[Jim_Reid]

to get right to it, what if, say, the government just made up a load of jobs...

we could get people doing anything, anything at all (possibly mundane tasks so it's not something to aim for), pay them minimum wage (or slightly better). basically make it so there could be full employment and anyone could walk to a job center and sign on to this.

just think, it wouldn't cost THAT much more than paying out the benefits, the money they earn could be taxed, and the work they are doing would be in some way worth something to someone. more importantly, they now have enough money in their pocket to spend on whatever they want so it would help the economy out, has knock on effect on other kinds of business.

also with less time on their hands and enough money to live properly so they'd have a better quality of life and they are less likely to commit crimes and cause trouble so it's going to save money on other public services like police, a + e, etc...

what do you think? obviously at first it would be expensive but long term it should sort itself out?

[xxm]

Your idea shows huge amount of naivety.

[Bellissima]

[Spaz Man]

So you basically mean voluntary Communism?

[Clip]

By this you mean make the Public Sector pound-for-pound larger than any in the world with the possible exception of North Korea?

This sounds like some kind of Gordon Brown wet dream. An absolutely huge Labour client state that can be absolutely controlled and turned into lifelong Labour voters. It's the essence of socialist command economy - millions of people milling about doing pointless jobs.

[Jim_Reid]

I don't see why it wouldn't work...we should put fat people on treadmills and generate electricity for the national grid, they lose weight we get power. just 1 example of how we can get people to spend their days on this scheme.

the people in power just aren't thinking hard enough.

[HARRY PUTAH]

(Original post by Jim_Reid)
to get right to it, what if, say, the government just made up a load of jobs...

This was already done. By labour LOL

They're called public sector jobs and the vast majority of these employees are terrible at what they do.

Why do you think the Torys sacked a lot of them?

[Jim_Reid]

it would not be communism because "real" jobs still exist outside the scheme

[g_star_raw_1989]

You could be in line for a Nobel prize with this idea.

[usainlightning]

By employing someone in the public sector you are probably destoying more than one job created in the private sector. To pay someone a public sector salary you have to raise taxes on the productive part of the economy (the private sector). Heece the private sector has less money to invest and create jobs. Read up more on the broken window fallacy.

[Banishingboredom]

I agree to a certain extent. If people on benefits were required to 'work' for them by performing manual labour such as cleaning graffiti and picking up rubbish - the sorts of things people doing community service have to then they'd be more inclined to find a job whilst benefiting the community. They could also be made to volunteer for charities for a certain number of hours perhaps.

Otherwise raising minimum wage is a solution as at the moment it is barely higher than the benefits people are receiving so some people have very little motivation to look for jobs.

[Jim_Reid]

this wont be taking jobs off the private sector...there's loads of **** to do around my area, I don't see any company's lining up to do it because it's not profitable to be doing it...private sector is only interested in lining its own pockets first and providing jobs second.

this can be the other way round

[WTSFG]

WoW. Just WOW. tsr never fails to surprise me.

It's called freedom of ****ing choice my friend.

[Jim_Reid]

(Original post by WTSFG)
WoW. Just WOW. tsr never fails to surprise me.

It's called freedom of ****ing choice my friend.

people could still go on the dole if they want, but who would if they can have a job like this until something better comes up?

[WTSFG]

(Original post by Jim_Reid)
people could still go on the dole if they want, but who would if they can have a job like this until something better comes up?

There are jobs out there- people are on the dole either cos their ****ing lazy/frictional unemployment until they find that job that matches their skills.

The cost to the Gov't of this scheme would be ridiculous. It's called communism and it failed miserably.

[Formerly Helpful_C]

(Original post by WTSFG)
There are jobs out there- people are on the dole either cos their ****ing lazy/frictional unemployment until they find that job that matches their skills.

The cost to the Gov't of this scheme would be ridiculous. It's called communism and it failed miserably.

I think you would do well to research before posting false comments. Communism has never been tested, so how could it have failed? Oh, you mean the "communist" states of Yugoslavia, the USSR, Cuba, etc? Yeah, they were never communist. Sorry.

[Jim_Reid]

(Original post by WTSFG)
There are jobs out there- people are on the dole either cos their ****ing lazy/frictional unemployment until they find that job that matches their skills.

The cost to the Gov't of this scheme would be ridiculous. It's called communism and it failed miserably.

there aren't jobs for everyone though, how can the current system be considered a success if it can't employ all the people it's supposed to support.

and it isn't communism, because certain jobs just could not be done on this scheme, doctors, police, accountants, computer programmers etc...all the better jobs would be paid more than this job.

in an ideal world only enough people in a certain job would be trained as are needed, for some reason, why do we have so many people training in the same stuff if we don't need it.

im not saying make it like brave new world and have everyone have a job given at birth, if people work hard they could get any job they want, and get paid more and if they don't work hard they can do this kind of thing...that's not communism in my book

[WTSFG]

(Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
I think you would do well to research before posting false comments. Communism has never been tested, so how could it have failed? Oh, you mean the "communist" states of Yugoslavia, the USSR, Cuba, etc? Yeah, they were never communist. Sorry.

Oh sorry, that's right, they weren't communist because all it's leaders were happy for their countries to be communist but not the elite running it. Oh yes, that's bloody inspiring isn't it.

[Formerly Helpful_C]

(Original post by WTSFG)
Oh sorry, that's right, they weren't communist because all it's leaders were happy for their countries to be communist but not the elite running it. Oh yes, that's bloody inspiring isn't it.

What's inspiring? Knowing that humans can be consumed by power? Old news, pal.

[Tudball]

That's the Keynesian model for unemployment, essentially.
Consider it deficit spending in order to inject money back into the economy. It's not as ridiculous as these posts seem to make out. Probably not applicable or practical in our current economic environment, but such strategies have been endorsed by many prominent economists.