of context.

If you're not in walking or local bus (hah) distance of supermarket & schools (depending on your needs obviously), a car is a necessity.

Elect me and I'll remove the necessity, not provide the car.

Is movng closer to towns in order to counter this obstacle not an option? Ok, I get if you have kids and they are in schools - but if you don't?

I mean a lot of the jobs we lost were in construction in rural towns across Ireland, these jobs are not coming back and finding replacement industries is also not an option in the short to mid term.

So people who can move need to weigh up the option of staying in a rural area, with no prospects of employment with moving to towns where there may be some.

daltonmd

Gurgle wrote: »

If the system paid out SW in the form of appropriate vouchers, then that money would be guaranteed to stay in circulation within our economy instead of ending up in the hands of American / German / Japanese multinationals.

Oh, like butter vouchers? I remember them being swapped in shops for cigarettes. lol, there'll be a "black market" a very lucrative one created in minutes.

Count Dooku

daltonmd wrote: »

Oh, like butter vouchers? I remember them being swapped in shops for cigarettes. lol, there'll be a "black market" a very lucrative one created in minutes.

This is why electronic food stamps cards been invented
http://www.ebtproject.ca.gov/

Tony EH

daltonmd wrote: »

Post a link or it's a meaningless statisic.

This is akin to "tits, or GTFO". I.e. not helpful.

daltonmd wrote: »

If that is happening then why didn't your pal report it? Or why didn't/doesn't the intern report it? I'm calling foul on it to be honest.

Assuming that "may pal" wished to go through the hassle of what reporting such an incident intails, she would then have to deal with the fallout of such an action. Your pat answer, again, isn't helpful. Also, more than likely her protestations would fall on deaf ears, or little would be done about it. Into the bargain, she is reliant on her former employer for references for her next position.

Simplistic off the cuff remarks like "why didn't she report it" utterly fail to take into account the ramifications of such action upon the person making the complaint.

In addition, the person on teh Jobsbridge scheme isn't going to report the incident and risk shooting herself in the foot either, is she.

daltonmd wrote: »

Wishing that taxpayers lose their jobs just to "prove" a point? Nice.

I'm sure there are plenty of people on the dole now that once shared the same petty opinions that some are expressing both here on Boards and elsewhere. It's too easy for loudmouths to sit and gripe about the 400 000 dole scroungers and how cutting their social welfare would make Irealnd "great" again. I'd wager a great deal of them change their opinions, once the reality of surviving on the dole is brought home to them, when they themselves are chucked out of their job.

daltonmd wrote: »

The point is that we can't afford the SW system that we have. More should be done, no-one disputes that. But if SW isn't cut then taxpayers/essential service has to be.

No, the point is that cutting peoples social welfare won't do anything to create jobs and moaning about people on the dole is just petty.

The social welfare system needs overhauling and reconstruction, not blanket cutting, which will only serve to make life harder for people who are already finding it difficult. But that overhaul will take time and management. Something that our governing bodies are particularly bad at, as has been proven time and time again.

Our country has a long history of not being able to generate jobs for its citizens and that doesn't seem to be in the process of changing in the future. There is and has been a lack of political will to engender the environment to create work the country.

ChRoMe

Tony EH wrote: »

This is akin to "tits, or GTFO". I.e. not helpful.

Its perfectly reasonable to request someone cite the source for the facts/statistics they are quoting.

Tony EH

Aye, perhaps. But a flippant "it's meaningless" doesn't do anything.

I've said I can't vouch for the accuracy. But I did read it somewhere and people can either take it on board or not.

Either way, the main point remains the same. There aren't enough jobs for the people already on welfare and government lacks the will, power or basic interest in remedying that problem and a blanket cut of social welfare won't help that situatution one iota.

And begrudgers moaning about "dole scroungers" is tiresome in the extreme.

ChRoMe

Tony EH wrote: »

And begrudgers moaning about "dole scroungers" is tiresome in the extreme.

Indeed, the class war is alive and well in Ireland. The venom towards the more unfortunate in Irish society is depressing.

EchoO

Sleepy wrote: »

There's no denying that there's less job positions available than there are people claiming welfare. Just as there's no denying that many of the vacancies that do exist are being filled from abroad because those who are on the welfare queues consider themselves to be above those jobs, those jobs not to pay enough to make it worth their while to work or they've refused to retrain in the misguided notion that we'll have a need for thousands of unskilled labourers again when the housing boom kicks off again.

You seem to be denying the extent to which the number of unemployed people exceed job vacancies though. The ratio is 26:1. Can you supply any evidence to support your undeniable assertion that low paid employment is being turned down by Irish nationals in large numbers? I can't seem to find any.

So those who live in an area where they can't find a job should move? (echos of Norman Tebbitt) There are around 16,800 job vacancies and 436,700 unemployed. Where exactly are the other 419,900 going to move to? How many people can the Irish educational/vocational training system upskill in a year? At a guess, a fraction of the 436,700.

sarumite

daltonmd wrote: »

One uses gods transport (yer feet), the phone issue has already been dealt with, the internet? Not a neccesity. Buy papers, go into internet shops, go to FAS, ise the tools that are already there. No-one is slamming anyone - just pointing out that SW is not for these items.

I don't think I could find a job in my field without regular internet access if I had to. Most employers in my area either use online applications forms or emails for recruitment. Most (if not all) solely advertise online (or in expensive professional journals) and Fas is useless for anything specialised. I actually don't know where the nearest internet shop is, and by the time I paid for the travel to get there and used their computers to do the research etc for the particular role and filled out the forms the cost would probably close to the same as having internet at home.

Sleepy

Gurgle wrote: »

Oh come on, way out of context.

If you're not in walking or local bus (hah) distance of supermarket & schools (depending on your needs obviously), a car is a necessity.

Elect me and I'll remove the necessity, not provide the car.

How? Provision of public transport regardless of the cost? State-run shops in areas too remote to support private ones? People need to accept that the cost of the cheap house and beautiful environment of country living is low level of public services imo.

Gurgle wrote: »

If the system paid out SW in the form of appropriate vouchers, then that money would be guaranteed to stay in circulation within our economy instead of ending up in the hands of American / German / Japanese multinationals.

Not really since so much of the food and other goods in our supermarkets are imported. It might help a little and would could certainly be used to attempt to force those who drink and smoke their children's allowance to take better care of themselves and their offspring but ultimately, the black market would end up being a factor

If the system changed from welfare to community employment at minimum wage, I wonder how many people would 'discover' that they actually weren't available for 20 hours per week.

Agree entirely.

Count Dooku wrote: »

This is why electronic food stamps cards been invented
http://www.ebtproject.ca.gov/

Even then, half our food is imported so the money still leaves the country (not to mention the profits of the supermarkets). We live in a globalised world, protectionism isn't the answer although I still believe we should try to buy Irish where we can.

Tony EH wrote: »

I'm sure there are plenty of people on the dole now that once shared the same petty opinions that some are expressing both here on Boards and elsewhere. It's too easy for loudmouths to sit and gripe about the 400 000 dole scroungers and how cutting their social welfare would make Irealnd "great" again. I'd wager a great deal of them change their opinions, once the reality of surviving on the dole is brought home to them, when they themselves are chucked out of their job.

No, the point is that cutting peoples social welfare won't do anything to create jobs and moaning about people on the dole is just petty.

This isn't moaning or begrudging: it's simple fact. We do not have the ability to continue spending borrowed money to pay welfare rates that are extremely generous by comparison to any other European country. I had to live on it myself for 3 months after being made redundant in 2010 and, while no, it wasn't pleasant, I don't believe it should have been: I wasn't contributing to society therefore I didn't deserve any more than the bare essentials from it.

Cutting social welfare would create employment as it would make it cheaper for employers to add an extra member of staff to their team: when you're competing against welfare rates that can leave a man better off on welfare than working in a job that pays anything less than 40k* it's hard to hire extra staff if your profit levels can only support paying minimum wage.

(*based on my own situation - co-habiting in a rented house with a stay-at-home partner and two kids, luckily for me my education and career choices mean I can earn a little more than that)

The social welfare system needs overhauling and reconstruction, not blanket cutting, which will only serve to make life harder for people who are already finding it difficult. But that overhaul will take time and management. Something that our governing bodies are particularly bad at, as has been proven time and time again.

Our country has a long history of not being able to generate jobs for its citizens and that doesn't seem to be in the process of changing in the future. There is and has been a lack of political will to engender the environment to create work the country.

But you're railing against one of the means the government has at it's disposal to help create employment. I'd take it you'd similarly rail against lowering minimum wage? Against removing the unions?

I agree that the welfare system needs a total overhaul. I don't think it would be that difficult to alter rates in a fashion that made sense, however. The blanket cut for all under 25's was very unfair: it should have been a cut for anyone living under their parents roof or being provided with accommodation by a 3rd party.

Rates could be cut according to new delineations with the publication of a budget. The DOSP unions might have a fit but **** them: they need to start doing their job properly or be replaced by those the other side of the counter who can do them better.

puffishoes

EchoO wrote: »

You seem to be denying the extent to which the number of unemployed people exceed job vacancies though. The ratio is 26:1. Can you supply any evidence to support your undeniable assertion that low paid employment is being turned down by Irish nationals in large numbers? I can't seem to find any.

So those who live in an area where they can't find a job should move? (echos of Norman Tebbitt) There are around 16,800 job vacancies and 436,700 unemployed. Where exactly are the other 419,900 going to move to? How many people can the Irish educational/vocational training system upskill in a year? At a guess, a fraction of the 436,700.

Of the 436k+ unemployed a huge amount of which have came from the construction and related industries.

Now we won't be creating a hundreds of thousands of job in this sector anytime soon. But we're at late 90's levels by creating on average 1k jobs a week. as i said earlier, this is no good to people who's expireince is building walls or mixing cement.

people who are on the live register need to up skill. these construction jobs are NOT returning, so all the leccy's and brickies and chippy's etc waiting on the side lines who are not qualified to take on the new jobs need to re-train.

what are your ideas? up their SW and let them sit it out for 20 years untill the good times come back?

Someone can do an A+ and start on the bottom of the ladder in IT in a matter of weeks for example.

There's a number of problems.

Some won't go and work what they regard as menial jobs for min wage

Some want to wait it out till they get a job in their field.

Some are just down right useless at looking for work as their used to it landing on their door step.

some don't see it worthwhile as the dole payments are so high it's not worth their while

there's a never ending amount of different circumstances, but the fact is if we reduce SW to the basic level it removes this choice.

while spending 25%+ of GDP on SW we can't invest in job generation.

Count Dooku

Tony EH wrote: »

No, the point is that cutting peoples social welfare won't do anything to create jobs and moaning about people on the dole is just petty.

Why unemployment fell in Germany, when they reduced benefits for long term unemployed in 2005(Hartz IV)?

Count Dooku

Sleepy wrote: »

Even then, half our food is imported so the money still leaves the country (not to mention the profits of the supermarkets). We live in a globalised world, protectionism isn't the answer although I still believe we should try to buy Irish where we can.

At least half spent on grocery will stay here, because for other consumer goods percent of import is much higher

Gurgle

Can you link to source please Dooku, I'd like to see the details.

daltonmd

Count Dooku wrote: »

This is why electronic food stamps cards been invented
http://www.ebtproject.ca.gov/

Looks good - but the reality is that any new system would take years. So in the meantime we have to deal with the system in place.

EchoO

Count Dooku wrote: »

Why unemployment fell in Germany, when they reduced benefits for long term unemployed in 2005(Hartz IV)?

That's hardly comparing like with like. Reducing benefits is not going to increase the number of jobs being created in the economy or reduce the dole queues.

Count Dooku

Gurgle wrote: »

Can you link to source please Dooku, I'd like to see the details.

Hartz IV - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartz_concept
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,5221558,00.html

unemployment - http://www.google.ie/publicdata/explore?ds=z8o7pt6rd5uqa6_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:de&fdim_y=seasonality:sa&dl=en&hl=en&q=germany+unemployment

puffishoes

EchoO wrote: »

That's hardly comparing like with like. Reducing benefits is not going to increase the number of jobs being created in the economy or reduce the dole queues.

It increases the amount of money we have to invest in job creation....


Reducing benefits also puts people in a position where there more than likely to take lower paid jobs if they want to maintain their sky and ntl subs etc.

It increases the amount of money we have to invest in job creation....



It increases the amount of money we have to invest in job creation....

Count Dooku

EchoO wrote: »

That's hardly comparing like with like. Reducing benefits is not going to increase the number of jobs being created in the economy or reduce the dole queues.

It forcing unemployed take jobs for less rather than stay on dole
BTW, immigration is far from zero and lot of low paid jobs had been taken by immigrants
http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Topics/PPSN/Pages/ppsn_all_month12.aspx
http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Topics/PPSN/Pages/ppsn_all_month11.aspx
This is why Germany protected own labour market as part of welfare reform

Laminations

EchoO wrote: »

That's hardly comparing like with like. Reducing benefits is not going to increase the number of jobs being created in the economy or reduce the dole queues.

Well reducing spending might allow monies otherwise eaten up by welfare by siphoned into a capital expenditure / stimulus program and help create the circumstances and opportunity for job creation.