Truants’ Parents May Lose Child Benefits As Unemployed Are Told To Sign On Twice As Often

[Byron]

You are but a P45 from being a chav yourself.

I don't want my tax dollar used to prop up crony capitalists, Sir Phillip Scumbag, Vodascum and a load of bankrupt banks.

Not a Pinko either. Always voted Tory. Never again, that was a "con" too!

I am related to quite a lot of chavs and other workshy layabouts.

[alexw]

Well, I think this proposal is quite sensible.

As usual, the Pinkos amongst us are having a left fest.

I don't want my tax pounds being squandered on truants and chavs.

No its kneejerk populism politics at its finest.

We are in a depression / deep recession. The vast vast majority of those who have lost their jobs would love to have another. But not surprisingly the jobs are not available because of the aforesaid depression/recession.

So what do our ruling plutocracy do?

They decide to make those who are unemployed and want to work (the vast vast majority of the unemployed) spend precious money and time traveling to the local job center so cameron can look good in front of the camera's. Even worse in one fell swoop he doubles the workload of the job centers. As someone mentioned above running the jc's costs 3.7 billion while jsa costs 4.6 billion.

Congrats! Now the admin costs will be significantly more than the money they oversee / pay out. Utter lunacy. If anything, the regularity in which jsa claimants sign on should decrease during recessions/depressions to reflect the underlying reality in a counter-cyclical manner. When jobs are prevalent - push the unemployed harder, when jobs are scarce - push less. It even makes sound economic sense. Not do the idiotic opposite which is what he is proposing.

I'll also add i just read that 'our mate dave' is pushing to significantly weaken the ICB bank ring-fence reforms. Yet again if your wealthy, have lobbying power, or are part of our ruling elites you'll get what you want handed to you on a platter. If your in the bottom ~70% of society as shown above all you'll do is get shafted. Its becoming more and more obvious by the day that we don't have a democracy, instead we have a self-serving plutocracy running the UK solely for their own benefit.

[iLegallyBlonde]

If you actually wanted a job the very last place you'd find one is a Job Centre. We've just taken on a new nanny. She's been unemployed for 9 months, signed up for every scheme there is to help her back into work, the one thing that would have made a massive difference to her chances is an ofsted registration certificate for £100 which she didn't have of course. I bet more than a £100 was spent filling out forms, making her jump through pointless hoops.

[Mrs Bear]

I never understand why people who's kids cannot stand school and in many ways who could blame them (the kids that is) don't just de register them, one simple letter and you'd never here from the LEA again nevermind be prosecuted.

Friends of oours took their daughter out of school, wanted support from the LEA in home educating her and couldn't get them to come around and check her progress for love nor money.

Trouble is, most of the parents whose kids are truanting are probably not the types to take the trouble to home-school them.

[iamnumerate]

Truancy is good. The more children who cause trouble at school truant the easiest it is for children who want to learn, but don't go to a good state school, to learn,

I wish we had had more truancy at my school.

[Bob Loblaw]

Where I used to live the job centre was about 15 miles away.

There was 1 bus every 3 hours costing about £4.50 return so a round trip could potentially take 6 hours

A taxi would cost £15 each way - do that twice a week and all your JSA is gone

A car journey would cost about £5 in petrol and parking - but not everyone has a car

I don't think making people sign on in person is unreasonable but making people spend all their money on getting there seems pointless.

I used to cycle 16 miles to work, do an 8 hour shift (I started at 5am) and then cycle back. Why would this not be an option for someone to get to a job centre?

[erranta]

Of course not.

Everyone who doesn't work and doesn't ensure their kids go to school is probably a chav though...

Thing is, do they want their children brainwashed with 'greeny' bull-shite from the age of 5 as part of their State Educa-sham?

[SHERWICK]

I never understand why people who's kids cannot stand school and in many ways who could blame them (the kids that is) don't just de register them, one simple letter and you'd never here hear from the LEA again nevermind be prosecuted.

Friends of oours took their daughter out of school, wanted support from the LEA in home educating her and couldn't get them to come around and check her progress for love nor money.

Corrected above. (only cos this thread is all bout how we dont need no educashun).

[billybong]

Well, I think this proposal is quite sensible.

As usual, the Pinkos amongst us are having a left fest.

I don't want my tax pounds being squandered on truants and chavs.

It's soundbite politics which will likely cost more in taxes than it saves. Claimants should be genuine but seeing what are basically officially pre approved claimants twice as often doesn't seem to be the most effective or cost effective way of achieving that. If there are jobs isn't the time better spent looking. It's nothing to do with left or right it's just a matter of having a sensible and fair policy to see taxes spent properly and that applies at all levels from banker bailout claimants through to claimants at the other end of the spectrum.

The claimant excesses during the NuLabour period were astonishing at all levels but the Coalition haven't inspired at all in that connection. It became official policy as part of the so called economic stimulus. Promises about private sector job creation and rebalancing of the economy seemingly just more soundbite politics and the same old same old regularly spouted by the NuLabour, Tories and LibDems as they merge together into their own special brand of debt, bailout and soundbite economics.

[OnionTerror]

It's soundbite politics which will likely cost more in taxes than it saves. Claimants should be genuine but seeing what are basically officially pre approved claimants twice as often doesn't seem to be the most effective or cost effective way of achieving that. If there are jobs isn't the time better spent looking. It's nothing to do with left or right it's just a matter of having a sensible and fair policy to see taxes spent properly and that applies at all levels from banker bailout claimants through to claimants at the other end of the spectrum.

The claimant excesses during the NuLabour period were astonishing at all levels but the Coalition haven't inspired at all in that connection. It became official policy as part of the so called economic stimulus. Promises about private sector job creation and rebalancing of the economy seemingly just more soundbite politics and the same old same old regularly spouted by the NuLabour, Tories and LibDems as they merge together into their own special brand of debt, bailout and soundbite economics.

AFAIK, the JC is already short staffed, as they've already had to lay off a fair number of staff...If their workload increases, I can see strikes happening (like they've threatened in the past)....what will it prove/solve? Nothing...