[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218020]If you're going to do that for disabled people, then it wouldn't be fair for everyone else. And if you did it for everyone else, no one would want to work. There would be no one to provide that sustenance. Like I said, this fantasy idea of the workshy won't work.[/QUOTE]
You're an idiot who has obviously never had any form of disability in their life nor has known anyone who has a disability.
I may get my benefits and not have to work, unlike you, but you, unlike me, don't have to go through indescribable suffering every single day of your life. You may have a painful headache once in a while, but I have to go through pain that makes even a severe migraine look like a stubbed toe.
I won't disagree that there are some people out there who abuse the benefits system, whether it be disability benefits or JSA benefits or whatever, but to paint people genuinely on benefits for disability the same as those who abuse the system, is the work of a moronic bigot. You know what, I change my mind I do wish you had a temporary injury that let you see what its like for people like me. Hell, my own fucking mother never had any real idea of just how bad it was for me, until she herself suffered from one or two of my conditions.
Seriously, you act like people chose to be disabled.
You have abosloutely no idea how much I, and people like me, [B]long[/B] to have a life that is relatively normal, or even fully normal, to be able to work without worrying about crippling pain or furthering our disabilites, or even working ourselves to quite literal death with complications due to having to work.
All the focus of Zeitgeist, TVP, The Free Charter and the likes merely sway to dismantle your work ethics. Do not succumb to these as they will try to prevent you from having the life of an ordinary honest and hard working citizen and who is well behaved and punctual.
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218123]If you give them the right to choose of whether to work or not, then you should do the same to everyone else. Yet if you did that, the system would collapse.
[editline]14th January 2013[/editline]
Seriously now, this is sounding like some argument of the venus project or some money-less fantasy. The world cannot live without money and people must work for that.[/QUOTE]
Ok I'm going to explain this as clearly as possible so pay attention.
If someone is considered to be unable to work because of a disability it is because a government verified their inability to work. Someone given the benefits from this aren't given a choice of whether to work or not, they are declared [B]unable[/B] to work.
You're fantasy idea of a system that makes someone who is declared unable to work have to work whenever they possibly can under the supervision of a tax payed doctor (who will most certainly be unwilling to accept any payment that comes even close to minimum wage) will benefit literally nobody and only serve as a massive bonfire kindled with money.
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;39218190]You're an idiot who has obviously never had any form of disability in their life nor has known anyone who has a disability.
I may get my benefits and not have to work, unlike you, but you, unlike me, don't have to go through indescribable suffering every single day of your life. You may have a painful headache once in a while, but I have to go through pain that makes even a severe migraine look like a stubbed toe.
I won't disagree that there are some people out there who abuse the benefits system, whether it be disability benefits or JSA benefits or whatever, but to paint people genuinely on benefits for disability the same as those who abuse the system, is the work of a moronic bigot. You know what, I change my mind I do wish you had a temporary injury that let you see what its like for people like me. Hell, my own fucking mother never had any real idea of just how bad it was for me, until she herself suffered from one or two of my conditions.
Seriously, you act like people chose to be disabled.[/QUOTE]
I do sympathize sincerely for your condition.
However, that was not my point. My point was that there are people working to pay for your sustenance. I merely said that if at any time you feel better and able to do work (and do keep asking yourself that too, because if at any time you are then try to do some charity work), then do some -- your benefits are not stopped if you work, only if you work over a certain number of hours.
So all I'm saying is, give back whenever you can and as much as you can.
Because otherwise, no matter what pain you're in, the system has without question worked to ensure that you have continuous sustenance - and has not received anything back from you.
Like I said - again - if you can work at any time, even if to do some writing for a local tabloid, then do it charitably. Make it fair.
My tax from working long hours as a supervisor goes towards this!
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218270]I do sympathize sincerely for your condition.
However, that was not my point. My point was that there are people working to pay for your sustenance. I merely said that if at any time you feel better and able to do work (and do keep asking yourself that too, because if at any time you are then try to do some charity work), then do some -- your benefits are not stopped if you work, only if you work over a certain number of hours.
So all I'm saying is, give back whenever you can and as much as you can.
Because otherwise, no matter what pain you're in, the system has without question worked to ensure that you have continuous sustenance - and has not received anything back from you.
Like I said - again - if you can work at any time, even if to do some writing for a local tabloid, then do it charitably. Make it fair.
My tax from working long hours as a supervisor goes towards this![/QUOTE]
The problem is that's not all you're saying at all. Under your fantasy system you would demand that RavenQ work whenever he is remotely capable under the verification of a doctor who is sent to frequently visit him on taxpayer money or lose his benefits entirely.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39218324]The problem is that's not all you're saying at all. Under your fantasy system you would demand that RavenQ work whenever he is remotely capable under the verification of a doctor who is sent to frequently visit him on taxpayer money or lose his benefits entirely.[/QUOTE]
No, I said for those who are more incapacitated, that medical assessments would be less frequent.
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218270]I do sympathize sincerely for your condition.
However, that was not my point. My point was that there are people working to pay for your sustenance. I merely said that if at any time you feel better and able to do work (and do keep asking yourself that too, because if at any time you are then try to do some charity work), then do some -- your benefits are not stopped if you work, only if you work over a certain number of hours.
So all I'm saying is, give back whenever you can and as much as you can.
Because otherwise, no matter what pain you're in, the system has without question worked to ensure that you have continuous sustenance - and has not received anything back from you.
My tax from working long hours as a supervisor goes towards this![/QUOTE]
You act as if benefits are the only thing that your taxes go to.
I'd love to swap places with you, even for a day, just so you could understand what it is like.
The system has, with [I]MANY[/I] questions, determined that I am entirely unfit and unable to work, whatsoever.
[quote]Sympathy is an extension of empathic concern, or the perception, understanding, and reaction to the distress or need of another human being[/quote]
You do not understand disabilities whatsoever, so you don't sympathize, at all. You just think that disabled people can pop a pill and be functional again. Believe me, I put as much effort into being barely functional as you do working.
[quote] I merely said that if at any time you feel better [/quote]
Yes because all us disabled people have periods where we don't suffer at all! You know what the extent of my "feeling better" is? Not being curled up in bed in excrutiating pain [I]wanting to die[/I], the pain is so bad, but instead barely able to think straight and coherently, moving slower than an arthritic old man while still being in excrutiating pain. Y'know, if the christian hell does exist, i'll tell you pal, it has nothing on what I go through every day. Even if i did get to a point where i was feeling well enough to [I]maybe[/I] do some charity work or whatever, by the time I 'd got to the place where the charity work is performed, I'd be ready to collapse.
[editline]14th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218350]No, I said for those who are more incapacitated, that medical assessments would be less frequent.[/QUOTE]
Except, how would you really know if a person is remotely capable of worked unless they were being observed by a accredited physician every single minute of the day!
I get assessed [I]every fucking year[/I] despite the fact that I have dozens of letters from neurosurgeons, bone specialists and other specialist doctors saying that I WILL NEVER RECOVER, I WILL ONLY EVER GET WORSE PERIOD.
But don't worry, in about a decade I'll not be "leeching" off the system according to you, I'll be dead. That's right, my condition, while slowly worsening is also slowly killing me, with an outside estimate of 10 years (and thats only an approximation, i could die right now, tommorow, or the day after, I have no idea when) You know how old I am? 27! KNow how long I've had all this shit? FIFTEEN FUCKING YEARS.
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218350]No, I said for those who are more incapacitated, that medical assessments would be less frequent.[/QUOTE]
So how exactly would that work? Let's say you had a doctor visit someone who is declared unable to work every month and that person just so happens to be considered to be able to work on that one day the doctor visited.
What then? They work that one day of that month? What if it was only that one day the person was able to work? Do you have the doctor show up every day to verify this until the person is no longer considered able to work?
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39218207]All the focus of Zeitgeist, TVP, The Free Charter and the likes merely sway to dismantle your work ethics. Do not succumb to these as they will try to prevent you from having the life of an ordinary honest and hard working citizen and who is well behaved and punctual.[/QUOTE]
I hate to say I used to think like this myself, the problem with being honest is that you can never tell if anyone else is either and it sets you up to be a gullible target by most people. Dumbest thing I ever said to my manager was "I've run out of work" - trust me those managers will find something to make all your hardwork seem fruitless, I've only once managed to utterly exhaust all the tasks for one day and my reward? Being able to drool into my coffee mug whilst staring at the wall...
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;39218367]You act as if benefits are the only thing that your taxes go to.
I'd love to swap places with you, even for a day, just so you could understand what it is like.
The system has, with [I]MANY[/I] questions, determined that I am entirely unfit and unable to work, whatsoever.
You do not understand disabilities whatsoever, so you don't sympathize, at all. You just think that disabled people can pop a pill and be functional again. Believe me, I put as much effort into being barely functional as you do working.
Yes because all us disabled people have periods where we don't suffer at all! You know what the extent of my "feeling better" is? Not being curled up in bed in excrutiating pain [I]wanting to die[/I], the pain is so bad, but instead barely able to think straight and coherently, moving slower than an arthritic old man while still being in excrutiating pain. Y'know, if the christian hell does exist, i'll tell you pal, it has nothing on what I go through every day. Even if i did get to a point where i was feeling well enough to [I]maybe[/I] do some charity work or whatever, by the time I 'd got to the place where the charity work is performed, I'd be ready to collapse.
[editline]14th January 2013[/editline]
Except, how would you really know if a person is remotely capable of worked unless they were being observed by a accredited physician every single minute of the day!
I get assessed [I]every fucking year[/I] despite the fact that I have dozens of letters from neurosurgeons, bone specialists and other specialist doctors saying that I WILL NEVER RECOVER, I WILL ONLY EVER GET WORSE PERIOD.
But don't worry, in about a decade I'll not be "leeching" off the system according to you, I'll be dead. That's right, my condition, while slowly worsening is also slowly killing me, with an outside estimate of 10 years (and thats only an approximation, i could die right now, tommorow, or the day after, I have no idea when) You know how old I am? 27! KNow how long I've had all this shit? FIFTEEN FUCKING YEARS.[/QUOTE]
I apologize and I do sympathize. I wish there was a cure available for you, and do sincerely hope that one arrives as soon as it possibly can.
However, you are still elusive of my point. Working people are helping you -- I merely stated that if at any time you are able to help back, that you should.
The only alternative is that people shouldn't have to work, that working should be an option. Unfortunately, my beliefs are such that one must work if they are fit and able to.
However, I do believe that you should be exempt from benefits tests due to your condition: you are indeed wholly incapacitated, and are quite unable to give something back. I do not have a problem with that. My point with regards to assessments were such that if one is about to do charity work or such, that assessments should focus on helping them step into the world of work and that if they do manage to step into it, to help them to get right into that working environment. For the wholly incapacitated, assessments shouldn't be unless cures are available - and at which point, the assessments should provide them direction/treatment if it is indeed available.
The point really is to try and get them better and well as best as the system can and to make them fit for work so they can get into the world of work (albeit for the exception of the wholly incapacitated -- unless treatments/cures are found to make them fit for work).
[editline]14th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Chopstick;39218445]I hate to say I used to think like this myself, the problem with being honest is that you can never tell if anyone else is either and it sets you up to be a gullible target by most people. Dumbest thing I ever said to my manager was "I've run out of work" - trust me those managers will find something to make all your hardwork seem fruitless, I've only once managed to utterly exhaust all the tasks for one day and my reward? Being able to drool into my coffee mug whilst staring at the wall...[/QUOTE]
If you "run out of work" and were fit and able to work, then you should continue working. My advise is that you shouldn't stop working: work all you can, as hard as you can and for as long as you can! It's better than not working!
Anyway, it's good that you've swayed from the delusional propositions of the workshy folk of the likes of Zeitgeist, TVP, etc - all those who believe that working should be an option. It shouldn't, period. It would be wrong!
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39220717]
However, you are still elusive of my point. Working people are helping you -- I merely stated that if at any time you are able to help back, that you should.[/QUOTE]
Who's to say he [i]isn't[/i] giving back? Merely by existing he's benefiting society more than you are with your snivelling little entitled holier-than-thou kid attitude and asinine uneducated right-wing talking points that have no basis in the actual situations of actual human beings.
It's apparent that you've lived your whole life without having to experience even a shred of the hardship that truly disabled people have experienced. I'm convinced that if you were speaking right now instead of typing all we'd be able to hear are the thrashing noises of someone so enveloped in their own privilege they're drowning in it.
[QUOTE=Irkalla;39099761]I dunno man, I'm one of the chronic unemployed.
The only jobs I've ever had are thanks to nepotism and cronyism.
There's just something about me that puts people off, it always has ever since I was a child. Not sure what it is or why... But why should any of that matter? All I want to do is scrape up enough money to go to school.
I guess somebody's gotta be part of the 7.9%. And it's that reason that I think workfare is flawed. There has to be a certain sector of society that's unemployed. Everyone can't just have a job. That's not how it works.
But yeah, I've been to every place in town looking for a job. Multiple times. I've even looked out of town. It's just something about me that folks don't like.[/QUOTE]
What could possibly be so wrong with you?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39221796]Who's to say he [i]isn't[/i] giving back? Merely by existing he's benefiting society more than you are with your snivelling little entitled holier-than-thou kid attitude and asinine uneducated right-wing talking points that have no basis in the actual situations of actual human beings.
It's apparent that you've lived your whole life without having to experience even a shred of the hardship that truly disabled people have experienced. I'm convinced that if you were speaking right now instead of typing all we'd be able to hear are the thrashing noises of someone so enveloped in their own privilege they're drowning in it.[/QUOTE]
Hey! I work and pay my taxes into this system! I help provide him sustenance. All I was saying is that if at any time - any time at all where he feels fit and well, by any means - if he's able to, that he should do some charity work to give back at least part of what he's been given.
My point merely was that those of the incapacitated should not be given a complete free ride, wholly exempt from the responsibilities of work.
I believe if at any time - and when, and that's any time - that everyone should work. They should work as much as possible, however they can, for as long as possible! It's not so much a problem with him receiving sustenance but more so that if he can at any time do some charity work, for anyone - freely - just as a means to give back and to begin offsetting what has been given to him.
Unless of course you're a lefty who thinks money grows on frees and that the world is full of rainbows and bouncy castles. Unfortunately, that is not true so welcome to the real world pal. People have to work to survive and there's no other option. There won't be another option (the only exemption are children and the incapacitated).
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Adius Shadow;39221866]What could possibly be so wrong with you?[/QUOTE]
It could be his approach. Employers want the most devoted and willful candidates who are willing to do anything to make sure they get their work done. And that's anything. If they have a cold/flu, they want them to still come to work on time. To remain punctual, not to be late or miss any days off. To orderly and appropriately dressed and to be well behaved and mannered with the code of conducts/etc and what the employer demands.
If he has a problem with authority, it will probably show. Troubled individuals most often find it difficult to find their way into full time employment. It seems that it is often those who believe that the world owes them their supposed right to free food, water and shelter. Employers hate this attitude. This is probably why there are so few hippie's employed and are instead protesting outside banks/landmarks in the name of some childish "occupy movement". They haven't woke up to the real world and remain nested and continuously deluded by their fantasies of a supposed "free world" without a need to work.
OP is bitter and frustrated about his retail job so he creates a deluded fantasy about contributing to society to justify his position and create an opportunity to condescend people
Pathetic
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39222040]Hey! I work and pay my taxes into this system! I help provide him sustenance. All I was saying is that if at any time - any time at all where he feels fit and well, by any means - if he's able to, that he should do some charity work to give back at least part of what he's been given.
My point merely was that those of the incapacitated should not be given a complete free ride, wholly exempt from the responsibilities of work.
I believe if at any time - and when, and that's any time - that everyone should work. They should work as much as possible, however they can, for as long as possible! It's not so much a problem with him receiving sustenance but more so that if he can at any time do some charity work, for anyone - freely - just as a means to give back and to begin offsetting what has been given to him.
[/QUOTE]
How would doing charity work be offsetting, or payiing back the "debt" since, you don't get paid for charity work and thus don't pay taxes, which seem to be your big thing about contributing.
and no, [I]you[/I] don't provide my sustenance, what you do, is pay into a system which then decides where to distribute the money, whether it be in benefits, covering government costs, miitary spending, healthcare, education, police, etc etc.
[quote]It could be his approach. Employers want the most devoted and willful candidates who are willing to do anything to make sure they get their work done. And that's anything. If they have a cold/flu, they want them to still come to work on time. To remain punctual, not to be late or miss any days off. To orderly and appropriately dressed and to be well behaved and mannered with the code of conducts/etc and what the employer demands.
If he has a problem with authority, it will probably show. Troubled individuals most often find it difficult to find their way into full time employment. It seems that it is often those who believe that the world owes them their supposed right to free food, water and shelter. Employers hate this attitude. This is probably why there are so few hippie's employed and are instead protesting outside banks/landmarks in the name of some childish "occupy movement". They haven't woke up to the real world and remain nested and continuously deluded by their fantasies of a supposed "free world" without a need to work. [/quote]
Or, you ignorant cunt, it could be a case of employers unwilling to continually employ him because his conditions interfere with his ability to work at peak performance. You've basically just done the thing every moronic, raging cunthole does, which is to [I]call people with disabilities [B]LAZY[/B][/I]. Which is so far out of the ballpark that you should be taken outside and forcibly have your limbs broken. You've basically just called the entirety of the disabled people in the world, either lazy, hippies or both.
Infact, with that, I'm fucking done with trying to explain things to you, and I suggest everyone else who reads this thread does the same.
OP, do you even know the definition of disability or incapacitated?
"incapacitated past participle, past tense of in·ca·pac·i·tate
Verb
Prevent from functioning in a normal way: "incapacitated by a heart attack".
dis·a·bil·i·ty
/ˌdisəˈbilitē/
Noun
A physical or mental condition that limits a person's movements, senses, or activities.
A disadvantage or handicap, esp. one imposed or recognized by the law.
Synonyms
incapacity - incapability - inability - incompetence"
Charity work does not put food on the table or pay the bills. Be thankful you're in good health and have the ability to work.
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39222040]Hey! I work and pay my taxes into this system! I help provide him sustenance. All I was saying is that if at any time - any time at all where he feels fit and well, by any means - if he's able to, that he should do some charity work to give back at least part of what he's been given.
My point merely was that those of the incapacitated should not be given a complete free ride, wholly exempt from the responsibilities of work.
I believe if at any time - and when, and that's any time - that everyone should work. They should work as much as possible, however they can, for as long as possible! It's not so much a problem with him receiving sustenance but more so that if he can at any time do some charity work, for anyone - freely - just as a means to give back and to begin offsetting what has been given to him.
Unless of course you're a lefty who thinks money grows on frees and that the world is full of rainbows and bouncy castles. Unfortunately, that is not true so welcome to the real world pal. People have to work to survive and there's no other option. There won't be another option (the only exemption are children and the incapacitated).
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
It could be his approach. Employers want the most devoted and willful candidates who are willing to do anything to make sure they get their work done. And that's anything. If they have a cold/flu, they want them to still come to work on time. To remain punctual, not to be late or miss any days off. To orderly and appropriately dressed and to be well behaved and mannered with the code of conducts/etc and what the employer demands.
If he has a problem with authority, it will probably show. Troubled individuals most often find it difficult to find their way into full time employment. It seems that it is often those who believe that the world owes them their supposed right to free food, water and shelter. Employers hate this attitude. This is probably why there are so few hippie's employed and are instead protesting outside banks/landmarks in the name of some childish "occupy movement". They haven't woke up to the real world and remain nested and continuously deluded by their fantasies of a supposed "free world" without a need to work.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I obviously am not punctual. You know like that time I showed up on time to put a job application in, and the boss didn't show up that day. I waited 4 hours that day, and packed it up and went home. I repeated this for the next three days.
When he finally decided to show up and I handed in my application, he actually had the cheek to call me out on my sandals. Yeah, I'm obviously the one with the problem here. It couldn't be employers' ridiculously over the top expectations.
In this economy, where one has to compete with degree holders for minimum wage work, there isn't any room for someone that has been fired so much as one single time.
The OP in this thread is exactly what's wrong with society today.
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;39223394]How would doing charity work be offsetting, or payiing back the "debt" since, you don't get paid for charity work and thus don't pay taxes, which seem to be your big thing about contributing.
and no, [I]you[/I] don't provide my sustenance, what you do, is pay into a system which then decides where to distribute the money, whether it be in benefits, covering government costs, miitary spending, healthcare, education, police, etc etc.
Or, you ignorant cunt, it could be a case of employers unwilling to continually employ him because his conditions interfere with his ability to work at peak performance. You've basically just done the thing every moronic, raging cunthole does, which is to [I]call people with disabilities [B]LAZY[/B][/I]. Which is so far out of the ballpark that you should be taken outside and forcibly have your limbs broken. You've basically just called the entirety of the disabled people in the world, either lazy, hippies or both.
Infact, with that, I'm fucking done with trying to explain things to you, and I suggest everyone else who reads this thread does the same.[/QUOTE]
If it's spent on health care, then the government rightfully deemed it to be necessarily spent as so. Vice versa for spends on military, social security, etc - it's the governments choice and is rightfully so. This is an age of democracy and it's the collective choice of people of which party to vote in, so if you're whining about the government then either a) you didn't vote, in which case if you didn't you have NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN, b) had a weak vote and didn't emphasize the importance of politics enough to your peers or for them to catalyze effort onto their peers, or c) were just unlucky with your vote. I sympathize with the latter-most of the options.
If his doctor isn't taking him seriously, then he should switch doctor and try a better one. The better one should help get him treatment that's focused on making him fit for work.
However, my point still stands in the previous post. I merely stated that it could be, addressing the previous poster who queried "what could possibly be so wrong with you?". If it was just "something just puts employers off me", aside from his sleep issue, then it could indeed be his approach.
And my taxes do find their way to pay towards your sustenance, like many other of my working fellows. You should be most grateful for the likes of I who work hard to pay our taxes.
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=itchyflakes;39224749]OP, do you even know the definition of disability or incapacitated?
"incapacitated past participle, past tense of in·ca·pac·i·tate
Verb
Prevent from functioning in a normal way: "incapacitated by a heart attack".
dis·a·bil·i·ty
/ˌdisəˈbilitē/
Noun
A physical or mental condition that limits a person's movements, senses, or activities.
A disadvantage or handicap, esp. one imposed or recognized by the law.
Synonyms
incapacity - incapability - inability - incompetence"
Charity work does not put food on the table or pay the bills. Be thankful you're in good health and have the ability to work.[/QUOTE]
A disability incapacitates one's ability to do something. That's what I was referring to with regards to my use of "incapacity".
And charity work isn't about being greedy and wanting more sustenance, it's more so about giving back whenever and however you can. Charity work can fill in the blanks, bridging the gaps of the partially-incapacitated and enabling them to do at least some work if they can't enter proper employment. At least then they would be doing work, which of course is better than doing no work. Any work is better than no work.
People who depend upon these things though don't have a great life with everything paid for them. They get the bare essentials so they can live, but not actually live life as a human being is supposed to. It's absolutely shit to live like that.
[QUOTE=Irkalla;39225691]Yeah I obviously am not punctual. You know like that time I showed up on time to put a job application in, and the boss didn't show up that day. I waited 4 hours that day, and packed it up and went home. I repeated this for the next three days.
When he finally decided to show up and I handed in my application, he actually had the cheek to call me out on my sandals. Yeah, I'm obviously the one with the problem here. It couldn't be employers' ridiculously over the top expectations.
In this economy, where one has to compete with degree holders for minimum wage work, there isn't any room for someone that has been fired so much as one single time.[/QUOTE]
He earned his right to his position and worked hard for it. You should respect him, whether he has those choices or not. He's probably earned it. Sandals probably aren't the most fashionable of footwear to impress an employer either, try men's shoes and an actual suit. Something that makes you appear most willing which also displays a strong work ethic. He wants employees to listen to him, to behave orderly and appropriate to his requests and to be wholly punctual with perfect attendance. He doesn't want a layabout who does only what's necessary, he wants someone who's willing to go all the way just to make sure that work gets done. He wants sole dedication. If you want to work, you should be willing to give up whatever it is you're doing: to move to a new location, walk plentiful miles even if your feet ache every day. It shows dedication and that's what employers want. An employer would much rather someone who walks 20 miles to work of a morning, gets there on time all the time, never misses a day off and does what they're told and has no bad behavior/isn't disruptive, than someone who gets a taxi to the workplace who lives 5 miles away (even if they are punctual, have perfect attendance, etc -- you would come atop the list by displaying greater dedication and willfulness towards work).
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Van-man;39225898]The OP in this thread is exactly what's wrong with society today.[/QUOTE]
No, it's the workshy/those not properly committed to work that are the wrongs of society. The evils of welfare have indeed run rampant throughout society. People are way more idle now than they were in the good old days. In the good old days people worked long hours, didn't complain about their wage and were wholly content with just their sustenance. They didn't argue with their employers or spout silly ideals of fantasy lands. They just simply worked and dedicated their lives to working. That's what wrong. People should dedicate their lives to working!
[video=youtube;Lz15INZ01XI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz15INZ01XI[/video]
[video=youtube;myQ9tkQD2UE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myQ9tkQD2UE[/video]
I don't have a problem with his race/him whining about it. It's him not working that bothers me. I often work up to 52 hours a week and he's just a layabout spouting his religious views whilst nurting his kids! It's people like him, who are not looking for work/dedicating themselves to work. Instead, they do a Youtube channel/some other silly thing instead when they should be queuing up begging for a job at McDonalds or Burger King.
Or go to college, and get a job you enjoy. TBH, you make work seem like shit.. "dedicate you life to it, work long hours, etc.."
[quote]If it's spent on health care, then the government rightfully deemed it to be necessarily spent as so. Vice versa for spends on military, social security, etc - it's the governments choice and is rightfully so. This is an age of democracy and it's the collective choice of people of which party to vote in, so if you're whining about the government then either a) you didn't vote, in which case if you didn't you have NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN, b) had a weak vote and didn't emphasize the importance of politics enough to your peers or for them to catalyze effort onto their peers, or c) were just unlucky with your vote. I sympathize with the latter-most of the options.
[/quote]
So if tax money is spent on anything BUT benefits, you deem it rightly so? Then with your arguments, money being spent on benefits is rightly so because its all part of the same system that determines where tax money shuold be spent.
[quote] You should be most grateful for the likes of I who work hard to pay our taxes.[/quote]
Who says I'm not grateful? But where does that gratitude end? Before or after people who are on benefits, for whatever reason, whether it be disability or lack of jobs in the market, are made into basically indentured slaves, forced to work as hard as anyone else in the job world, but for under minimum wage.
[quote]People should dedicate their lives to working!
[/quote]
People who are able, should work to live, not live to work, like you espouse.
You continuously lump in [B]everyone[/B] who is on benefits as work shy, lazy or hippies.
[quote]Instead, they do a Youtube channel/some other silly thing instead when they should be queuing up begging for a job at McDonalds or Burger King. [/quote]
And what of those people who do do that, just because you're looking for work and even begging for work, doesn't mean that companies will employ you there and then on the spot. For people to work, theren needs to be the job in the first place, which, in this day and age, there really isn't. Even college and university Graduates who send out hundreds of CV's a month struggle to find work, but you'd just put that down to lack of effort.
[quote] And charity work isn't about being greedy and wanting more sustenance, it's more so about giving back whenever and however you can. Charity work can fill in the blanks, bridging the gaps of the partially-incapacitated and enabling them to do at least some work if they can't enter proper employment. At least then they would be doing work, which of course is better than doing no work. Any work is better than no work.
[/quote]
Except if you are able to do any work at all, you're lumped in as being fully fit to work, regardless of whether you are or aren't.
[quote]He earned his right to his position and worked hard for it. You should respect him, whether he has those choices or not. He's probably earned it. Sandals probably aren't the most fashionable of footwear to impress an employer either, try men's shoes and an actual suit. Something that makes you appear most willing which also displays a strong work ethic. He wants employees to listen to him, to behave orderly and appropriate to his requests and to be wholly punctual with perfect attendance. He doesn't want a layabout who does only what's necessary, he wants someone who's willing to go all the way just to make sure that work gets done. He wants sole dedication. If you want to work, you should be willing to give up whatever it is you're doing: to move to a new location, walk plentiful miles even if your feet ache every day. It shows dedication and that's what employers want. An employer would much rather someone who walks 20 miles to work of a morning, gets there on time all the time, never misses a day off and does what they're told and has no bad behavior/isn't disruptive, than someone who gets a taxi to the workplace who lives 5 miles away (even if they are punctual, have perfect attendance, etc -- you would come atop the list by displaying greater dedication and willfulness towards work).
[/quote]
This settles it, you're the perfect, brainwashed corporate lackey. People like you help promote the idea that money should come before everything, even the welfare of other human beings. You'd be a prime candidate for supervising a chinese sweat shop.
I just think some people would defend welfare til death. Idk, the real argument is towards the government.. Point is, no judgement is passed on the people who accept aid, but I am critical of our government. Fact of the matter is, some people like Raven need welfare, but at the same time, THERE IS a moral, philosophical, etc.. case against taking money from someone without choice and giving it to someone else. Does it help people who need it like Raven? Absolutely. Can there be better way to help people besides taxing them to death? Yes, having a healthy economy as a whole is a great start... There are other solutions whether they be be discovered or undiscovered and it will take time to reform....
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39229638]
No, it's the workshy/those not properly committed to work that are the wrongs of society. The evils of welfare have indeed run rampant throughout society. People are way more idle now than they were in the good old days. In the good old days people worked long hours, didn't complain about their wage and were wholly content with just their sustenance. They didn't argue with their employers or spout silly ideals of fantasy lands. They just simply worked and dedicated their lives to working. That's what wrong. People should dedicate their lives to working![/QUOTE]
Haha oh god this guy has got to be trolling. In the "good old days" we left our disabled to die and children worked in factories for far less than livable wages and were frequently killed or maimed by unsafe work conditions.
They didn't argue with their employers because they had no choice.
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;39230452]So if tax money is spent on anything BUT benefits, you deem it rightly so? Then with your arguments, money being spent on benefits is rightly so because its all part of the same system that determines where tax money shuold be spent.
Who says I'm not grateful? But where does that gratitude end? Before or after people who are on benefits, for whatever reason, whether it be disability or lack of jobs in the market, are made into basically indentured slaves, forced to work as hard as anyone else in the job world, but for under minimum wage.
People who are able, should work to live, not live to work, like you espouse.
You continuously lump in [B]everyone[/B] who is on benefits as work shy, lazy or hippies.
And what of those people who do do that, just because you're looking for work and even begging for work, doesn't mean that companies will employ you there and then on the spot. For people to work, theren needs to be the job in the first place, which, in this day and age, there really isn't. Even college and university Graduates who send out hundreds of CV's a month struggle to find work, but you'd just put that down to lack of effort.
Except if you are able to do any work at all, you're lumped in as being fully fit to work, regardless of whether you are or aren't.
This settles it, you're the perfect, brainwashed corporate lackey. People like you help promote the idea that money should come before everything, even the welfare of other human beings. You'd be a prime candidate for supervising a chinese sweat shop.[/QUOTE]
No, I said whatever the government focuses on with its spending powers is deemed rightly so. It's a justly action. Government's aren't trying to make the world worse for their citizens, they merely want to make for a better world. And they need people working to do that: good, honest and well behaved working citizens.
It's not "slavery" if they're told that they must go through workfare to develop the skills they need, that will HELP get them into the world of work. Sure, some have to do 40 hours per week in a supermarket like Tesco, but it's NOT slavery. They have a choice of whether to go on that benefit and abide to the criteria for receiving that benefit or to go off it. It's entirely their choice!
If you work to live, you live to work. There's no exception.
If sending CV's isn't solving the problem for them, then perhaps they should prove their dedication by some other means. Perhaps by trying to contact the employer personally and to express their devotion to work. That would most probably help get them a job.
And that's not true. There are many disability charities with disabled people working for them, doing charity work.
I'm not a "brainwashed corporate lackey". I'm an ordinary hard working citizen, like every other normal hard working citizen.
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39230604]Haha oh god this guy has got to be trolling. In the "good old days" we left our disabled to die and children worked in factories for far less than livable wages and were frequently killed or maimed by unsafe work conditions.
They didn't argue with their employers because they had no choice.[/QUOTE]
Governments are better now. Sure they make mistakes, but don't tarnish them with the same brush everywhere. Besides, if you're at the bottom then you have no choice. Whether you're in China and must work long hours for Foxconn, you must keep up that work ethic and work your way up the ladder. There shouldn't be any other way, unless you have peers who deem you worthy of money -- i.e. such who invest in your abilities and your work ethic. Otherwise, you have to seek some other way to prove that worth and it's always by starting at the bottom. Those at the bottom do not deserve a "good wage", they deserve the bare essentials for working. Success doesn't come at the click of your fingers, you've gotta work for it!
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Relaxation;39230562]I just think some people would defend welfare til death. Idk, the real argument is towards the government.. Point is, no judgement is passed on the people who accept aid, but I am critical of our government. Fact of the matter is, some people like Raven need welfare, but at the same time, THERE IS a moral, philosophical, etc.. case against taking money from someone without choice and giving it to someone else. Does it help people who need it like Raven? Absolutely. Can there be better way to help people besides taxing them to death? Yes, having a healthy economy as a whole is a great start... There are other solutions whether they be be discovered or undiscovered and it will take time to reform....[/QUOTE]
Either you keep a check on the disabled and make sure they do work when they are able to, and focus on making them able to, or you give everyone free sustenance. If you give everyone free sustenance, then no one would be working for that sustenance. And don't try the "oh well, if we gave those who provide that sustenance footballers wage, then people would want to work to make that sustenance free" because it's bullshit. The system we have now is improving to be the best it can be. Soon, the disabled will have to take treatment such as anti-depressants/etc to help get them into work. If they refuse, benefits are stopped. For job seekers, they will lose their welfare if they don't accept work placements (which can last for just a meager 6 months of just 32 hours a week). They don't deserve a minimum wage for it however because they must earn that right. Governments are just trying to help get people into work and to end the "something for nothing" cultural ideal. People these days expect too much from society and it's wrong!
[QUOTE=livelonger12;39231148]
Either you keep a check on the disabled and make sure they do work when they are able to, and focus on making them able to, [B]or you give everyone free sustenance.[/B][/QUOTE]
You see this? Right here? The thing you have been repeating over and over again?
Explain this. Explain this exactly down to every single detail and source you have. Prove to me just this once that you have even the slightest idea of what you are talking about.
[quote]No, I said whatever the government focuses on with its spending powers is deemed rightly so. It's a justly action. Government's aren't trying to make the world worse for their citizens, they merely want to make for a better world. And they need people working to do that: good, honest and well behaved working citizens.[/quote]
And people who cannot work are still citizens. Disabled and unemployed are still part of the society.
[quote]If you work to live, you live to work. There's no exception.[/quote]
Working to live and living to work are two entirely different things, but you can't see it.
[quote]
If sending CV's isn't solving the problem for them, then perhaps they should prove their dedication by some other means. Perhaps by trying to contact the employer personally and to express their devotion to work. That would most probably help get them a job.[/quote]
Obviously people should walk over hot coals just to show employers that they can work, right? The reason the CV's aren't working is that there [B]aren't the jobs to go around.[/B]
[quote]
I'm not a "brainwashed corporate lackey". I'm an ordinary hard working citizen, like every other normal hard working citizen.[/quote]
Brainwashed people never see that they're brainwashed.
[quote]It's not "slavery" if they're told that they must go through workfare to develop the skills they need, that will HELP get them into the world of work. Sure, some have to do 40 hours per week in a supermarket like Tesco, but it's NOT slavery. They have a choice of whether to go on that benefit and abide to the criteria for receiving that benefit or to go off it. It's entirely their choice![/quote]
I'd love to see you work a 40 hour week for the equivilant of £1.40p an hour pay. With none of your travel or other work related expenses getting covered. Some choice either ending up homeless and starving, or beind forced to work (with the stoppage of your benefits as a threat) for 1/4 of minimum wage isn't a choice at all. By the way you ignorant cokcmongling bastard, minimum wage is not a right that can be given or taken away, [B]any[/B] employer is legally obliged to pay a minimum wage as specified by the government.
[quote]Either you keep a check on the disabled and make sure they do work when they are able to[/quote]
Doing that on a continuing basis, having to pay highly specialised professionals or a regular basis, to ensure that every single disabled person is able to work, on a regular basis, would end up costing way more than benefits do now, in both the long AND short term.
you're basically saying, anyone who is unfit to work, or who are sometimes fit to work, but not fit enough to earn a living wage, should be thrown out in the streets and left to die, even the greeks 2,000 years ago didnt have as barbaric a stance towards the disabled and the infirm as you do.
livelonger12 has some fucked up view about life, so I am just gonna stay out of this and speak words of wisdom
[B]Work to live. Don't live to work.[/B]
edit: shit he already beat me to it.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39231382]You see this? Right here? The thing you have been repeating over and over again?
Explain this. Explain this exactly down to every single detail and source you have. Prove to me just this once that you have even the slightest idea of what you are talking about.[/QUOTE]
Free sustenance, i.e. someone not having to pay or work for their water, food or shelter. I.e. it being some deluded "human right".
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;39231531]And people who cannot work are still citizens. Disabled and unemployed are still part of the society.
Working to live and living to work are two entirely different things, but you can't see it.
Obviously people should walk over hot coals just to show employers that they can work, right? The reason the CV's aren't working is that there [B]aren't the jobs to go around.[/B]
Brainwashed people never see that they're brainwashed.
I'd love to see you work a 40 hour week for the equivilant of £1.40p an hour pay. With none of your travel or other work related expenses getting covered. Some choice either ending up homeless and starving, or beind forced to work (with the stoppage of your benefits as a threat) for 1/4 of minimum wage isn't a choice at all. By the way you ignorant cokcmongling bastard, minimum wage is not a right that can be given or taken away, [B]any[/B] employer is legally obliged to pay a minimum wage as specified by the government.
Doing that on a continuing basis, having to pay highly specialised professionals or a regular basis, to ensure that every single disabled person is able to work, on a regular basis, would end up costing way more than benefits do now, in both the long AND short term.
you're basically saying, anyone who is unfit to work, or who are sometimes fit to work, but not fit enough to earn a living wage, should be thrown out in the streets and left to die, even the greeks 2,000 years ago didnt have as barbaric a stance towards the disabled and the infirm as you do.[/QUOTE]
Yes, an unfortunate part of society that society is innately obliged to take care of. However, there should still be limits, i.e. those that are getting better/managing their conditions better should be more closely observed than those who have greater permanence of their disability. So for the former, they would be pushed into work quicker than the latter group (the latter-most of which would not be pushed at all, for they are wholly incapacitated).
If you work to live and have no other choice, then you live to work.
Brainwashed? Exactly how do you think I'm brainwashed? I'm merely placing my views - the views of common working folk - of good honest hard working values and how everyone should be forced to take part in it.
It is a choice. You don't have to go on benefits. And they get their rent paid for, free healthcare/prescriptions and free dental care. The costs all add up. Besides, it's a starting point for them but obviously you see that as a bad thing. You think giving these folk a chance to work is a bad thing. It's not: it helps them develop a stronger work ethic which will thus make them more attractive to employers.
You don't seem to be reading my replies properly. Those who are becoming more able should be more closely observed than those that are more permanently stuck with their incapacity. It helps get them into work.
I'm not saying that. Those who are wholly incapacitated should still receive their benefits, but if they can work on some days then they should. People should work as much as they can for as long as they can and that's the way things should be. People helping each other! I'm not saying they should be left to starve, but they should be punished for not working when they can (even if they are unable to the next day).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
