I've had an idea.

[whitevanman88]

Which may be a good or bad thing depending...it's the beginning of my weekend so ahhm ont booze.

Doleys. We all hate 'um. I used to be a doley, for three loooong months and to tell you the truth I hated any minute of it. If the Jobcentre had come along and said "Yeah, we'll give you benefits, but you've got to work for it" I would not have objected. Not one little bit.

Now obviously the concept of the jobcentre monkeys organising that sort of thing is absolutely laughable, not to mention the insurance implications (and associated...) which would make the thing a whole lot more costly.

So why not get local businesses involved? If the jobcentre approached me (As a current business owner) and said "Hey Mr WVM88, would you like someone to work for you? We'll pay 50% (or so) of their wages..." I'd jump at the chance. Seriously. And I would have jumped at the chance to be in work like that when I was ont' dole.

Now, I'm sure you're thinking 'Hold up chap, most of the people on benefits don't want to work and would do a st job' - but that's the wonderful thing. Anyone that is on the dole 'cause they can would be deterred. And also, if anyone fked about in my shop they'd be ahhht (as three of my ex-employees will testify).

Thoughts?

[whitevanman88]

OK. Just cull all the chavs then. That'll sort it.

[whitevanman88]

Deva Link said:

So the tax payer should subsidise some business's employees? Hmmm.

What I do think fit, unemployed, people could usefully do is to tidy up the scruffy estates they usually live on.

Please read my first post properly.

Currently we're subsiding the tts 100%...yes? Any reduction in that is good, yes?

The PH massive has already dismissed ideas of making you work for benefits on insurance grounds. This is at least a halfway house that *might* work.

Edited by whitevanman88 on Thursday 27th May 23:04

[whitevanman88]

paulrockliffe said:

I'm sure the best answer is for councils to use them for free hour for 20-30 hours a week, picking up litter, cutting the grass, whatever, so long as they're earning their keep.

Again, the insurance implications as well as other implications will ensure that this will cost more than giving them the dole.

Give companies a subsidy - those who get on will get proper employment - those who don't will end up with no benefits.

I'm not saying subsidise them forever.