We have a lot of school leavers and long term unemployed who are claiming benefits. Should they be told that they have to take some of these jobs as fruit pickers hotel cleaners or sandwich makers or no benefits? The trouble is the greedy employers want the asylum workers because they can pay them less. Pay our workers a decent amount of money so that they could afford to go to work and be able to pay their rent etc., and have a worthwhile life and the country would save a lot on benefits payouts. We would not seem like such an easy option for immigrants if these jobs were taken. What do you think?
2006-08-27
11:30:11
·
19 answers
·
asked by
AndyPandy
4
in
Politics & Government
➔ Immigration
This is NOT a racist comment and I don't have any objection to anyone coming here to work. I would like to see a lot of healthy British scroungers get off their backside and do some work for a change.
I am aware that a lot of them are thick but this cou ntry will go bankrupt if we don't sort it out.
2006-08-27
12:04:21 ·
update #1
I agree with you that there are a lot of school leavers and long term unemployed, that are capable of filling vacant positions in employment, which would indeed save this country money in handouts. But unfortunately these people don't want to work, that is why the eastern Europeans are filling these jobs, they are not taking other peoples jobs they are doing the jobs that the scroungers on benefit, think are beneath them. Most of the immigrants that are working here, are polite hard working and are highly educated, In fact far too educated to do the menial jobs that they do and they do not think that hard work is beneath them. I many instances they have far more pride than us Brits.
2006-08-28 10:39:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The jobs school leavers get are not fruit picking job, but jobs that require an education of some kind. It is a waste to give someone with brains a job in a field miles away from where they live just for the sake of them having a job. They will eventually find something anyway.
The long term unemployed are long term unemployed because:
a) They are unemployable
b) Thick as pooh and dangerous with it
c) Don't want to work
There is no group of intelligent hard wokring people that aren't mentally ill sitting around unable to get a job. The people you hear on Radio 5 every morning complaining about foreign workers are too dumb to get a job themselves. You can hear it in their voices and words that they are barely capable of forming a sentence and when they do it is a biggoted one.
You could force the natives who aren't working to take the jobs the immigrants do but the thickos would get fired quickly, the school leavers would find the better job fairly soon after starting and the rest aren't qualified in the correct areas such as being a professional qualified builder.
That is a version of what I think.
2006-08-27 18:41:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Every country that offers benefits to the unemployed is just being short sighted if they think people are only going to claim them for a short while and then return to work. The UK current has an increasing underclass population who are often ridiculed as chavs. The truth is this countrys problems are nothing to do with immigration which is just being used as an excuse by the underclass and white middle england tory party boys to scare the rest of the country.
The real problems with this country is the number of children born outside of wedlock. Illegitimacy often means that the parents are not in a stable relationship and it is usually the father (generally the discilplinarian) who is not present. If one grows up lacking discipline he will always seek the easiest option which is to sit on his **** and claim benefits.
Note: Immigrants don't just fill unwanted jobs. If it were not for immigration the nhs would be cripled. Its also very harsh for a country that once controlled 1/3 of the world to wash its hands of people who come from nations that economies we cripled by raping them of thier natural resources or those who's econmoies were damaged by petty wars such as the great war which was just a bunch of egotistical fools comparing how big their dicks were.
2006-08-27 21:06:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by british stud 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
We are told by LABOUR that immigration is a good thing for the UK as it fills the jobs we indiginous people do not want to do. At the very least this can be seen as an admission that LABOURS 'Welfare to Work' idea was a failure. My work brings me into contact with many immigrants, and I have to say that I am always shocked by the number of fit, healthy males aged 20-30 that are listed as unemployed. I believe the "......because Birtish people dont want those jobs' arguement is spewed out to placate our justified anxiety over the immigration issue.
2006-08-27 18:40:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I agree with you - but I thought that the job centre made you go and get a job nowadays or stop your unemployment benefit? I also think that the wages paid are too low and being on benefits is better than working because of this. I myself would stay on benefit if I was in that position. Higher wages to the people of this country would encourage a lot more 'loafters' to work, but greed and profit are much more important to a company and that's why they take on someone that would take a lower wage.
2006-08-28 08:48:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Curious39 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sadly the British won't do these jobs. So they have to employ people from mostly eastern Europe to do it. Having worked in the dole office in the UK and interviewed people for jobs what really shock me was half them the British sadly couldn't spell or read or write. Most left school with out any formal education i.e GCSE or A-levels. Is that why the New Labour is bringing back the three
Rs again. The point I'm making here is simply is that the reason British don't want to do certain jobs
2006-08-27 19:30:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
True, that the reason many of our employers over here like the immigrants because they can pay them less, but what they get paid, works out 10 times more than what they would get in their own country so they don't mind.
For example. A British Builder will only work for at least a minimum of £30-£40 an hour, a polish worker with the same qualifications is happy to accept £10 an hour. In their country, this is 10 times more than what they would get.
I have a polish friend who came over for the summer and worked in a cafe up in the Lake district. He was on something like £5.50phr and took back home to Poland with him, over £1000 by end of the 2 months he was working. I know £1000 don't sound much to us as Brits but This was 5 times more than what his mother (who is a qualified secondary school teacher) earns in the same time !!!!
See, we might see it as getting paid sh!te, but to them, its a gold field.
2006-08-27 18:49:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
i used to work in a jobcentre and can honestly say that a good 90% of people claiming dole for more than 6 months don't want a job. They would much rather sit on their sofas watching TV while their **** grows than go out and graft for a living. The system rewards bone idolness.
The only soloution i can see is forced work (new deal is moving towards this) and dole payments in food/heating vouchers rather than money so people who can work but choose not to dont get the creature comforts they enjoy. Harsh but fair.
2006-08-28 06:02:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by enigma_variation 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Many Americans argue the same point. Even here, our immigrants tell us they are taking jobs we don't want. I think it's just an excuse. And yes, may on benefits should look into actual work.... but we can't run other people's lives.
2006-08-27 19:43:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ananke402 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
There's an old saying,"If you tell people often enough,they will believe what is said"!!!!!
True,there ARE SOME jobs which Brits do not want to do,but not all of them!!
Feeble excuses and lies come very easily to Mr Blair and his cronies!!Remember the "Weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq?
2006-08-29 08:04:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋