Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    delete
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    If you fall on hard times, instead of turning homeless you can enter the workhouse: you receive accommodation, food and a small allowance and in return you carry out work. If these are state-owned workhouses, such work might include helping clean the streets or other labour. The workhouse would be seen as temporary and you would receive help during your time there to find permanent work.

    The workhouse receives a lot of stigma because of the abuses that went on there, but I think the above is a good idea.

    Views?
    No.

    Simple question, simple answer.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    If you fall on hard times, instead of turning homeless you can enter the workhouse: you receive accommodation, food and a small allowance and in return you carry out work. If these are state-owned workhouses, such work might include helping clean the streets or other labour. The workhouse would be seen as temporary and you would receive help during your time there to find permanent work.

    The workhouse receives a lot of stigma because of the abuses that went on there, but I think the above is a good idea.

    Views?
    In theory, sounds likeca very good idea. What were these abuses that happenes in the past? And in what period of history were workhouses a thing? Because it sounds like some victoria period idea or smth that went awry.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    No
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yep, it also includes the social element of the workhouse as well, of course let's not make it a compulsory institution, we are a liberal country.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, Singapore has a similar system to combat homelessness.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    No, but I do believe those on job seekers allowance should work 1 or 2 days a week to earn that money as if it were a job.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    No its a very stupid idea. How are people going to find work if they are locked up? How can families stay together if they have to live separately?

    If there is work that needs doing like street cleaning, its already been done by people paid to do it. Why should people be made unemployed so others can do their jobs for free? Makes no sense.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    No its a very stupid idea. How are people going to find work if they are locked up? How can families stay together if they have to live separately?

    If there is work that needs doing like street cleaning, its already been done by people paid to do it. Why should people be made unemployed so others can do their jobs for free? Makes no sense.
    Who said anything about being locked up? What are you talking about?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Death Grips)
    Who said anything about being locked up? What are you talking about?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    How do you separate the sexes if you don't lock them up?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Absolutely **** idea.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    How do you separate the sexes if you don't lock them up?
    You could have family units, similar to student halls. And I don't see why the sexes necessarily have to be segregated? People would probably have their own bedroom.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mscaffrey)
    Absolutely **** idea.
    Everyone's saying its a bad idea but nobody's explaining why.

    You lot just sound like a bunch of sheep nodding in agreement with each other but you dont even understand why.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Death Grips)
    Everyone's saying its a bad idea but nobody's explaining why.

    You lot just sound like a bunch of sheep nodding in agreement with each other but you dont even understand why.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Thanks for calling me a sheep, they're the best of the animals.

    I understand why I think it's a bad idea, but sometimes I'm just not in the mood to elaborate on TSR seeing as most comments on here go ignored anyway (actually the reason I didn't elaborate this time is that my dinner was ready and I only had time for the one sentence). Still, I think people are entitled to say something that has been proven by history to be barbaric is **** without having to elaborate.

    As someone who has lived on welfare (both growing up and now, as I recover from illness) I think that the current welfare system contributes to bad mental health enough without making people with no work move to a special place, away from the rest of society and away from their own home, in order to do labour probably for a lower amount of money than the minimum wage provides. I can only imagine a workhouse system causing more shame and worse mental health, as well as isolating and alienating those out of work.

    If you want to give those out of work a sense of a purpose and help them learn extra skills, my suggestion would be to encourage volunteer schemes where the volunteer work involves providing something worthwhile in the person's own local community. This will foster a sense of belonging and is much less likely to result in governments and businesses simply using the unemployed for cheap labour. Anyone who takes part in work other than voluntary work should be paid a wage for it that allows them to pay for their own accommodation and essentials, not have it provided by the state. Let's not take away everyone's freedom just because they can't find work, especially in a broken economy where we don't have enough work to go around.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mscaffrey)
    ... in a broken economy where we don't have enough work to go around.
    I don't disagree with a lot of what you've written, but that last sentence is nonsense.

    There's plenty of work to go around - why else are forms having to import foreign workers? We haven't got a population shortage - its just that people generally have a higher sense of worth than they should. There are many jobs available that a lot of people simply don't want.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    I don't disagree with a lot of what you've written, but that last sentence is nonsense.

    There's plenty of work to go around - why else are forms having to import foreign workers? We haven't got a population shortage - its just that people generally have a higher sense of worth than they should. There are many jobs available that a lot of people simply don't want.
    The problem is a lot of jobs on offer don't offer a big enough wage for people to live on. That's why we're getting the national living wage now, in an effort to make that problem less prominent. As it is a lot of firms are having to use foreign labour for those low paid jobs because sometimes foreign workers will accept the lower wage. I still think that points to a broken economy, though, if jobs are being offered that don't actually allow people to live on those wages.

    And a lot of imported workers are people who have come to the UK to look for work, they haven't been imported by firms to take on jobs that no one in the UK will take. So these people are then added to the people of working age, meaning that unless new jobs are created as people are moving into the country we're ending up with less and less available jobs (especially as the retirement age is increasing at the same time). It makes sense that as the population of working age grows, but new jobs being created don't keep up with that level of growth, we're going to end up with too few jobs. There are people in the Job Centre every week who would literally do anything and yet they don't get work because hundreds of people are applying for each job. If that doesn't mean there aren't enough jobs then I don't know what does.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    You could have family units, similar to student halls. And I don't see why the sexes necessarily have to be segregated? People would probably have their own bedroom.
    The original work houses were gender segregated. What you are proposing is not a workhouse, more like a hostel for the unemployed.

    Why would unemployed people want to go to a hostel when they already have a home? What is the point of it?

    The original workhouses were deliberately austere and strict to discourage people going there. For example, the inmates had to wear a uniform, families were separated and the food was cheap and nasty. It was more like prison for the poor. They were suppose to avoid them as much as possible by finding work. You are proposing a pleasant hostel for the unemployed and not encourage them to avoid them by finding work.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 13, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.