Urban Farms

[doahh]

There is also a problem where, if you force people to work for dole then you can't really make them work more hours than they would get paid minimum wage for. So if the dole was £60 a week then you could ask them to work 12 hours a week for it. If you don't do that then the top bankers would find it more profitable to bankrupt the country and then get a free labor force thrown in to boot. This would be an ideal route to the beginnings of legal slavery and the marginalization of those who have done nothing wrong except to find themselves out of work. The true doleites would be unlikely to be productive on the farm anyway.

I think the problem of the unemployed is that those on minimum wage are always going to be just about at subsistence level. If we are going to have a benefits system then it also needs to provide a subsistence level of lifestyle and so there can never be a benefit to working unless you have a good job. The only option that I can see is to raise minimum wage to £10 an hour to make it worth working or scrap the benefit system (at least in its current form). The two are incompatible with each other without a strong moral thread running through society which the UK may be lacking.

[Guest sillybear2]

Every job created in the Public Sector is just another nail in the coffin of the country's finances.

The dole is the ultimate "non-job", if that person 'gets a job' in the public sector that is basically useless then it's no different from them being unemployed, apart from the fact they now cost the tax payer x6 the amount with pension entitlements. You could argue they now have some status, pay taxes, and have a greater means to consume, but following that logic everyone could just work for the government.

[HPC001]

There is also a problem where, if you force people to work for dole then you can't really make them work more hours than they would get paid minimum wage for. So if the dole was £60 a week then you could ask them to work 12 hours a week for it. If you don't do that then the top bankers would find it more profitable to bankrupt the country and then get a free labor force thrown in to boot. This would be an ideal route to the beginnings of legal slavery and the marginalization of those who have done nothing wrong except to find themselves out of work. The true doleites would be unlikely to be productive on the farm anyway.

I think the problem of the unemployed is that those on minimum wage are always going to be just about at subsistence level. If we are going to have a benefits system then it also needs to provide a subsistence level of lifestyle and so there can never be a benefit to working unless you have a good job. The only option that I can see is to raise minimum wage to £10 an hour to make it worth working or scrap the benefit system (at least in its current form). The two are incompatible with each other without a strong moral thread running through society which the UK may be lacking.

Part of the reason for wages being low is the companies think the DSS, thats the rest of us, will subsidise the crappy wage with some degree of tax credit, housing benefit etc. While these are paid to people on low incomes, the cut off point for most of it is at £16,000. There are millions of people below that level. The assumption that the welfare system helps everyone equally is also absurd but that is what helps perpetuate the problem.

Edited August 31, 2009 by HPC001

[Game_Over]

Quite, seems so simple right, but if the government is giving you free money week after week and Żeleński is doing all the hard labour, what incentive is there to dig for victory?

If you have a Socialist government for long enough all people end up digging is mass graves.

These ideas are just more socialist fantasy land economics.

I believe Pol Pot thought it would be a good idea to march everyone into the countryside

And Mugabe has turned Zimbabwe into a nation of small holders, thus ensuring everyone will starve.

[ralphmalph]

Part of the reason for wages being low is the companies think the DSS, thats the rest of us, will subsidise the crappy wage with some degree of tax credit, housing benefit etc. While these are paid to people on low incomes, the cut off point for most of it is at £16,000. There are millions of people below that level. The assumption that the welfare system helps everyone equally is also absurd but that is what helps perpetuate the problem.

Well said this is the crux of the matter.

[council dweller]

My 'punishment' would be to provide REAL jobs for people that paid a wage they could actually live on.

But this is never going to happen unless we stop importing all the World's unemployed.

Too many are happy with the current situation, not only are current and future leaders but many who climbed the ladder in better days are quite happy to kick it away now.

[Guest sillybear2]

If you have a Socialist government for long enough all people end up digging is mass graves.

These ideas are just more socialist fantasy land economics.

Except Żeleński isn't a small holder, he works on a huge industrialised farm and commercial processing plant, yet at the same time the government pays native citizens to do nothing.

[Game_Over]

Except Żeleński isn't a small holder, he works on a huge industrialised farm and commercial processing plant, yet at the same time the government pays native citizens to do nothing.

Comes back to wages and housing I think.

No one can live on agricultural workers wages any more

Mainly because house prices in the countryside have been driven up by second home owners.

Personally I would impose massive taxes on second homes.

And I would impose massive taxes on people who work more than 20 miles from where they live.

This would also reduce our carbon emissions

Lets face it guys

It's really, really easy to F*ck things up

But once something is F*cked up it is really, really difficult to fix it

[Guest BoomBoomCrash]

Here's a novel idea. How about work for wages? If there are jobs to be done then surely people can be employed to do them. Having the uneployed undertake the work for nominal payment kinda makes it look like you're just exploiting them.

[XswampyX]

Here's a novel idea. How about work for wages? If there are jobs to be done then surely people can be employed to do them. Having the uneployed undertake the work for nominal payment kinda makes it look like you're just exploiting them.

Why bother?

Just buy a house for 500,000 and make 50,000 a year sat on your AR$E.

The problem with working is that it take away your benefits! You work 20 hours, earn £100.00 and lose £100.00. Why would you do that?

Edited August 31, 2009 by XswampyX

[HPC001]

Why bother?

Just buy a house for 500,000 and make 50,000 a year sat on your AR$E.

The problem with working is that it take away your benefits! You work 20 hours, earn £100.00 and lose £100.00. Why would you do that?

Wrong. A 25 year old single person, earning £400 per month (so £4800 per year, paying only NI) is entitled to the following in my local area:

Council Tax Benefit £762.32 per year (this is 66% of the full bill)

Housing Benefit £9,136.08 per year (based on LHA of £190 per week)

That's just the two main ones for starters...

Now imagine how much lower those amounts would be if we had sensible housing costs.

Edited August 31, 2009 by HPC001

[godless]

How about ban benefits altogether, give them some free land and a free house and they can live on what they produce. Subsidies and training through credit unions and clubs to get them started, community funding rather than state.

This is how it used to be for centuries except barons and lords owned the land and houses and forced you to work so you could pay to live on it, now the state does that. Millions of people remain in a perpetual poverty trap for nothing more than political strategizing and power games just like they used to use them for cannon fodder when it was a more geopolitical. Even now some folk believe its fine to use these people, against their will, to die in foreign lands just to get them off the teat of the state.

The whole things a huge joke and an effing old one too.

[HPC001]

How about ban benefits altogether, give them some free land and a free house and they can live on what they produce. Subsidies and training through credit unions and clubs to get them started, community funding rather than state.

This is how it used to be for centuries except barons and lords owned the land and houses and forced you to work so you could pay to live on it, now the state does that. Millions of people remain in a perpetual poverty trap for nothing more than political strategizing and power games just like they used to use them for cannon fodder when it was a more geopolitical. Even now some folk believe its fine to use these people, against their will, to die in foreign lands just to get them off the teat of the state.

The whole things a huge joke and an effing old one too.

I'm in favour of mutual organisations, if thats what you're referring to.

[Guest sillybear2]

Comes back to wages and housing I think.

No one can live on agricultural workers wages any more

Yup, high housing costs make us internationally uncompetitive and divert wealth to our overlords, yet you called me a land obsessed commie when I suggested gifting plots of land to people

[godless]

I'm in favour of mutual organisations, if thats what you're referring to.

Mutual society

[porca misèria]

Today's lunch for my wife and I was a couple of chicken thighs each from Tesco bought just before closing (30p)and sweet corn, runner beans, potatoes,tomatos all grown in our garden. Dessert was apple pie...apples from our tree.

Just give people land and let them do what they will.

That's OK for a lucky few. But there's not enough land for everyone to share your privileged lifestyle.

[porca misèria]

How about ban benefits altogether, give them some free land and a free house and they can live on what they produce.

Where do I sign up?

[Guest sillybear2]

Where do I sign up?

In the 17th century, with the Diggers.

[godless]

Where do I sign up?

go to your local la revolte office

[wonderpup]

When you think about it, the two great 'achivements' of labour were High house prices and a 'flexible' (meaning low paid) labour force.

I think I can see a flaw in this plan.

[mfp123]

The answer is to stop importing millions of people to do jobs that should be done by millions of people who are currently living on benefits.

Anything else is just more public sector job creation schemes that impose an even bigger burden on the rapidly contracting wealth creating sector of the economy.

Basically, we are F*cked for generations.

Thanks a lot Gordon.

where are all these millions of jobs you are talking about?

12 months ago unemployment was at 5.2% i.e full employment.

unemployment cant really go any lower than this, and in fact its recommended unemployment doesnt go too far below this level as it distorts the labour market.

there always needs to be some pool of surplus labour to match demand, like a transition zone.

so 12 months on we get unemployment, and suddenly you think this is due to immigration, not the global downturn?

glad to see youre switched on to what is actually happening in the economy.

Edited September 1, 2009 by mfp123

[Guest sillybear2]

where are all these millions of jobs you are talking about?

12 months ago unemployment was at 5.2% i.e full employment.

unemployment cant really go any lower than this, and in fact its recommended unemployment doesnt go too far below this level as it distorts the labour market.

I'm not sure the concept of a natural rate of unemployment now applies given that we have EU immigration, say our native unemployment rate dropped to 0%, normally this would be considered highly inflationary, but in the modern era we can simply ship in new workers or outsource work.

[athom]

A good number of the underclasses already run urban farms, it's just that they only cultivate a certain variety of 'erb.

Yes many of the unemployed are already indoor gardening experts. It's amazing what they can do when the motivation is there.

Supply infrastructure is already in place i see

http://www.growell.co.uk/p/7001/BudBox-Grow-Tents.html

[athom]

The answer is to stop importing millions of people to do jobs that should be done by millions of people who are currently living on benefits.

The trouble is the ones on the dole are all too often uneducated and unmotivated, where as people coming from abroad are either better educated and come to fill posts no one here can fill or at least they are motivated and will do work those here won't get out of bed for.

Big kick up the **** is needed but in the mean time we can't do without all the imported labour, some of it perhaps but not all of it.

[athom]

I'm not sure the concept of a natural rate of unemployment now applies given that we have EU immigration

Yes this ease of ebb and flow work force who as soon as there is some money here will come over and sup it up but as soon as they've done that will bugger off and spend it abroad doesn't seem like it will ever allow a time where the british worker is in a sellers market. All too easy for the bosses to get cheap labour. Looks like the prols are stuffed. Time to fight our way to the top. Or over the palace gates.

There is also a problem where, if you force people to work for dole then you can't really make them work more hours than they would get paid minimum wage for. So if the dole was £60 a week then you could ask them to work 12 hours a week for it. If you don't do that then the top bankers would find it more profitable to bankrupt the country and then get a free labor force thrown in to boot. This would be an ideal route to the beginnings of legal slavery and the marginalization of those who have done nothing wrong except to find themselves out of work.

Hmmm