"Ann Widdecombe versus the benefits culture"

I'd agree more or less with that process, hysteresis and all that. However, when (as today) jobs are fairly plentiful (the job market is nothing like it was in the 80s and 70s), it is argued that overly generous benefits are what lure people into this process in the first place. Reduce them, and you will reduce the number of long term unemployed, benefiting both those people and the economy/society in general

Out of curiosity, how long were you unemployed for?

I've been in higher education for three years, and I'm still not used to being skint and relatively possessionless. I hate it.

I'd accept that economic circumstances are different today (though it might be naive to think another recession is impossible). What I think is interesting is that it seems like the culture of long-term unemployment can pass from one generation to another even where, as you suggest, a higher material standard of living (and even self-esteem) might be easily gained with work-orientation. Also, I tend to think that I've possibly been deeply affected by my experience of unemployment in that:

a) While I'm a consciencious worker and always (thusfar) obtain good references I never find myself 'believing' in the job and instead have a self-consciously instrumental and short-term attitude to work.

b) I'm still to this day (twenty years later) relatively unmaterialistic - this computer being the most expensive thing I own.

I have no idea how representative this kind of long-term unemployment 'imprint' is, however.

It always makes me laugh when politicians, who for the best part earn vast sums for doing very little paid by the taxpayer lecture people on working for a living. Look at Widdecome - a fine example - the daughter of a Senior Civil Servant (living off the taxpayer seems to run in the family) - convent school, Latin at Oxford and then practically straight off to Parliament. WTF does she really know about working for a living?

Very little? And what do you know about being a politician? 649 people legislating our lives is a job with great demand and responsibility, I think the salary she is on (someone said 50k I think with Ann you can comfortably tripple that) is well justified. She isn't an executive, she isn't even a Chief executive, she is a Legislator, she's of the Governing class, of course you can moan about her performance but at the end of the day she is worth what the role will pay.

Get out of her arse!

And, do not neg rep people for their opinions which are not offensive to any group. It's not polite. You know whats coming your way now, and mine is much bigger than yours.

Very little? And what do you know about being a politician?

649 people legislating our lives is a job with great demand and responsibility, I think the salary she is on (someone said 50k I think with Ann you can comfortably tripple that) is well justified. She isn't an executive, she isn't even a Chief executive, she is a Legislator, she's of the Governing class, of course you can moan about her performance but at the end of the day she is worth what the role will pay.

God your stupid, it was a completely sarcastic comment I know your a socialist but if your IQ was any lower then we would have to water you. Your harking on about 'lol 360 quid aint enuf' is complete crap, do these people live in central London, no.

And you chose to go to university in London. Had I been in England at the time (I stayed in Scotland for largely financial reasons too) I would not have done that myself quite simply because of the associated costs.



Well then you're living a luxury lifestyle which, frankly, is beyond the reach of most of the population. Not everyone can, or should be able to, afford what you do.

I did choose London, for job prospects too. I figured any money i spend now will be made back with the better prospects it opens up later on, you know, deferred gratification and all that.

Yeah, its expensive to live in London( especially in West London), i concede that. But i believe if poeople are able to get into a London uni, knowing that it can be brilliant for contacts etc, then there should be financial assistance for that. If i'm not mistaken, you get more loan for London, don't you?

It's quite simple remove benefits
Then people would realise in the long run to stop having children because other people aren't gonna pay for them for you
Also it would help solve all these chavs/yobs around living on the doll, force them to get a job or be homeless
Of course you would need incapicity benefits but you would make them awfully hard to get, so no one who isnt intilted to them has no chance in hell of getting them.
I believe its only fair if people cant be arsed to work they should get no benefits
Increase minimum wage instead, use some of the benefit money to help do that, the amount of the increase in the effeciency of the economy would be tremendous
And hard working people wouldnt have to pay for louts on benefits which in my opinion is injust

I've been arguing against the belief that exams are getting easier. Then i see you got an A in English language. Maybe i'll shut up on that exam thread for a while.

Why punish the children of those on benefits by removing them?

Ha ha is that menna be an insult?
Because theres allways social services
The only way to provide an incentive to stop yobs porducing 15 children, who will all turn out to be anti social and yobs too. is to remove the incentive of child benefits.
because then quite simperley they would realise that they cant supprot the children they are creating for fun.
Also it would reduce street crime and all of that, just like abortion in america reduced street crime, in my opinion theres no reason for benefits its like living in a nanny state, they should go out and get a job
There is no logical economic reason for benefits, bar politiceans are too scared to remove them because they will get voted out.

There's nothing more entertaining than watching Widders shout at dole scum.

Anyway, I saw the one where she bascially followed prostitutes around yelling at them and calling them scum.

Well at least they're earning their way. Widders was probably just jealous coz she couldn't give it away if she tried.