|
Scary Euro Man
(05-24-2010, 12:41 PM)
|
#401
Originally Posted by SmokyDave:
|
|
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 12:49 PM)
|
#402
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
|
|
His head smashed in and his heart cut out and his liver removed and his bowels unplugged and his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off and his penis...
(05-24-2010, 12:53 PM)
|
#403
Originally Posted by operon:
Originally Posted by Sir Fragula:
Originally Posted by iapetus:
|
|
(05-24-2010, 01:00 PM)
|
#404
Quote:
|
|
His head smashed in and his heart cut out and his liver removed and his bowels unplugged and his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off and his penis...
(05-24-2010, 01:04 PM)
|
#405
Originally Posted by Sir Fragula:
Well, the illegal killing thereof. |
|
Scary Euro Man
(05-24-2010, 01:11 PM)
|
#406
Originally Posted by SmokyDave:
|
|
His head smashed in and his heart cut out and his liver removed and his bowels unplugged and his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off and his penis...
(05-24-2010, 01:13 PM)
|
#407
Originally Posted by iapetus:
Originally Posted by Science Daily:
The eagles should have been stopped on the way through Arizona. |
|
Banned
(05-24-2010, 01:41 PM)
|
#409
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
His head smashed in and his heart cut out and his liver removed and his bowels unplugged and his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off and his penis...
(05-24-2010, 02:18 PM)
|
#411
Originally Posted by avaya:
Sussex? Shandy. Edit: On a related note, why do we have Wessex, Sussex, Essex, Middlesex but no 'Nossex' or 'Norsex'? |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 02:38 PM)
|
#412
Originally Posted by SmokyDave:
Edit: other than catholic priests. I guess when Henry VIII adopted protestantism he abolished Nossex |
|
GAF's Bob Woodward
(05-24-2010, 02:50 PM)
|
#413
Originally Posted by curls:
I've never really compared dole rates in other countries, but here the sort of standard rate is ~€200/week. |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 03:14 PM)
|
#416
Originally Posted by gofreak:
|
|
His head smashed in and his heart cut out and his liver removed and his bowels unplugged and his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off and his penis...
(05-24-2010, 03:21 PM)
|
#417
Originally Posted by cntrational:
Also, I fear Chinner has migrated south for the winter. |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 09:11 PM)
|
#418
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8702061.stm
Quote:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 09:27 PM)
|
#422
Originally Posted by UnblessedSoul:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 09:37 PM)
|
#423
Yes I have to agree far too many university courses are this airy fairy nonsense these days.
Money needs to be prioritised towards the traditional courses. Random shit at university is a very real waste of money when the private sector ends up doing most of the training itself. So, outside of the major science/med/engineering subjects you really don't need to specialise in a course. We need to be focused on improving the quality of the labour force. That starts from the ground up. More standardised courses the better. Push the quality up. I would even go as far as scrapping tinpot A-Levels entirely and replacing them with an IB. Better and more rounded education all-round. Now if I was going to go extreme I would mandate every teacher from year 7 and above is required to have a dumbbell. Need some fucking discipline in schools these days. I say go completely medieval on them. |
|
(05-24-2010, 10:19 PM)
|
#429
Originally Posted by Subliminal:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 10:29 PM)
|
#431
Originally Posted by Kentpaul:
|
|
GAF's Bob Woodward
(05-24-2010, 10:31 PM)
|
#432
Originally Posted by operon:
I think it's a legacy of the boom years, when I guess it was 'proven' that even with a very generous social welfare system, people did prefer to work if they could work. That was the case, when there were jobs-a-plenty, few people were actually 'bums' and stayed on benefit regardless. And of course...it was easy to afford this generosity, when unemployment was so low and tax receipts so high. Interestingly, though, there's been little adjustment to social welfare since the shit hit the fan. Only a very minor reduction (from €20x to €196 per week), and some rule changes for people under 20 (their max is €100 a week or something like that). I expect if finances don't recover that more will have to be done though... I'll have to remember the UK rate, though, next time I hear someone complain about the dole here. |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 10:32 PM)
|
#433
Originally Posted by Kentpaul:
Subliminal: Cameron is PM now, get over it. The new government has made a good start at dealing with the mess of the previous one. I suppose you're one of those lefty trolls who still blames Thatcher for all the country's ills, 20 years after she left office and 13 years after her party left government. |
|
(05-24-2010, 10:40 PM)
|
#435
Originally Posted by SmokyDave:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 10:47 PM)
|
#436
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
I agree with Raydeen, avaya and curls on the frivolous Uni courses, though. Yacht Management? Golf Sciences?!? What??? :lol Oh, and as for the benefits argument, Council Tax and Housing Benefit are paid out so that claimants and their families aren't turfed out of their homes and forced to live rough, which might possibly maybe would definitely lead to an explosive rise in the crime rate. Hopefully nobody has any objection to that.
Last edited by Dambrosi; 05-24-2010 at 10:51 PM.
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 10:49 PM)
|
#437
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
The main reason for the increasing number of unemployed youths is due to a lack of experience; employers aren't willing to take on younger, inexperienced workers at this time, so that's where FJF comes in. For Mr Osbourne to put that as one of his priorities for cuts just shows the old Daily Mirror image of the Tories creeping in. Fuck George Osbourne. |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:13 PM)
|
#439
Originally Posted by Garjon:
Originally Posted by Garjon:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:20 PM)
|
#440
As far as I know, the Future Jobs Fund creates something like 150,000 temporary jobs for around 6 months or more, for people unemployed for more than a year. Youth unemployment is over 700,000.
So it's simply a temporary measure which does absolutely nothing to help address long term unemployment problems. It takes people off Jobseeker's Allowance only to dump them back onto it 6 months later. The cancellation of the FJF is part of the long term plan for a wholesale review of the employment and benefits systems. From the Conservative manifesto: “We will scrap Labour’s failing employment schemes and create a single Work Programme for everyone who is unemployed, including the 2.6 million people claiming Incapacity Benefit who do not get enough help from existing programmes.” Dambrosi: your class warfare and irrational Tory hatred is really boring.
Last edited by jas0nuk; 05-24-2010 at 11:24 PM.
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:22 PM)
|
#441
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:26 PM)
|
#442
Originally Posted by Raydeen:
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:27 PM)
|
#443
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
Oh, and jasOnuk: your smug self satisfaction and irrational Tory brown-nosing are getting rather disgusting. EDIT: Raydeen, is that for real? Yikes, sucks to be her. I mean, it's not like they didn't get interviewed, right? |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:31 PM)
|
#444
Have you read Raydeen's post? I'm sure it isn't the only example. FJF creates temporary non-jobs which waste taxpayer's money when we should be looking at addressing LONG TERM unemployment problems.
FJF is not a viable or sustainable solution. It is a sticking plaster. edit: Apparently "four weeks on minimum wage" counts as a job. Great, really.
Last edited by jas0nuk; 05-24-2010 at 11:37 PM.
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:36 PM)
|
#445
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
I just fail to see how cutting these places and jobs in the public sector and then expecting the system to suddenly fix itself through restructuring the system and giving it a new fancy name without effectively forcing private companies to take on more staff. And I don't like how you used the word 'dumped' - giving them 6 months of work experience is hardly dumping them. Raydeen, don't tell me you are suggesting a link between FJF and idiot psychopaths who smoke weed all day? |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:36 PM)
|
#446
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
Again: the main reason for youth unemployment and, I'd wager, unemployment in general is that employers won't employ inexperienced staff. Solution? Forcing private companies to take on more staff would be like forcing the banks to start loaning out money again - a popular move, but, given the economy's current state, annoyingly impractical. Surely there has to be another way?
Last edited by Dambrosi; 05-24-2010 at 11:41 PM.
|
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:41 PM)
|
#448
Turns out it's not even six months, apparently four weeks on minimum wage counts as a job under the Future Jobs Fund. How the heck does that help anyone?
I'd suggest that lack of experience is not the only factor affecting youth unemployment and unemployment in general. Over the past 2 or 3 years the private sector has had to tighten its belt by making redundancies and freezing or even cutting wages in inefficient departments. Creating temporary jobs gives some experience but it hardly improves their chances of getting a job afterwards, if there are no jobs available. The public sector has taken up some of the slack but since public sector jobs are not wealth-creating there is only so much the state can do before we end up with a borrowing crisis, as we have done. The government needs to encourage private sector growth and make it easier and cheaper for employers to create jobs. |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:45 PM)
|
#449
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
Considering that the private sector's current woes are mainly being caused by the banks' unwillingness to lend credit in a tough global recession, what is the best course for reversing that trend? Just making it cheaper and easier to employ people won't cut it on its own, we have to make sure that those people aren't unfairly exploited as well. |
|
Member
(05-24-2010, 11:45 PM)
|
#450
Originally Posted by jas0nuk:
Yeah, you're probably right. Which is exactly what the Tories/Lib Dems are failing to do. But then, how exactly would you stimulate private sector growth while avoiding the negative points of the FJF? |