Exodus, the Movement of the People

There seems to be lots of outrage at the moment about the odd exodus of people from London to random other parts of the country. There was a large chunk of Newsnight¹ the other day devoted to  asking why London councils had decided to dump children in care in towns that were rife with crime. People couldent understand why London would send their most vulnerable children, those who had been placed into care, into situations that in some cases were worse than the ones they left. How is it that there is a high concentration of privately owned children's homes in one small area known  by the police for its large quantities of drug dealers, prostitutes, probation hostiles and registered paedophiles? 

Here's what I think is going on. The government, the people in charge of allocating where the children should go? They don't care. The rent in these places was cheap, and the law said that they had to stash 'em somewhere. So like anyone forced to do tidy-up, they did it in the easiest, most half assed manner possible. Throw some money at the problem, and get the cheapest bidder to do the dirty work. Yay capitalism!  Who cares if a few hoodies get raped? They should of had the good sense not to be born poor. It's just like the parenting classes.² Poor people are just inherently a bit shit. They must be, because they don't even have any money! I mean, you must be stupid or lazy or addicted to drugs or something! After all it's so easy to make money these days, isn't it?

Well no, actually it's not. It's easy to make money if you already have money. If you can afford the police bribes, or the stakes in the giant casino that is the stock market, then yeah, good for you. But if you're working a part-time minimum wage job because that's all you can get, because all the unpaid workfare people have been allocated all the hours that you used to do, then no. Money is not easy to come by. And when the housing benefits get capped, but the landlords are still allowed to charge whatever they want, there is simply not enough money³. And so, Exodus. The movement of the people. Out with you filthy poor scum. Only pure-bred yuppies are allowed to live here. As a council officer declares: "To live in Westminster is a privilege, not a right!"⁴. Personally, I think that says it all. It's an ideological argument, not an economical argument. Economically it's a bit suicidal. I mean, if you can't afford to live in London on a bin-man's wage, then who is going to empty the bins? Who will deliver the letters if being a postman doesn't pay? Who will man the tills at Tesco? Do you all really like self-service checkouts that much?

Of course, there will be those who tell me I'm spouting bollocks, that there is no such thing as class warfare or even class any more. That this is just incompetence and people not paying attention, or being unable to do anything about it because there not enough money, debt crisis, mess Labour left us etc. I don't know, maybe there's an element of that, yes. But as this guy concludes⁵; 

"The government's own impact assessment and academic research makes clear that people will be forced to move because of the changes and central parts of London will to a certain extent become the preserve of the rich with more lower income people congregating in cheaper areas of the capital. "Social cleansing" is a strong term that some readers have objected to. But there is some evidence of a trend consistent with it. "

¹ http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01jxx2d/Newsnight_13_06_2012/

²http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/may/18/parenting-lessons-roll-out-country?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

³ http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/mar/28/families-52000-income-london-rent

⁴http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/16/housing-benefit-cap-families-central-london

⁵http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/apr/24/housing-housing-benefit

Are we at the pinnacle of our civilisation?

I wonder perhaps if this is it? This is as far as humanity can progress towards being something like Star Trek's Federation, a glorious post-war, post-money civilisation that can colonise new worlds and spread across the stars. I mean, we just can't seem to keep our shit together. Look at the Euro-zone. Too many voices clamouring for attention, all saying that it isn't their fault. Too much pride. Too much of the blame game. It seems like we can't even have an international game of football without a crap-load of racists being unable to contain their pre-programmed prejudices. 

I feel like I owe some recognition to the hate-mongers there. I mean, that's a hell of an achievement, managing to create a new generation of Neo-Nazis when World War II is still relatively well-remembered across the globe and Auschwitz is just up the road. That's some top-notch brainwashing equipment you've got there. Or did you just find some cryogenically frozen Hitler Youth in a bunker somewhere?

But I digress. Only slightly though, because the conditions that led to WW2 are in fact showing their unpleasantly apparent faces again here in 2012. The massive rich-poor divide. The uncaring wealthy governments forcing crippling austerity on poorer neighbouring countries that have just had their economies crippled. The resulting resentment and racism that occurs when those people are faced with forced austerity. It makes sense, if you think about it. They are told by their weak and out-of-touch ruling elite that while they, the wealthy few are not to blame, you the poor must make a huge change in lifestyle and essentially culture, forced on you by a foreign people and a foreign government with whom you have no control over and whom you find distinctly alien. All it takes then is one person to stand up and scream "Down with the foreign oppressors! Down with the traitor government!" and the rusty gears of the war machine start grinding again.

If any part of that sounds familiar then look in a history book, or go to Wikipedia. Check out "France after world war 1", specifically the " Treaty of Versailles¹". Now doesn't that all sound a bit familiar? If you change the word "war" to "debt crisis" then re-read the article, then it really does start to sound like a broken record. Nations with the upper hand making the nations with the lower hand pay. And accept that they should pay, that they deserve it. That they are mud, and that they deserve to be made to pay because they are in some way an inherently inferior people, as demonstrated by the fact that their nation has the lower hand. Then racism. Then war.

The biggest stinky present that we got from WW2 was nukes. Nukes are bad. Many crappy action movies have demonstrated what happens when bad or crazy people get hold of a nuclear warhead. I dread to think what would happen if Jason Statham doesn't stop the terrorists detonating the Black Hole Bomb developed during the Debt Wars.

¹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles

I am tired of being lied to

I really am sick to the back teeth of it. As a British child, I was told to go for my dreams, to "Aim Higher", that I was a "Walking Talking Miracle" and that just by "Working Hard and Being Me" that I could "Be whatever I wanted to Be." Lies. A very cruel deceit, to get us all to buy into your ponzy schemes. To give the numbers that some people seem to need to validate themselves. Honestly I feel ever so slightly brainwashed, filled with ideas and ideals for a world that only actually exists inside some think-tank's conference room. I've heard it said that British young people are lazy, that we believe that life owes us a living. We do not. We were told that if you did this and that, jump through this hoop and fill in this form, that success would follow. So we worked hard. We got the quallies. We went to Uni. We got ourselves the skills that we were told we would need. Because were smart, us Brits. We pay attention. Turns out sometimes we pay attention to the wrong people, because when we walked out from under the sheltering cave of education, blinking against the light of the working world, we discovered the truth. That employers didn't seem to care about excel spreadsheets or SAT scores. That they wanted experience in work, with references and NVQs. Not stupid bits of cream wove card with things like BSc or MA on them. You see we're not lazy, we're in shock. We grew up in Great Britain, only to turn around twice and find the "Great" has been sold off for scrap. We're in the UK plc.® ™ now, were corporations are people, not stupid humans. We're cattle, a commodity, to be traded as stock. The uneducated short-term temporary worker, that's what we're supposed to be. Don't think. Work hard, then go back to sleep. Why else would there be so many jobs that specifically prohibit graduates from applying¹? Apprenticeships that forbid people that hold a degree²? What makes us so damn scary? 

Of course, this is probably not deliberate. This might look like a pre-meditated attempt to segregate those who have gone to Uni from those who haven't, but I don't think it is. I think it's incompetence, of people not really knowing what's going on or what to do. The people who posted those jobs probably thought there was some other scheme for graduates, or that we wouldn't need anything, after all, we've been through higher education, what more could an employer need as proof of employability? They've probably just outsourced that department to someone else, it's the done thing in 2012. Are you a failing government institution? Do you not have a clue what to do? Then outsource! Get a private corporation to do it for you, everyone knows that a pure profit motive is the best medicine for corruption! 

Just look at the Jobcentre's new Work Programme, as outlined helpfully in form WP01MA4¹, which you can download from http://www.whatdotheyknow.com thanks to the Freedom of Information request they sent. Otherwise this information would not be available to the public. You can see that pretty much all functionality with regards to actually finding you work has been relegated to your "provider". You must attend any meeting they make, do any activity that they bid you do. Otherwise your benefits could be sanctioned indefinitely, but a minimum of a month. And in return for all this, you get to "discuss what help you need to prepare for" with your provider. Discuss the preparation for the help? No actual help giving then, just discussion about help preparation. Seems fair. After all, as they insist, "The Work Programme provider will not make you seek, apply for, or have any medical treatment." Which is nice, although I'm not sure why their bringing that up. Is making people undergo medical procedures for their JSA something that can happen now? No wonder they want to scrap the Human Rights act.

The scary part of this is that the definitions for who gets to go on this scheme are so vague. It's deliberately done that way. Anyone who has been on the JSA "long enough". And that's the "accumulated total", the sum of all the days that you've ever been signed on. I was looked in the eye and told unequivocally by a Jobcentre Plus "Advisor" that "everyone on JSA will eventually be referred to a work programme."  

So this is the master-plan of the government; sweep us all under the rug. Fiddle the numbers. The problem with these out of touch politicians is that they haven't realised that the numbers mean things. They are for their benefit, an indicator. Breaking your speedometer so it always reads zero doesn't mean that you are no longer speeding. Closing your eyes doesn't make you invisible. We are all still here, still hurting, still angry. And for the government to add to that pile, and make life for us already at the bottom even more unbearable is either monumentally stupid or ruthlessly suicidal.

At this point I am genuinely unsure which.

¹https://www.wmjobs.co.uk/fe/tpl_wmp01.asp?s=FoQnTYvIgXJoLlXgd&jobid=43795,2357233557&key=11463622&c=788735762334&pagestamp=dbnrdprulwffqnwxot

²https://www.wmjobs.co.uk/fe/tpl_wmp01.asp?s=FoQnTYvIgXJoLlXgd&jobid=44986,5683959840&key=12413681&c=762387581521&pagestamp=dbixqnkzucyzxqnwcb

³ http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/91170/response/227348/attach/3/WP01MA4.pdf

The Jobcentre has now, by actively interfering, made it virtually impossible for me to find work

A while ago I wrote an article about how the Jobcentre only hindered my search for work. I must now update that statement: the Jobcentre has now, by actively interfering, made it virtually impossible for me to find work. And I don't mean the dewy-eyed, graduate-worthy type of work I so desperately wished for in my last article. I mean I'm trying to get work temping in a call centre and they are actively getting in the way. 

Since my last article I have abandoned all hope of ever using my degree in my career. Or even of having a career. Fate has decreed that I be born into a lost generation, and I have come to terms with this. My dreams are dead, and now I'm just trying to get by. Life can be cruel, but this I accept. After all, I'm not starving, and thanks to the few weeks I spent temping I can actually pay all my bills, which is pleasant. I wasn't even too bothered when that time ended, and I had to face the Jobcentre again. After all, I had found work. I had proven that I could get a job, and off my own back, since I had found the work myself through social networking and an agency. But I was expecting the Jobcentre that I left. Not the Jobcentre 2.0. At first it seemed normal. I was suspiciously interrogated about the numerous methods that I use to find work, and then pushed to lower the standards of my jobseekers agreement towards ever more menial jobs. But then something new, or rather a new face of an old enemy; I was referred to the Work Programme. Even though I had found work, even though this was day 1 of my claim, back to the forced volunteering. When I protested, asking why, I was told like the idiot I obviously am, that it was the accumulated total that they took into consideration. So even though this was day 1 of this claim, because I had spent more than 6 months on the JSA in my life, I was eligible for referral to the Work Programme. In disbelief I asked why this was so, and was told in no uncertain terms; 

            "Everyone on JSA will eventually be referred to a work programme." 

Everyone. Including, I imagine, all the people who have been "re-assessed" from their disability allowance. If your of an older generation, and have ever accumulated 6 months time on the dole in your whole life, then the Jobcentre now considers you incompetent and in need of "re-training." After all, you must not know how to wash your hands, or to not swear in an interview.

The icing on the cake was when my "Adviser" shoved a piece of paper under my nose and said "Sign here." When I asked what for, she said "to confirm that you've read and understood the referral letter." The same letter that she still held in her hand. The letter that she refused to give me until after I'd signed the legally binding document stating that I had already read and understood it. I know I shouldn't sign things under coercion, but I have been threatened before by my adviser with benefits sanctions of up to 13 weeks for "refusing to co-operate with Jobcentre staff." I may have had a few weeks temping, but to lose all chance of getting any JSA for 13 weeks could put me below the poverty line.

And so now I'm stuck with this stupid Work Programme. Again. My agency tells me it's very important, if you're temping, to be immediately available. They keep asking me if I am. But I'm not anymore, because the Jobcentre have put me on this Programme. I am unavailable for work because of the Jobcentre. How can an institution tasked with finding people work, after taking a substantial chunk of the taxpayer's money as their budget, actually destroy peoples chances of finding employment? Would it not be more economically stimulative simply to divvy up the Jobcentre's budget amongst all the unemployed, and give them all a list of numbers for local Job Agencies? 

At least they could afford to eat.

Revenge of the Angry Graduate Slave

I wrote an article a while ago, about how little use the Jobcentre has been in actually helping me back to work. At the time, I thought that a "Personal Advisor" asking me to remove my degree from my CV would be an isolated, if not rare event. From the response to my article, I gather that in fact removing qualifications from CVs is a standard tactic at the Jobcentre. Who signed off on that?
Why is the Jobcentre trying to dumb us down, and funnel us all into minimum wage jobs? What happened to all the other jobs? What happened to the Sciences, to the Arts, to Music? Why are they telling us to think small? Why can't we have great thoughts, and have great ideas? This is supposed to be Great Britain!

What message is the Government trying to give us here? You are telling us that our qualifications are of no use, of no relevance in Britain in 2012. You're telling us that the only thing that employers want is the willingness to stoop lower than the next guy.

Forget work experience, what do you think our life experience is going to be? What are we going to do about our debts? What was the point of all that study and hard work?

You are annoying skilled people who have been singled out for their intelligence and perseverance. This is very dangerous. When you took EMA off the kids, and tripled the Uni fees, they tried to burn down the Conservative Party H.Q.

There are always unforeseen consequences.

People keep asking me "Why are you even going to the Jobcentre? It's not really designed for people  with degrees." I responded somewhat sarcastically with "Point me to the Jobcentre for graduates, and I'll go there!" My old Dad then informed me that there was once such a thing. It got cut.

Another thing people ask is "Where do you get this sense of entitlement from? You get paid your JSA. I had to abandon my hopes and dreams and aim low, why shouldn't you?" Putting aside my previous argument about bullying and transference, I'd like to respond a little more to the point.

If I accept that the social security net is a good thing, then I am entitled to my JSA, in order to stay out of poverty. And aside from that, I am being forced to work for no wage. I am entitled to my Human Rights, which according to Article 4 of the Human Rights Act as stated on legislation.gov.uk¹ declares;

1. No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.
2. No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.

If I accept the Capitalist philosophy of "something for something", and assume that my JSA is a wage, then I am entitled to the National Minimum Wage, which £1.80 an hour (£54 divided by 30hrs) falls far short of.

The Government is either breaching my Human Rights, or my Right to a Fair Wage. Both, I thought, were highly illegal. If you want people to experience the true world of work, as you say you do, should they not then also have the experience of being paid the National Minimum Wage? Why do we have to work for nothing, but people with the right business connections and the right friends in high places can write themselves cheques for millions of pounds of the taxpayer's money? What do you think that tells us about the British Work Ethic at the top? Of what we should aspire to?

According to workingrights.co.uk², in response to the question "Can an employer pay less than the minimum wage if they pay a bonus?" The answer was "Unfortunately, yes."  Why unfortunately? If you can dock wages due to bonuses, until it falls beneath the minimum wage, then why don't we take banker's bonuses off their salaries? I'm sure the public won't find them as objectionable then. After all, we get our JSA docked penny for penny if we find any ways of making money.

It's almost as if there's one set of laws for the bottom layer of society, and another set of laws for the top. But if you look a little more closely, you realise that the devil is in the details. The National Minimum Wage is not as absolute and all-encompassing as it sounds. According to direct.gov³ "Most workers are entitled to the National Minimum Wage." Most. Not all. According to the booklet about the minimum wage, available from the Citizens Advice Bureau, and online from adviceguide.org.uk⁴, there are exceptions to the National Minimum Wage. These are, among others;

• Workers under the age of 16.
•  Au-pairs and nannies if they are living with a family and not paying for accommodation or meals.
• Some trainees on government schemes.

So we allow child slave labour, lots of cheeky chimney-sweeps with lung cancer. We allow slavery in the home, as long as they're a Family Pet Slave, given only bed and board. Like the dog. And finally the  piece de resistance, Government Slavery. There it is in black and white, you don't need to pay people if they're on a Government Scheme. Servus publicus. Ancient Rome is reborn, in all its corrupt and decedent glory. Don't worry, Grey Men in Suits, you don't need catchy rhyming insults. Government Slavery is A-OK.

You could almost understand all this if we were a nation besieged by war, like in the times of Winston Churchill. But we're not. All I see is class warfare.

¹http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/3

²http://www.workingrights.co.uk/can-employer-pay-less-than-minimum-wage.html

³http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Understandingyourworkstatus/Migrantworkers/DG_10027923

⁴http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/e_national_minimum_wage.pdf

Welcome to somewhere you probably didn't mean to go.

Ladies, Gentlemen, and all shades in between, I give you... My blog. 

I have been asked by so many people recently "Why don't you have a blog?" and I don't really have a good answer. I should do. I rant at walls enough. And it is something that I've always meant to do.

So, here it is. Expect a brief spurge of backlog and then probably nothing. But who knows? The world has a never-ending supply of ironic hilarity for me to point out to you good folks. 

So enjoy (or at least I hope you won't be too offended by) my two cents. Or about £12 in pennies knowing me. >:^D