The long term out of work will have to engage in work placements in return for their social security, under strict rules launched by the Chancellor George Osborne.
Workfare is an unorthodox design to orthodox social welfare techniques and, was first announced by civil rights pioneer James Charles Evers in 1968, but, it was made popular by Richard Nixon in a broadcasted address in August 1969.
Oh, you didn’t actually think that George Osborne really thought of the concept, to think, he would require a brain.
Long established welfare benefit designs are usually given based on particular circumstances, such as hunting for work, or founded on meeting a standard that would situate the recipient as unavailable to search for work, or be working.
Workfare means that recipients have to fulfil certain participation requirements to carry on receiving their welfare benefits. These conditions are frequently an amalgamation of activities that are meant to make better the recipient’s employment possibilities, such as education, rehabilitation and, employment skills and, those nominated as playing a role in the community, such as voluntary, or low paid employment.
These programmes, which are common in Australia, Canada and, now the United Kingdom, have caused substantial discourse and disagreement.
There are two main types of workfare schemes, those that encourage direct employment to get people off the welfare roll and, straight into the workforce and, those that are intended to increase social capital by providing guidance and education to those currently in the welfare structure.
In the Third World, similar schemes are invented to reduce rural poverty between day labourers by providing government subsidised temporary employment throughout those times of the year when little agricultural jobs are obtainable.
Although we don’t live in a Third World nation, well not yet anyhow. Nonetheless, are we now living is what is classified as a Third World, I’m not sure. The word as far as I was concerned was merely differentiated as such countries that were poverty-stricken, but I was incorrect because Third World countries are as well differentiated by the worst records for political rights and civil liberties and, in the United Kingdom at the moment; we don’t appear to have much of either.
The intention and objective of workfare is to create a net contribution to the general public from welfare recipients. Most often, this means getting the jobless into paid employment, reducing or removing welfare payments to them and, consequently bringing about an income that creates taxes.
What’s more, it’s disputed that once a person has new job skills, even at entry level, they’re better able to get profitable long term employment.
Welfare to work programmes works toward breaking the cycle of poverty in which welfare dependency can turn into a way of life but Workfare in the United Kingdom refers to government workfare plans by which people must undertake employment in return for their benefit payments or risk being deprived of them.
Workfare strategies in the United Kingdom are an issue. Backers assert that such plans will assist people in moving off welfare and, into work, whereas critics bicker that they’re comparable to enslavement and indentured servitude and counterproductive in reducing unemployment.
In November 2011, the Prime Minister’s Office made public a scheme under which Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants who haven’t located a position once they have been through a work programme will do a 26 week position in the community for 30 hours a week.
As stated by The Guardian in 2012, under the Government’s Community Action Programme, people who have been out of employment for a number of years, are obliged to work for six months unsalaried, incorporating money making companies, in order to retain their benefits.
These developments shadowed years of worry and talks by people both for and opposed to such plans of action. In 1999, the UK charity Child Poverty Action Group communicated worries that a government report that single parents and the disabled might have to attend recurrent interviews for jobs under danger of being deprived of benefits and, was a step towards the US model of the workfare system.
This as well means that the government had already thought of this master plan even prior to David Cameron and his posse having got into power.
The Trades Union Congress (TUC), a federation of trade unions in the United Kingdom, has declared that workfare is taking advantage of the jobless, paying them less than the minimum wage.
The TUC as well points out that workfare is biased to the paid employee who find themselves in conflict with voluntary workers, after all, if you were the owner of a business and, required workers, who would you take the unpaid workers, or one’s that you had to pay?
In these situations the consequences would be work deficits and, the decline of pay, overtime or other conditions and, employers who choose not to utilise workfare workers would as well find themselves wrangling with other companies who are effectively being subsidised.
There is little proof that workfare increases the probability of locating employment. It can even lessen employment opportunities by restricting the time obtainable for job search and, by failing to supply skills and experience valued by employers.
Nonetheless, this is what the government want because free labour is more advantageous than having to reward someone a full salary for the week, when they can pay them next to nothing for a full weeks work.
In the end we will see almost everyone out of work and, being fed off the state for a minimum wage. They will end up paying us less than minimum wage because almost all people will be out of work and, over time, no one will think to act upon this since our children would have been conditioned to think that’s is how it should be.
It does not matter how much we believe that we’re not, we are all ruled over and, conditioned to do as we’re told. I don’t have to prove or disprove this, our TVs, the newspapers and ads on the TV do this daily, they tell us what we should do, what we should purchase, how we should consume our food, what we should ingest and, almost all of us are convinced it’s true.
This has become our way of life and, we’re living a life of restraint and, it’s not a life that we control, but one that other’s control for us, without us even realising it.
Benefits will be taken away from the long term unemployed, unless they work full time, picking up garbage, cleaning off street art, or cooking meals for the elderly.
Some might believe that workfare is okay and, in some situations it might be, but the ordinary person gets £71.80 a week on benefit, the average person who works on minimum wage gets approximately £246.09 before tax, working a full week, which is way more than the meagre £71.80 the government want to give in benefits and, as well make the benefit claimant work 40 hours a week – Slave labour is disparaging to human life when the government are exploiting human beings, no wonder the people of the United Kingdom are becoming annoyed with what’s going on.
George Osborne blamed Labour of permitting people to linger on benefits for years, while allowing uncontrolled amounts of immigrants fill low paid jobs. Migrants have been permitted to come into the United Kingdom for numerous years to do unskilled jobs for little money.
All governments past and present appear to like servitude and, they don’t appear to be able to wake each day without controlling something, it’s practically what makes them tick, this control and supremacy.
Mr Osborne said: ‘From now on, people are going to have to do something in return for those benefits.’
There is getting people to do something, but not something for nothing. Had Mr Osborne said that people would have to work part time for their benefits, then that would have been fair and, why is it called ‘Workfare’, is it because it’s not fair?