[Closed] Nasty Tories at it again

"Very simple Fred - none of the people that are involved are MTBers nor do they post here, hence, safe to conclude that you are not part of that group. "

So, because I'm not 'involved' in your particular charity activity, you assume you know about any other aspect of my life?

You don't, end of. You really have no idea who I am, what I do or don't do. The world is a bigger place than just you.

"Dunning-Kruger effect?"

I have long suspected similar.

Does anyone know whether the ONS classes people who travel to a place of work, then spend all day quoting internet drivel on STW as being in or out of work?

Some of the posts in this thread have more contemptuous smarm in them than I thought it was possible to communicate in writing.

So at least I learned something.

"that 37000 people have cause to celebrate a new job following unemployment should be good enough in itself.."

It should be, but rising homelessness for one, somewhat tempers this. For any 'good' news the tories may chose to focus on, there will be many more bits of 'bad' news. The net effect is that society is declining, not improving.

No Fred, I assumed nothing, but merely guessed that

teamhurtmore - Member
But I am sure that you are helping in other ways...
POSTED 2 HOURS AGO #

So all is good! The more that people actually do something the better, hey? No point leaving it to governments....

On the people being involved in these factual stats not being MTBers

why bet on that, no one has suggested it? 😯

... but I prefer to look at the actual, physical reality of people's lives. Such as the massive increase in food bank use, just to use one example. The 'facts' of this are that increasing numbers of people cannot afford to buy food to eat.

I don't remember there being any food banks when I was a kid. Their use has increased exponentially since then.

fin25 - Member

I think looking at employment/unemployment figures alone is pointless. Yes, more people are in employment than ever before. That is a tiny part of the story. Three million working people in poverty?
That's three million people who are NOT BENEFITING from being in a working family.
This narrative that, once someone has a job, everything is fine is nonsense.

Add in underemployment- now falling at last from record levels but still about 50% higher than it was 10 years ago. That's been estimated at a 5 million hour a week shortfall. To put that another way, the equivalent of 140000 full time jobs.

Nice footnote from the BBC on today's figures, btw:

"The ONS is 95% confident that the figure of a 37,000 fall in unemployment is accurate give or take 79,000. That means that the fall in unemployment is not statistically significant."

The level of employment is a second derivative issue - far more important for all concerned is the level of productivity. Our record there is pretty dismal and without it, many of the real issues described above cannot be tackled.

Well this is the Work and Pensions Secratary's ideal;

[i]Jobs of the future may not have stable hours, holiday pay, sick pay, or pensions, the Work and Pensions Secretary has said.[/i]

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-gig-economy-damian-green-speech-holiday-minimum-wage-sick-pay-hours-a7421071.html ]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-gig-economy-damian-green-speech-holiday-minimum-wage-sick-pay-hours-a7421071.html[/url]

still, gets those pesky statistics down...

IT contractors typically choose self employed, no pension, no sick pay, no health insurance .. its not about the terms and conditions its about the wages. Also they do this to pay less tax.

The issue we have in the UK is scams to get round minimum wage and tax law and agencies / contractors who facilitate this. Add on top an unli ited supply of cheap manpower and you have a problem

Major factor in these disagreements is the reliance on stats. Typical example....a working stw member reads a (biased on left or right) newspaper and comes to a conclusion. I'd bet that if that person actually went and spent some time with people in a homeless persons hostel, soup kitchen, mental health ward, walked the streets taking the time to get to get to know the lives and back stories of these people they have an opinion on, said opinion would change and you'd realise life is shit out there for many many people (which is unacceptable in a country with so much money)...and a lot of it is because of issues that are out of their control.

Poverty. Hugely manipulated. There are definitions which include having the money for a holiday. Even TMH linked definition of absolute poverty isn't absolute it's benchmarked against the median income. So for example as pensions rise poverty goes up. As someone with Indian relavtives and having travelled extensively in Asia poverty here is very minor in relation.

We all have a social conscience imo, the issue is how do we pay the bills ?

Look at Greece, very generous payments until .... the music stopped along with their ability to keep borrowing money

On the subject of foodbanks....and don't get me wrong here, I think they are doing a great job for a lot of people. However...if theres a foodbank down the road and I'm a bit skint, then I'd probably nip in there to see what was up for grabs. If it wasn't there, I wouldn't.

So its not surprising that more people are using foodbanks is it? They never existed before!

edit:sorry Jim, just spotted your post above saying similar.

However...if theres a foodbank down the road and I'm a bit skint, then I'd probably nip in there to see what was up for grabs. If it wasn't there, I wouldn't.

So its not surprising that more people are using foodbanks is it? They never existed before!

You can't just turn up and fill your boots. You need to be referred and will be given a voucher for so many days provision. My MiL volunteers in a food bank. Believe me they are both a much needed safety net and last resort for those who use them.

In addition to the above I should also say that I am deeply ashamed to live in a so-called first world country where food banks are deemed necessary and are now seemingly accepted as the norm.

if theres a foodbank down the road and I'm a bit skint, then I'd probably nip in there to see what was up for grabs

oh, see how out of touch you are? Food banks don't work like that...

I expect Carney will push up interest rates soon to control inflation as all this extra money floods into the economy.

Look at Greece, very generous payments until .... the music stopped along with their ability to keep borrowing money

EVB and coyote - who is denying that life is shit for some folk, and the reasons can be out of their control or that its acceptable to have a need for foodbanks?

When Carney does raise rates, there will be v real problems with indebtedness.

Major factor in these disagreements is the reliance on [s]stats.[/s] anecdotes/extrapolation

FTFY

oh, see how out of touch you are? Food banks don't work like that...

well of course I'm out of touch....I'm fortunate not to think about using one.

I'm probably out of touch with a lot of other things too, so whats your point??

I'm probably out of touch with a lot of other things too, [b]so whats your point?? [/b]

I think the point is to educate yourself before spouting DWP falsehoods and getting shot down?

Such as the massive increase in food bank use, just to use one example.

Free food? Of course if you offer free food people will take it. The only person I know who uses a food bank also spends a fair amount on weed every month. Is the foodbank subsidising his drug habit?

No surprise. Rich people arguing poverty isn't as bad as it really is and its the manipulation of figures....

Wow IRC, one example of gaming the system over 500000 or so genuine cases.

Edit, possibly gaming the system, we don't know the guys true story, just some anecdotal "bloke down the pub sez" horseshit

And of course, nothing like the reality of food bank users, often to ashamed to ask for help until almost forced to go for help...

If it's free food, why don't you rock up and claim yours.
Report back here on how you fair

No surprise. Rich people arguing poverty isn't as bad as it really is and its the manipulation of figures....

EVB perhaps you missed the irony in the OP's point, or simply choosing to make it for him!?!

Wow IRC, one example of gaming the system over 500000 or so genuine cases.

What? Checked them all have you?

Have you?

Defensive, much?

Isn't neo-liberalism great? All at each others throats so divide and conquer can prevail for the haves in our society.

Isn't neo-liberalism great? All at each others throats so divide and conquer can prevail for the haves in our society.

Indeed...

Or to put it another way, we are all so busy worrying about how many are cheating the system that we don't notice how many the system cheats.

Or to put it another way, we are all so busy worrying about how many are cheating the system that we don't notice how many the system cheats.

Agree.

Call me soft but one child in poverty is too many. Poverty is morally acceptable when there is no surplus in the system. We have a significant surplus in the global economy - yet people go hungry, die from preventable disease and fight over 'limited' resources that are not limited. Whether a child's parent works or does not - how is this situation justifiable?

who is denying that life is shit for some folk, [b][u]and the reasons can be out of their control[/b][/u] or that its acceptable to have a need for foodbanks

So why screw them further through unfair assessment for work procedures and slashing benefits for already vulnerable people? Why not go after the Philip Greens of this world, you know the "wealth creators" so beloved of the right.

What Coyote sed.

There seems to be an attitude that we blame those with the need rather than those who could help alleviate the need but chose not to.

Very simple Fred

Playing the ball or the man ?

Call me soft but one child in poverty is too many. Poverty is morally acceptable when there is no surplus in the system. We have a significant surplus in the global economy - yet people go hungry, die from preventable disease and fight over 'limited' resources that are not limited. Whether a child's parent works or does not - how is this situation justifiable?

Don't be silly, we can justify it be stigmatising them as scroungers and de-humanising them.

Rope the right wing press in to help and it's job done.

DrJ - Member

Very simple Fred

Playing the ball or the man ?

You'll get nowhere on this forum softening your words with sports-themed analogies 😉

fwiw i find clodhopper's arguing style vastly different from freddibnah/rudeboy. (*waves 😀 )
Unless its 'fred' used in the parlance of bikesnob.nyc?

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37992488 ]everything is hunky dory in UKPLC[/url]

Klunk, any fool knows that (alongside sufferers of severe and enduring mental illness, and those with moderate to severe learning difficulties,) the very infirm elderly and people with Alzheimer's don't vote in the numbers that more physically and mentally well elderly people do. So looking after these people properly doesn't really help you win elections.

Being lobbied by care contractors might though. 🙁

So why screw them further through unfair assessment for work procedures and slashing benefits for already vulnerable people? Why not go after the Philip Greens of this world, you know the "wealth creators" so beloved of the right.

Why indeed?

Who is supporting unfair assessment on this thread?

Ditto slashing benefits? The only real issue is if/when benefits become a disincentive to work/penalise work, since most agree that work is the best route out of poverty. But there have been no posts on that topic.

Action is being taken against the likes of Philip Green - where the law permits - and against tax evasion, albeit not enough agreed.

So anyway what has this all got to do with the good news on employment - this is the positive foundation on what most of us actually agree on in terms of outcomes?

since most agree that work is the best route out of poverty. But there have been no posts on that topic.

I bet the 3 million working poor in Britain might not agree.

They might not, true.

Work is merely a starting point - well that's not true, education is the starting point. The JRF sums it up well

Katie Schmuecker from JRF said: “Work is the best route to economic security and a better standard of living and we welcome record levels of employment. But, as well as more jobs, [b]we need better jobs so all families can benefit from economic growth. [/b]Despite working full time hours, more families are still falling short of what they need to make ends meet. We need the state and business to ensure people in work can achieve economy and security.

The ends are agreed, if not the means. Personally, I think relying on the state to provide the answers is a long shot. It (here and elsewhere) has preferred the long established supposed-panacea of benefits as a band-aid to address the symptoms rather than addressing the root causes.

There's little there I can disagree with.

But until employers and corporate types step up to the plate and pay a living wage, on the 4th of Never as that will hurt the shareholder dividend i'll add

Until the Rentier classes stop seeing any steps towards the above being an excuse to increase profit

Until workers and unemployed workers realise their true power, unite, organise and form the ability to bring change or even ruination to the above by simply downing tools or civil disobedience en masse

Until all of the above realise there will always be an element of society unable to participate in paid employment for a host of reasons, and this group will need subsidy from all of us who are able. And lets stop this lie that there are elements of this group who are ****less, idle, bring nothing to the table of society.
EVERYBODY contributes in some way, The gutter press go out of their way to find the fraction of a percent who by some misdeed on that partcular week seem on the face of things to prove otherwise.

Until that day, we need enlightened government legislature to protect the weak, to cap the runaway greed, and yes make sure that employment is always better than a life on benefits.

ulysee - how about until people stop distorting reality, debate and progress becomes impossible.

Indeed, how about people stop distorting reality...

Finally, something we can all agree on.

😆

Absolutely, thm

how about until people stop distorting reality

But so many of them have direct and indirect vested interests not to mention petty jealously, pleasure from other peoples suffering, keeping up appearances and onupmanship to make sure that day never comes.

pleasure from other peoples suffering,

Really ? 😐

Really?

Don't panic, it's only Chester and he has previous on these threads!

OK 😐

Fraid so jamba. Pissing on other peoples chips is a hobby to some.

"Playing the ball or the man ?"

"Unless its 'fred' used in the parlance of bikesnob.nyc?"

I'm curious as to why both THM and Binners have been using 'Fred' in response to my posts. I'm assuming this may be some sort of forum 'in-joke', with which I am not familiar. It definitely seems to be some sort of personal jibe directed against me. Which I find somewhat disappointing; I have no problem with you disagreeing with me, but resorting to personal digs just shows up the weakness of your own argument, position and character.

Having read up on the bike snob nyc definition, I am still none the wiser. I really don't think that applies to me!

" how about until people stop distorting reality, debate and progress becomes impossible."

How about that?

"I'd bet that if that person actually went and spent some time with people in a homeless persons hostel, soup kitchen, mental health ward, walked the streets taking the time to get to get to know the lives and back stories of these people they have an opinion on, said opinion would change and you'd realise life is shit out there for many many people (which is unacceptable in a country with so much money)...and a lot of it is because of issues that are out of their control."

Very well said. It's hard to distort reality when you've seen it up close and personal.

As for 'work is the best route to economic security', well, how d'you explain the rising numbers of families in work, but needing to claim benefits? It's not the work itself that is the key to economic emancipation, it's the opportunities for progression through employment, individual development and a recognition of the value of that individual, that is one of the best routes to economic security. Increasing numbers of jobs are lower and lower skilled, there is very little if any opportunity for progression with many jobs, meaning that someone can be stuck on shit wages for ever, and never get out of the poverty trap. People with years of service can end up being made redundant, as companies simply don't want to increase their wages in line with the number of years they've put in, and can simply replace them with another younger person on minimum wage. If there is no development for the individual, they stagnate and cannot move upwards.

"pleasure from other peoples suffering"

"Really ?"

Really. See Phillip Green. Etc.

"work is the best route to economic security"

[img] [/img]

So we have now gone from positive economic data on the UK labour market to Aushwitz!

And in only four pages - amazing.

And in only four pages - amazing.

Just last year, it would have taken ten pages and a couple of flounces.

You can't stop progress.

[IMG] [/IMG]

i blame the tories

no really!!

their last conference was so jammed with 'nazi lite' soundbites that godwin is smashed

Out]r economy has changed there has been a loss of high skilled manufacturing jobs

replaced with; low paid service industry, the 0 hrs uberfication, huge rise in 'self-employment'
-a low wage economy that belies the unemployment figures and do trap many people.

I see the usual tory supporting suspects are unable to engage in any meaningful debate once more.

Nazis? Here you go:

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/james-amber-rudds-speech-echoes-mein-kampf/

Perhaps they are trying to match your level of debate - its hard to know where to pitch it at the moment?

replaced with; low paid service industry, the 0 hrs uberfication, huge rise in 'self-employment'
-a low wage economy that belies the unemployment figures and do trap many people.

This. However as long as the proles are occupied in low asperational employment the likes of ninfan and thm will happily accept any positive propoganda fed to them.

Coyote - before putting words into peoples' mouth perhaps you could check what they post. For starters try my quote from the JRF. It might help.

Work is merely a starting point - well that's not true, education is the starting point. The JRF sums it up well

Katie Schmuecker from JRF said: “Work is the best route to economic security and a better standard of living and we welcome record levels of employment. But, as well as more jobs, [b]we need better jobs[/b] so all families can benefit from economic growth. Despite working full time hours, more families are still falling short of what they need to make ends meet. We need the state and business to ensure people in work can achieve economy and security.

HTH

Wow, this really got out of hand, didn't it?

Look, lets go back to the OP. This demonisation of the poor and promotion of low skilled service jobs is not about nasty Tories. This has been a consensus since the early 80's. Yes, Labour threw a load of money at poor people to put a plaster over working poverty, but did nothing to tackle the root causes.

The zero hours contract thing. My wife is a regional manager for a large care provider. Without zero hours contracts half of her care services would not be able to operate. Believe it or not, some people like the flexibility of a zero hours contract. I agree, they are massively overused, have been used to manipulate unemployment figures and have allowed certain large organisations to "cheat" the employment system to some degree. But to ban them outright would do great damage to certain areas and is not going to solve the problem.

But as usual, people want to reduce everything down to simple explanations and find easy things to blame. Be that nasty Tories or spendy Labour.

This polarisation and entrenchment needs to stop, it is masking the fact that the people at the top never change no matter who we put in "power", why do you think that is?
Is is because our tribal identities are based on falsehoods? A deception by those in power to give us the illusion of participation while they keep all the money for themselves.

Yes, there is good news in the fact that more people have jobs than last month, but we also need to look deeper into those numbers and appreciate that there are millions of people not benefiting from being in work and that the success of a society should be measured by more than a simple set of figures manipulated to suit the needs of those in power, whoever they are.

I think we're a long way from Auschwitz, that is a ridiculous analogy, but it does make sure that your "enemies" are suitably dehumanised. Do you not see how your use of such imagery is quite ironic?

I think we're a long way from Auschwitz, that is a ridiculous analogy

I think that it is a tongue in cheek reference to the constant "work is the best way out of poverty" (which no one can disagree with) and "work sets you free".

Celebrating the creation of low aspirational jobs whilst doing nothing to create career opportunities for the masses is a little hollow.

Labour threw a load of money at poor people to put a plaster over working poverty, but did nothing to tackle the root causes

kinda true

Sure Start, whilst being very expensive actually had some positive results for families with often very poor chances

agreed that the low wage job expansion has been a feature of every government fr the last 30 odd years

Celebrating the creation of low aspirational jobs whilst doing nothing to create career opportunities for the masses is a little hollow.

who is doing that?

Don't get me wrong, Kimbers, things like sure start were a bloody great idea, but without wider reforms of the labour market, were unable to be anything more that a plaster. Rather than giving people the confidence, opportunity and optimism to build a better future as part of a comprehensive and holistic package of anti-poverty and labour measures, they just became one more thing to keep the poor artificially suspended above the worst poverty, creating a dependence at odds with people's wider needs, ultimately feeding the idea in government and wider society that the poor are an expense rather than a potential asset.

Coyote, there's nothing "tongue in cheek" about such imagery. If people are prepared to use such strong imagery to score points in a discussion then they should be prepared for the inevitable reaction of people to such strong imagery.

Clodhopper, to elucidate on 'Fred'
- sorry my bikesnob.nyc idea was a bit of a diversion/red herring (he uses the word Fred's to describe 'entryists' to road cycling with more money than 'grit' much like people in the U.K. derided for getting all competitive at sportives)

-when thm addresses you as Fred it is with reference to a former stw-er who has been banned many times and popped up again under various logins, and so it has become a bit of a sport on here spotting him, often with people simply addressing the suspect poster as Fred as freddibnah was one of his old old logins (which I think even predates thm's time here) He was controversial and argumentative in style often more for his own (and others'!) amusement and also mostly lefty in his views- in many way the opposite of ninfan who is also on his umpteenth )voluntary not banned) login and argues a point for fun but manages not to bother the moderators at all with this) I am sure I remember 'Fred' (well it would have been a different login by then) giving thm a hard time and perhaps that's why he in particular has addressed you in this way.
-so assuming it's not you as I am sure it isn't, take the 'fred' as an observation that your arguing style is creating a disturbance in The Force. 😀

😀

"who is doing that?"

The tories.

"But, as well as more jobs, we need better jobs so all families can benefit from economic growth. Despite working full time hours, more families are still falling short of what they need to make ends meet. We need the state and business to ensure people in work can achieve economy and security."

Please explain what the current government are doing in order to create better opportunities for all.

"take the 'fred' as an observation that your arguing style is creating a disturbance in The Force. "

Perhaps I should take this as a [i]compliment[/i], then? Thanks for the explanation. It was certainly perplexing me. The bikesnob thing really had me confused.

I only really joined this forum to get some 'advice' on buying a new bike. 😆

Did you miss the OP clod?

Step away from the twigs so that you can see the woods....it might help

But its companies not governments that are driving much of the improvement directly. Public sector employment is on a down trend.

I only really joined this forum to get some 'advice' on buying a new bike.

Well its opened a whole new world for you then! 🙂 Bet you've not been back to the Bike Forum since?

-when thm addresses you as Fred it is with reference to a former stw-er who has been banned many times and popped up again under various logins,

Such as the one you're currently using, as well you know. I really must get around to doing something about that.

Public sector employment is on a down trend.

Er... Don't you mean being slashed as part of the conservative ideology? "Down trend"! 😆

is there something in the name [b]ideal[/b]logy?

interesting choice of phrase - do you work for them?

Cougar: If that's the case it's like he is getting someone to ghost-write a whole new set of interests and indeed a whole new posting/writing style. Previous Freds were apparent from the first couple of threads by their way with words and 'style'- as were subsequent incarnations of GW, glupton and labrat for that matter. I am sure you have some IT skillz and IP address stuff to back up your suspicions, but for me the difference between old Freds and this one is quite remarkable.

Everytime I hear people talking about "work setting you free" etc.. I just keep wondering what are we going to do when we run out of work??

I know automation has been going on since, well, forever, but it's pace is increasing more and more quickly.

Workers in Amazon delivery centres etc are pretty much taking orders from a computer algorithm now, and they've only got jobs because they are cheaper than a robot and how many people's jobs will be replaced when with autonomous cars?

I think Ocado is aiming for an entirely autonomous distribution centre, where goods will then be loaded onto autonomous delivery vehicles.

It'll be like hitting "pause" on the current wealth distribution.

Everytime I hear people talking about "work setting you free" etc.. I just keep wondering what are we going to do when we run out of work??

Because of this very issue, more and more people from all sides of the political spectrum are starting to take the idea of a basic income guarantee rather seriously.

for me the difference between old Freds and this one is quite remarkable.

In so far as this one is unique in not being a weapons-grade pain in the ass, I agree.

Here's a random example. We have many more but I'm obviously not going to show my hand. Compare and contrast these two posts.

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/rip-howard-marks/page/2?view=all#post-7631881

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/anyone-on-here-tried-heroine/page/4?view=all#post-2364091

all sides of the political spectrum are starting to take the idea of a basic income guarantee rather seriously.

I'd vote for that, but whatever government managed to implement it would **** it up somehow.