So, I talked to 3rd-generation welfare dependants overnight about their problem

[RDJ]

But the problem they presented with, was not their major problem.

They appear to be completely absent any sense of responsibility for their own dependents, nor for the (aged, needy) parent of one of the couple. The Newly-Classic phrase "the government needs to fix this" was their default answer.

And, this* came to mind. I will quote a major excerpt because It Is Worthy of a full, yet Inherently Woeful, quotation.

Welfarism should be radically rethought not in order to save a few billion quid but in order to reverse the state’s spread into communities and to repair the self-belief and independence of working-class and poorer sections of society.

Both the right and left are failing on welfarism. The right ought to oppose it in the name of shrinking state interventionism. And the left ought to oppose it for the reason that many working-class institutions did oppose it when it was first being developed in the early twentieth century: because it makes people unproductive, and rips them from the society they live in, and because we should have full employment not paternalistic handouts.

The end result of this right/left failure is acquiescence to the rise of a new feudalism: millions of middle-class people employed by the state to look after millions of poor people. It is a scandal. It is domestic imperialism.

I will retire in less than 10 years if I live that long. What worries me, are the problems of the non-productive classes that the next (ever shrinking) productive generation will inherit.

* http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/201...elfare-system/

[Akzle]

vote akzle

[James Deuce]

You'll never have full employment. Unemployment is necessary to control inflation in a capitalist society. Doesn't matter if you are conservative or socialist capitalist.

This is one of the primary reasons why real scientists laugh at Economists who try to characterise Economics as a science.

[oldrider]

But the problem they presented with, was not their major problem.

They appear to be completely absent any sense of responsibility for their own dependents, nor for the (aged, needy) parent of one of the couple. The Newly-Classic phrase "the government needs to fix this" was their default answer.

And, this* came to mind. I will quote a major excerpt because It Is Worthy of a full, yet Inherently Woeful, quotation.

Welfarism should be radically rethought not in order to save a few billion quid but in order to reverse the state’s spread into communities and to repair the self-belief and independence of working-class and poorer sections of society.

Both the right and left are failing on welfarism. The right ought to oppose it in the name of shrinking state interventionism. And the left ought to oppose it for the reason that many working-class institutions did oppose it when it was first being developed in the early twentieth century: because it makes people unproductive, and rips them from the society they live in, and because we should have full employment not paternalistic handouts.

The end result of this right/left failure is acquiescence to the rise of a new feudalism: millions of middle-class people employed by the state to look after millions of poor people. It is a scandal. It is domestic imperialism.

I will retire in less than 10 years if I live that long. What worries me, are the problems of the non-productive classes that the next (ever shrinking) productive generation will inherit.

* http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/201...elfare-system/

True!

Another name for the condition is entitlement!

A good book on the subject of entitlement - this link is to a summary of same: http://www.getabstract.com/en/summar...fort-zone/1620

Used this book sometimes as reference during the changes from Gov't departments to SOE - quite helpful actually.

[Jin]

You'll never have full employment. Unemployment is necessary to control inflation in a capitalist society. Doesn't matter if you are conservative or socialist capitalist.

This is one of the primary reasons why real scientists laugh at Economists who try to characterise Economics as a science.

Where do people come up with this kind of garbage. Inflation is a monetary phenomenon it has nothing to do with unemployment.

[JimO]

Part of the problem is paying some people either the same or more on a benefit than what they would get working eg: your benefit goes up if you have an extra kid but try asking the boss for a payrise to support the extra kid and you will get laughed out the door. Another part of the problem has been the demise of compulsary unionism and award payrates with the min wage now becoming the award payrate for many. There is the other issue of the demise of many manufacturing industries due to cheap imports from China. Finally not many employers want to train people today irrespective of what qualifications a job seeker has got.

so its employers/chinese/everybody elses fault that these people dont/wont/cant work

[TheDemonLord]

I still believe that beneficiaries should have to do some form of Community service, work etc. to the amount of whatever their payment is, divided by the Minimum wage.

[Drew]

Part of the problem is paying some people either the same or more on a benefit than what they would get working eg: your benefit goes up if you have an extra kid but try asking the boss for a payrise to support the extra kid and you will get laughed out the door. Another part of the problem has been the demise of compulsary unionism and award payrates with the min wage now becoming the award payrate for many. There is the other issue of the demise of many manufacturing industries due to cheap imports from China. Finally not many employers want to train people today irrespective of what qualifications a job seeker has got.

Compulsory union membership ua reckon? Go get fucked. When they had the power in the building industry, people stopped building. What does that tell you?

Power corrupts...

[Drew]

I still believe that beneficiaries should have to do some form of Community service, work etc. to the amount of whatever their payment is, divided by the Minimum wage.

Can't make someone do the shit work for the dole, it takes jobs away from people who do it now. It also means the dole then has to match minimum wage. Lose lose right there.

[RDJ]

Compulsory union membership ua reckon? Go get fucked. When they had the power in the building industry, people stopped building. What does that tell you?

Power corrupts...

I appreciate that was a rhetorical question but it tells me two things

1. When you reward bad behaviour, you get more of it
2. When you pay people more for behaving badly, they will demand ever more pay and behave even worse so as to 'earn' it

...and then we see the Labour Party corollary - no, let's call it The Clark-Goff Corollary: when you pay people to do nothing, they will always seek to collect more money and do even less. Otherwise known as the WINZ Finagling Factor.

[TheDemonLord]

Can't make someone do the shit work for the dole, it takes jobs away from people who do it now. It also means the dole then has to match minimum wage. Lose lose right there.

Think of all the things that don't get done because we don't have a big enough workforce to do them. We are already paying them, so the expenditure isn't going to increase dramatically (obviously there would be some administrative and setup costs) and you are assuming that it would be full time - if Minimum wage is $10 (not saying it is, just using it for easy maths) and someone earns $100 a week on the dole, then they have to work an equivalent number of hours in as if they earnt that $100 after tax (so about 12 hours or so a week)

If they don't want to work, clearly they have too much money, or are getting income from other means, so their Dole can be cut, or removed.

The idea isn't perfect, but it would quickly put a stop to the attitude that you can get $$$ for nothing.

[yokel]

The way I see it is that if someone on the benefit gets say $300 PW and you work and get $800 PW, you're working for $500 PW.

At any rate the people stuck on the benefit is a result of redundancy from the the work force due to advances in technology and cheep imported goods(all so linked to advances in technology)

With all the advances in technology we all should only be working 20-30 hours PW.

I also reckon machines or automated processes should be paying income tax for the people thats been displaced in stead of being paid out a redundancy if you're lucky enough to get it that is.

[scumdog]

Can't make someone do the shit work for the dole, it takes jobs away from people who do it now. It also means the dole then has to match minimum wage. Lose lose right there.

Tell me why do we need to get in people from Vanuatu and the Phillipnes etc to do jobs that are available to Kiwis?

But Kiwis won't do them.

[TheDemonLord]

But Kiwis won't do them.

They would if they didn't get a handout from the Govt.....

[Drew]

Sounds lile you were unhappy you had to pay your builders an award payrate and not the minimum wage!! Maybe only tight arses like yourself stopped building?

I'm a builder you fucken idiot.