Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Sick of Unemployed People Getting abuse on
Options
Comments
-
Yet we still pay for the banks bailouts and to keep the banks active. We should do it for banks and bondholders but not for fellow Irish people who are baring the brunt of the banks action (inaction) but not for actual real people?
We're all baring the brunt. The last government chose banks over people and unfortunately that cannot be reversed.
It has to be accepted that some people have such levels of unsustainable debt that the only option for them is bankruptcy.
Of course I accept (and have posted many times on different forums) that those who can be saved, should be and every help should be given to them, by way of mortgage debt write down.
By this I mean that if someone bought a house during the boom for 300k and it's worth 150k, if they can service a 150k mortgage then all avenues should be walked to help them.
But for those who cannot do this then I'm afraid there's only one option available.
For those that live in million dollar pads, well then they should lose those homes and move into homes more suitable to what they can now afford.
At the end of the day, whle we all acknowledge that the banks were reckless, people have to realise that they too took on high levels of borrowing. At some point we have to stop fully blaming the banks for our woes,we are, in part responsible for the mess we are in.
All efforts should be made to help people start again - but the line has to be drawn on making deals to keep people in homes that they should never have bought in the first place and never be in a postiion to service.0 -
Sorry but I'm not going to put much credibility in a withdrawn ESRI report, or well, any report from an organization with the ESRI's reputation.It seems like a valid enough point, given some analysis in the recent (controversial withdrawn) ESRI report:
The Costs of Working in Ireland0 -
If you think through your logic: The ESRI had the report withdrawn with a flimsy excuse about not following proper publication procedure, but its the ESRI you don't trust.KyussBishop wrote: »Sorry but I'm not going to put much credibility in a withdrawn ESRI report, or well, any report from an organization with the ESRI's reputation.
Ergo there must be some truth in the report
0 -
KyussBishop wrote: »So you're saying these people should not be given as much welfare money as they are, yes? In what way do you propose to do that?KyussBishop wrote: »No, I am saying people cannot maintain mortgages and debt in the same way that they did when they worked out of SW. Are you saying that SW should be increased to help people do this? Should SW pay a mortgage?KyussBishop wrote: »You will need to get figures and show a breakdown of, lets say, the number of people getting more than 20k on welfare, and show that that is a significant percentage of welfare recipients, otherwise the argument has absolutely no backing.
It's as much backing as yours, where's your breakdown? It has also been said that we are not talking about the JSA, there are many associated costs attached to JSA as you well know. The report focussed on families, not single people.KyussBishop wrote: »What did the boom do?
All high wages is doing is keeping the hamster on the wheel - and I would rather see incomes slashed directly - then indirectly as this government is doing. Do you not see that? Water charges, property taxes, higher utilties, higher taxes - it's in with one hand and out with the other all the while the troika still look on and say - "your wages and SW are too high".KyussBishop wrote: »They will, because the number of people buying their stuff will decrease
Value of their stock? So what? Companies will do what they have to do and if you look at the cost of shopping (sorry mod I think this is important), the Consumer agency did a survey on out top retailers and found a 3.4% price difference in the shopping baskets, what does this show - price fixing - everyone "matching" everyone else but no-one chheaper - do you know what Tesco call Ireland? "Treasure Island" they never release their profits from here, they lump it in with the UK ones.
There's plenty of scope for every industry in this country to reduce costs - but as long as we keep paying then they won't.KyussBishop wrote: »Also, what is going to happen to people on mortgages?
I beleive that in some cases mortgage debt write down has to be used. I have posted extensively on this issue. I don't beleive that if people are struggling because of paycuts that they should be let swing. I really don't. As I already said, if someone can service a mortgage of equal value to their homes now then they should be helped.KyussBishop wrote: »So you see, cutting wages has a lot of knock on effects
It's all artificial though. Keep wages high to service high debt, keep wages high to pay over the odds for ESB/GAS shopping. We don't beneifit from this - we lose.KyussBishop wrote: »So you would be happy to let people go homeless and significantly escalate debt defaults, causing further harm to the economy? That's a great plan.
I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth, I have no problem discussing the issue with you, but you lose any credibility when you behave like this. Debt default is going to happen, it is happening, all the banks have managed to do is kick the can down the road. Homelessness won't happen. But as I said, there are some people who will ne be saved and we can't escape that fact.KyussBishop wrote: »What do you propose the family do when they forcelose? Start renting? Oh look the money's going to a landlord now instead of a bank, and the family have effectively lost every cent they put into their mortgage, years of their lives working.
I think if you ask a lot of people if they would hand back the keys and have their debt written off - they would jump on it. Happliy rent, get back on their feet and start again with no massive debt?KyussBishop wrote: »Don't want rent being subsidized? Well I guess they'll have to be homeless then, and forget about the idea of even having a place to live until jobs become available.
Never said that - again putting words into my mouth.KyussBishop wrote: »So effectively, it's either pump the money into debt repayments, or into rent payments, or just force people out of their current accomodation.
Yes. That's it in a nutshell. But it should read:
Either subsidize bank debt
Or house people on social housing.
Where do you see homelessness there?0 -
johnnyskeleton wrote: »Would you consider a comment such as:
"the system makes not working more lucrative than working and is easier, thereby discoraging people from wanting to work"
as being abuse towards the unemployed people? I think the point most people make is that the system makes long term unemployed people less willing to get a job.
Completely irrelevant in an economic environment where there is a chronic shortage of jobs!!
The implication is that everyone who is unemployed could find a job provided they wanted one badly enough.
There are over 130 million people unemployed throughout Europe. Willingness to work is not the cause.0 -
Advertisement
-
Whatever the views expressed on this forum, signs are that the EC would like to see reform of our social welfare system ...... but progress has been very slow so far.
The Irish Independent reported on 27th June that the European Commission criticised aspects of the social welfare system, “as it okayed the payment of €2.3bn in the next instalment of our bailout. While there have been some reductions in welfare payment, "some further calibration of benefits by either age or duration of unemployment might have to be considered." (http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ec-criticises-croke-park-deal-and-welfare-system-3151578.html).
Issues considered by the EU in coming to its decision to OK this instalment of the bailout were covered in the European Commission’s “Economic Adjustment Programme for Ireland, Spring 2012 Review”.
Page 19 of this paper, under Structural Reforms, states:
“The Department of Social Protection has submitted a report to Government outlining a comprehensive programme of reforms that can help better target social support payments to those with lower incomes, and reduce any disincentive to take up work/training, including the proposed introduction of the single working age assistance payment.”
(http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/pdf/ocp96_en.pdf)
Minister for Social Protection, Joan Bruton, answering questions on “The single working age assistance payment” in the Dail on 12th June 2012, concluded that “the Department of Social Protection, through an interdepartmental group, is working to assess what services and supports would be required to support the introduction of a single payment, should it be decided to proceed with its introduction” (http://www.kildarestreet.com/debate/?id=2012-06-12.39.6).0 -
-
No, I think if it's more than is needed considering the cost of living, it should be reduced; if at a proper cost of living adjusted payment level, and with well adjusted means tests, people are frugal enough to manageably pay off part of their debt with their payments, that's their sacrifice.daltonmd wrote:No, I am saying people cannot maintain mortgages and debt in the same way that they did when they worked out of SW. Are you saying that SW should be increased to help people do this? Should SW pay a mortgage?
The burden of proof is on one making the claims, and their hasn't been a reputable statement of figures outlining the number of people on welfare who are in the situation of being overpaid and better off not working, like you claim.daltonmd wrote:It's as much backing as yours, where's your breakdown? It has also been said that we are not talking about the JSA, there are many associated costs attached to JSA as you well know. The report focussed on families, not single people.
The country has an enormous sovereign debt to pay so taxes are going up no matter what; slashing wages just like that, with no forethought or additional planning or preparatory measures, is short sighted and in the manner described in my previous posts, does plenty of harm and not much good.daltonmd wrote:All high wages is doing is keeping the hamster on the wheel - and I would rather see incomes slashed directly - then indirectly as this government is doing. Do you not see that? Water charges, property taxes, higher utilties, higher taxes - it's in with one hand and out with the other all the while the troika still look on and say - "your wages and SW are too high".
Interesting if so, and right, yes, the solution there is reform in that particular industry including potential regulation to make pricing more transparent.daltonmd wrote:Value of their stock? So what? Companies will do what they have to do and if you look at the cost of shopping (sorry mod I think this is important), the Consumer agency did a survey on out top retailers and found a 3.4% price difference in the shopping baskets, what does this show - price fixing - everyone "matching" everyone else but no-one chheaper - do you know what Tesco call Ireland? "Treasure Island" they never release their profits from here, they lump it in with the UK ones.
There's plenty of scope for every industry in this country to reduce costs - but as long as we keep paying then they won't.
Now, when all the companies bordering on going out of business or having a hard time, see their stocks reduce in value, that's going to have a knock on effect which causes further damage to the economy, and which reduced wages won't account for.
Okey, while I agree here, these writedowns would have to come first before any wage cuts, otherwise it will be pushing a lot of people into an unsustainable position.daltonmd wrote:I beleive that in some cases mortgage debt write down has to be used. I have posted extensively on this issue. I don't beleive that if people are struggling because of paycuts that they should be let swing. I really don't. As I already said, if someone can service a mortgage of equal value to their homes now then they should be helped.
Right and the solution is not to solely cut wages, because the high cost of all these other areas will lag behind the wage cuts, massively harming people economically and increasing inequality.daltonmd wrote:It's all artificial though. Keep wages high to service high debt, keep wages high to pay over the odds for ESB/GAS shopping. We don't beneifit from this - we lose.
The solution is to deal with all those other problems in their own right, reform these various industries and get rid of impediments which are keeping the costs high, and then gradually (not immediately) reduce wages in a sustainable way.
Okey apologies, I do sometimes draw conclusions without realizing I'm putting words in peoples mouths; I think, as said earlier, a wide ranging debt writedown is the very first thing needed before looking at any cuts that are going to be affecting debt repayments. The can needs to be kicked down the road a little longer, and drawn out a time, to get some performance on those debts, and to keep people from foreclosing and losing homes.daltonmd wrote:I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth, I have no problem discussing the issue with you, but you lose any credibility when you behave like this. Debt default is going to happen, it is happening, all the banks have managed to do is kick the can down the road. Homelessness won't happen. But as I said, there are some people who will ne be saved and we can't escape that fact.
There's both an economic and social cost to short-term solutions, so any changes need to be drawn out a bit more gradually, in line with the deficit targets.
People want an end to crippling debt, but I'm pretty certain they don't want that; how many years of their lives will have been wasted servicing that mortgage, to end up with nothing to show for it in the end?daltonmd wrote:I think if you ask a lot of people if they would hand back the keys and have their debt written off - they would jump on it. Happliy rent, get back on their feet and start again with no massive debt?
Writing off debt is not the same as defaulting on it; a mortgage is an investment, and if you default on it you lose all that you have invested in it. They need a writedown not a default/foreclosure.
Well my point is the money previously going into bank debt is still going somewhere, so there's not necessarily less being spent of public money, and when you force people off of their mortgage, they lose whatever invested value they have in that (even if that value was previously inflated, deflating when house prices went down, there is still an investment/value there).daltonmd wrote:Yes. That's it in a nutshell. But it should read:
Either subsidize bank debt
Or house people on social housing.
Where do you see homelessness there?0 -
KyussBishop wrote: »No, I think if it's more than is needed considering the cost of living, it should be reduced; if at a proper cost of living adjusted payment level, and with well adjusted means tests, people are frugal enough to manageably pay off part of their debt with their payments, that's their sacrifice.
Firstly I'm not making any claims, secondly, the sovereign debt isn't the immediate problem, if we got rid of the banking debt then we'd still have a massive deficit that has to be closed. That's the reality. Even todays good news in Brussels changes nothing. Yes it's great if we beneift from it - but we are still a high earning/high SW rate society and we can't afford to be that way.0 -
If you think through your logic: The ESRI had the report withdrawn with a flimsy excuse about not following proper publication procedure, but its the ESRI you don't trust.
Ergo there must be some truth in the report
surely if an author doesn't follow proper publication procedure the publication in question should be withdrawn until the proper procedure has been adhered to? Whats the point of having a procedure if not?0 -
Advertisement
-
Firstly I'm not making any claims, secondly, the sovereign debt isn't the immediate problem, if we got rid of the banking debt then we'd still have a massive deficit that has to be closed. That's the reality. Even todays good news in Brussels changes nothing. Yes it's great if we beneift from it - but we are still a high earning/high SW rate society and we can't afford to be that way.
I agree that we can't afford the high cost of Social Welfare but, unfortunately, Minister Joan Burton sees the answer as higher PRSI contributions for employees and employers: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/burton-defies-diktat-with-comment-on-tax-policy-3154827.html.
I'd prefer if she concentrated on reducing the costs of her department rather than pursuing the easy route of screwing the taxpayer even more.0 -
I think the German system makes a lot more sense. You pay into unemployment insurance which you get paid as long as you have money to take out of it; then if you run out you get a very low amount of social protection. They also have much better systems to ensure that people are actually looking for work. For example, while you're on the unemployment insurance for the first 6-12 months (can't remember exactly) you don't have to take any job offered to you if it is not at least an equal level or pay as your previous job. After that you are obliged to take something that is in your skillset but may not be as well paid or as high up.0
-
I agree in principle, but I somehow doubt this cost of living report will be published without some major re-work by spin doctors.surely if an author doesn't follow proper publication procedure the publication in question should be withdrawn until the proper procedure has been adhered to? Whats the point of having a procedure if not?0 -
golfwallah wrote: »I agree that we can't afford the high cost of Social Welfare but, unfortunately, Minister Joan Burton sees the answer as higher PRSI contributions for employees and employers: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/burton-defies-diktat-with-comment-on-tax-policy-3154827.html.
I'd prefer if she concentrated on reducing the costs of her department rather than pursuing the easy route of screwing the taxpayer even more.
100% agree - as I said they are still trying to look at ways of sustaining the high wages & SW bill, instead of getting to the root of the problem. All Joanie is doing is playing pass the fkn parcel.0 -
Why is it that people always abuse the unemployed anyway i have a feeling the people that are saying the social welfare is to generous are the same people that would be on here crying that it is not enough for them to survive on if they ever had to live on it. And also what is up with this free housing lark no one lives in a house for free they pay rent just like anybody else that is in private accommodation, Everyone bitching about single parents getting pregnant just because they get so much money what babies are that cheap are they ?i know people that struggle to make ends meet that have jobs let alone people that are making e217 a week. I personally think there should be one week a year where the whole country has to live on benefits just to show everyone that is not easy sure the amount of money people receive would be generous if the cost of living was any way cheap but its really not. Personally do not have a job but id love one i send around cvs everywhere i can on a daily basis so far not one interview in over a year so do you want me to starve until i find a job ? Life is hard enough on e100 euro a week without everyone putting me down because sorry i am a human being and think i deserve to live weather on benefits or through employment, You can all say oh hes spending my taxes and yes i am and when i find a job i will hopefully start to pay back all the money the state has given me through paying my taxes,
Rant over sorry about the bad grammar0 -
Oh and one other thing i would gladly take food vouchers over money because that's all i use my money for well sorry your money0
-
100% agree - as I said they are still trying to look at ways of sustaining the high wages & SW bill, instead of getting to the root of the problem. All Joanie is doing is playing pass the fkn parcel.
Agreed - looks like she is looking for the easy way out!
And I'd also like to see more being done by the Minister along the lines outlined by FreudianSlippers to set up "better systems to ensure that people are actually looking for work".
She would be better implementing the changes needed to achieve the spending cuts to ensure our economic survival (as per cuts called for by Labour Leader, Eamon Gilmore, last year):http://www.thejournal.ie/expect-further-public-spending-cuts-says-gilmore-168489-Jul2011/0 -
golfwallah wrote: »Agreed - looks like she is looking for the easy way out!
And I'd also like to see more being done by the Minister along the lines outlined by FreudianSlippers to set up "better systems to ensure that people are actually looking for work".
She would be better implementing the changes needed to achieve the spending cuts to ensure our economic survival (as per cuts called for by Labour Leader, Eamon Gilmore, last year):http://www.thejournal.ie/expect-further-public-spending-cuts-says-gilmore-168489-Jul2011/
I'm getting a bit sick of this attitude that we have hundreds of thousands of welfare queens on our hands. In 2008 we had an unemployment rate of 4.8%; unemployment primarily caused by churn, not by a huge population of leeches. Do you honestly believe that the people added to social welfare since 2008 are just sitting around watching TV and not bothering to look for work?
There aren't any jobs, face it. The only sectors with a reasonable number of open positions are ones like I.T, finance and multi-lingual service centers. These are not available to most of the people who are newly out of work and, as has been shown previously in this thread, systems like FAS can actually decrease one's likelihood of gaining employment.
Maybe instead of bitching about people on social welfare, you should look to get paid more in your own job. Large companies are sitting on more money now than ever since they're no longer investing in expansion due to low demand. The race to the bottom attitude exercised by finger-pointing idiots is bad for everyone.0 -
That's essentially the point of this thread, there's thousands of people working full time jobs and by the time they account for the cost of going to work they have less to live on than the dole.i know people that struggle to make ends meet that have jobs let alone people that are making e217 a week
Education, training, follow up with some extra education and then add a pinch of training. Garnish with some a certificate, upgrade to diploma, Bachelors degree, masters, phd.Personally do not have a job but id love one i send around cvs everywhere i can on a daily basis so far not one interview in over a year so do you want me to starve until i find a job?
It sounds like an awful long road to start out on in search of a job, but in 5 years you can be a well qualified, very employable professional or you could have spent 5 years sending hundreds of CVs to apply for low-skills jobs and still have nothing.
You can't do anything about employment right now, there's 100 unskilled workers for every job. Make arrangements for the future instead. And don't worry about people whinging, in 10 years when you're pulling in €100k those same people are going to be bitching about how you think you're better than them :rolleyes:Life is hard enough on e100 euro a week without everyone putting me down because sorry i am a human being and think i deserve to live weather on benefits or through employment0 -
That's essentially the point of this thread, there's thousands of people working full time jobs and by the time they account for the cost of going to work they have less to live on than the dole.
So its just jelsousyEducation, training, follow up with some extra education and then add a pinch of training. Garnish with some a certificate, upgrade to diploma, Bachelors degree, masters, phd.
And how are people supposed to pay for that?It sounds like an awful long road to start out on in search of a job, but in 5 years you can be a well qualified, very employable professional or you could have spent 5 years sending hundreds of CVs to apply for low-skills jobs and still have nothing.
Again, who will pay for all this education , because the state wont anymoreYou can't do anything about employment right now, there's 100 unskilled workers for every job. Make arrangements for the future instead. And don't worry about people whinging, in 10 years when you're pulling in €100k those same people are going to be bitching about how you think you're better than them :rolleyes:
Ye are alll bitching about the state paying for everyone on the dole and now ye want them to pay for the upskilling? Makes perfect sense.0 -
Advertisement
-
So its just jelsousy
And how are people supposed to pay for that?
Again, who will pay for all this education , because the state wont anymore
Ye are alll bitching about the state paying for everyone on the dole and now ye want them to pay for the upskilling? Makes perfect sense.
At least if we, as a state, pay for those people to be re-trained or upskilled, then the opportunity for them to gain employment in the future increases and thus, the chance they might pay some of those costs back also increases.
That doesn't even take into account all the softer, more psychological benefits that the individual would benefit from.
Paying people to do nothing just cannot be on the cards, in all but a minority of cases.0 -
If the employed were jealous of the unemployed, we would join them. Duh.So its just jelsousy
There seem to be a few programs on the goAnd how are people supposed to pay for that?
Again, who will pay for all this education , because the state wont anymore
We're not bitching about the state paying for everyone on the dole. Everyone has the absolute right to food, shelter, education and medical care.Ye are alll bitching about the state paying for everyone on the dole and now ye want them to pay for the upskilling? Makes perfect sense.
Personally, I'm bitching about the state not doing more to encourage people to get off welfare. As it is, many people have no incentive as their current earning potential is less than the value of the dole. That can only be tackled by raising their earning potential or reducing the dole.0 -
Why is it that people always abuse the unemployed anyway i have a feeling the people that are saying the social welfare is to generous are the same people that would be on here crying that it is not enough for them to survive on if they ever had to live on it. And also what is up with this free housing lark no one lives in a house for free they pay rent just like anybody else that is in private accommodation, Everyone bitching about single parents getting pregnant just because they get so much money what babies are that cheap are they ?i know people that struggle to make ends meet that have jobs let alone people that are making e217 a week. I personally think there should be one week a year where the whole country has to live on benefits just to show everyone that is not easy sure the amount of money people receive would be generous if the cost of living was any way cheap but its really not. Personally do not have a job but id love one i send around cvs everywhere i can on a daily basis so far not one interview in over a year so do you want me to starve until i find a job ? Life is hard enough on e100 euro a week without everyone putting me down because sorry i am a human being and think i deserve to live weather on benefits or through employment, You can all say oh hes spending my taxes and yes i am and when i find a job i will hopefully start to pay back all the money the state has given me through paying my taxes,
Rant over sorry about the bad grammar
my sentiments exactly,people convieniently forget when they have jobs(and are lucky to have them),how difficult it is to struggle on so little on the dole,people forget,and dont factor in that the standard of living in recessionary ireland is still quite high,(it makes it harder) costs havent changed much since the celtic tiger era,with high rents on shops,and expensive produce..0 -
She is more worrying about political consequences due growing pressure from left rather than about that it will destroy more jobs that it will pay for itgolfwallah wrote: »Firstly I'm not making any claims, secondly, the sovereign debt isn't the immediate problem, if we got rid of the banking debt then we'd still have a massive deficit that has to be closed. That's the reality. Even todays good news in Brussels changes nothing. Yes it's great if we beneift from it - but we are still a high earning/high SW rate society and we can't afford to be that way.
I agree that we can't afford the high cost of Social Welfare but, unfortunately, Minister Joan Burton sees the answer as higher PRSI contributions for employees and employers: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/burton-defies-diktat-with-comment-on-tax-policy-3154827.html.
I'd prefer if she concentrated on reducing the costs of her department rather than pursuing the easy route of screwing the taxpayer even more.0 -
DELETE0
-
At least if we, as a state, pay for those people to be re-trained or upskilled, then the opportunity for them to gain employment in the future increases and thus, the chance they might pay some of those costs back also increases.
That doesn't even take into account all the softer, more psychological benefits that the individual would benefit from.
Paying people to do nothing just cannot be on the cards, in all but a minority of cases.
Ok, so everyone is now retrained and upskilled
There is a massive shortage of jobs still and now you have retrained , reductaed people still on the dole and the whole excerise has been expensive with the result of just a minority getting work out of it0 -
If the employed were jealous of the unemployed, we would join them. Duh.
Sounds like you are, After all your cuts and taxes are paid, you say you might as well be on the dole with what you have left after a full weeks work. While those who " sit on their arses all week" have more or less what you have left.
You cant have a grant and your weekly dole so your pretty screwed, (surely you should have researched this first)
We're not bitching about the state paying for everyone on the dole. Everyone has the absolute right to food, shelter, education and medical care.Personally, I'm bitching about the state not doing more to encourage people to get off welfare. As it is, many people have no incentive as their current earning potential is less than the value of the dole. That can only be tackled by raising their earning potential or reducing the dole.
Well make suggestions that might actually work instead of giving out about us free loaders.0 -
There is a massive shortage of jobs still and now you have retrained , reductaed people still on the dole
There are jobs available now, but they can't be filled. In many cases if the current jobs were filled the company would be looking at the next round of expansion. Instead they're stagnating in Ireland and growing abroad where the required skills are available.
The boom didn't last forever, the recession won't last forever.
Many professionals can market their services internationally.0 -
There are jobs available now, but they can't be filled. In many cases if the current jobs were filled the company would be looking at the next round of expansion. Instead they're stagnating in Ireland and growing abroad where the required skills are available.
The boom didn't last forever, the recession won't last forever.
Many professionals can market their services internationally.
So your agreeing with me in saying there are no jobs left in Ireland
Now you want the state to self fund education for those who they know will leave the country and not see the fruits of their education benifiting the Irish state?0 -
Advertisement
-
Ah, so you do class yourself as a freeloader. I think this is the first time you've admitted that you personally are on the dole as a lifestyle choice. You should be ashamed of grouping yourself with genuine cases of hardship.Well make suggestions that might actually work instead of giving out about us free loaders.
For that small segment of the live register (people who have no interest in ever doing anything for themselves), I'd like to see work schemes brought in. I bet you could learn how dig drains and repaint playgrounds pretty quick if the alternative was losing the 'paycheck'.:P0
Advertisement