ConDems Show Vicious Neoliberal Principles In Attack On Welfare

Given they both agree cuts which will entail more unemployment they are then further victimising the people they make unemployed, a searingly middle and upper class attitude that is based in the ‘scrounger’ idea that is demonstrably dishonest, they know full well their ideology depends on and creates a pool of unemployed to maintain ‘flexibility’ of labour and to lower labour costs. Nevertheless they convey through corporate media allies to condition people to think those needing welfare are ripping off taxpayers and are unwilling to work, ensuring the astronomically higher corporate and tax fraud figures of their supporters and compadres are kept out of the discourse. One can reasonably define a characteristic of neoliberalism is the scapegoating, the othering, of victims of the ideology in order to misdirect opposition from the -already rich- benefactors of neoliberalism. I have not seen anyone else focus on this part of the deal which perhaps also demonstrates the effectiveness of the ideology in informing opinions on this subject. For some people to be rich under this system it requires many others to remain poor, apparently a taboo issue for the self absorbed upwardly mobile acquisitive consumer puppets of marketing whose souls are owned by Visa.

From Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition deal
The parties agree to end all existing welfare-to-work programmes and to create a single welfare-to-work programme to help all unemployed people get back into work.

We agree that jobseeker’s allowance claimants facing the most significant barriers to work should be referred to the aforementioned newly created welfare-to-work programme immediately, not after 12 months as is currently the case. We agree that jobseeker’s allowance claimants aged under 25 should be referred to the programme after a maximum of six months.

The parties agree to realign contracts with welfare-to-work service providers to reflect more closely the results they achieve in getting people back into work.

We agree that the funding mechanism used by government to finance welfare-to-work programmes should be reformed to reflect the fact that initial investment delivers later savings in lower benefit expenditure.

We agree that receipt of benefits for those able to work should be conditional on the willingness to work.

29 Responses to “ConDems Show Vicious Neoliberal Principles In Attack On Welfare”

  1. Mike Says:

    What really annoys me is the fact that it is my own money they have taken off me that they then spend back on not only treating me like shit, but also while actually refusing to help me.

    The only ‘help’ they can envisage is me in a job, any job, just as long as I am creating wealth for them.


    PS Good luck with the move.

  2. RickB Says:

    That is another aspect of the system, they offer only very limited investment to people and onerous conditions, they want at best small scale owner operators who will find it hard to survive against huge corporate competition or just pack you off to any job regardless of suitability as you say, because what is important is not serving humans but serving capital. Plus there aren’t the jobs and this will of course make the min wage a joke as jobs will be closed and filled with workfare serfs.

    Thanks, seems appropriate to change because sod all else is!

  3. libhomo Says:

    Where are the freakin jobs for these people?

    • RickB Says:

      There aren’t this is a policy to make labour cheaper and more ‘flexible’ all cloaked in right wing ‘morality/austerity’.

  4. earwicga Says:

    seems appropriate to change because sod all else is

    We have to make our own change as nobody else will. First in our own personal lives then out into the wider world, getting more and more people on side against our lizard overlords.

    • RickB Says:

      Have you been watching V?

      • earwicga Says:

        Nope, never seen it.

        Been thinking about my comment though and I think I must make a much bigger effort not to get angry with the ignorant saps out there. They are ignorant because of the deliberate actions of the ruling class and it is more important now than ever to get open people’s eyes and get them on side. To let people know how they are being controlled and contributing to that. Or perhaps this is all crap – I’ve had a lovely hour of nitrous oxide today 🙂

        • RickB Says:

          No, I think that’s a good strategy because sadly they are just repeating a world view they are encourage to have. eg. most people will not know a City financier but they will know or know of someone on benefits and then the media tells them to despise people on benefits because they are scroungers etc. Meanwhile the rich financier will be avoiding tax to the tune of tens if not hundred of thousands while also in their work making profit the only guide regardless of social damage and profiting from financial instruments designed to be inscrutable to legal oversight all unseen by people, while the corporate media will encourage people to judge all in receipt of benefits as up to no good. So yes, much as Manufacturing Consent is called a primer in intellectual self defence, the first job is to gently provide the evidence that shows people they are being used and misinformed, if you have the patience and charm, which admittedly is hard to muster when some eejit spouts the usual tabloid talking points as if it is a well thought out and fully backed by evidence assertion of The Truth ™. Actually it’s almost funny they are told they pay tax to pay scroungers which is only true to the extent that-
          A. people are scrounging
          B. the rich effectively avoid taxation altogether

          now as A. needs evidence people rarely are able to provide (in fact fraud levels are far below fraud levels in corporate fraud)

          but B. is readily provable point out it is odd they hold A to be true but never even thought about B. And of course that the economic system actually creates a reserve of unemployed labour by design.

          It might be the whole country will need nitrous oxide daily!

      • Mike Says:

        “V” The eighties original of course. You’d be Gooder and I’d be Ham.

        Earwicga would have to be the Faye Grant character – Julie? Julia?

        Perils of a misspent youth and late night TV. I’ll be referring to you as Number 6 next. (Can you see Port Merrion from there?)

  5. earwicga Says:

    No Mike I’m not that close to Port Meirion – it’s about an hour’s drive from here. I have been there a couple of times but I find it a very unsettling place. I haven’t seen The Prisoner either so can’t make the comparisons.

  6. RickB Says:

    Ah yes, I have escaped form The Village a couple of times, yes it’s a good hour or so away.
    ‘I will not make any deals with you. I’ve resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. I resign. ‘
    Oh yes, not seen the remake, by all accounts it missed the boat on the profound and experimental original, I have a vhs box set from 94.
    V, ah, yes I enjoyed that, (Diane, great baddy) so you would be Michael Ironside’s anti-hero and I get to be Marc Singer, as long as I don’t have to be The Beastmaster next. Again not seen the remake but again reports are not so great.

  7. earwicga Says:

    if you have the patience and charm, which admittedly is hard to muster when some eejit spouts the usual tabloid talking points as if it is a well thought out and fully backed by evidence assertion of The Truth ™.

    I think it is essential to do this. I have been watching the riots in Greece and Ireland and much as I would love them to happen here I don’t think there is much hope. Civil liberties have been restricted so much in the War of Terror that the only resistance that is viable is information, which when the ‘austerity measures’ set in is going to be more sought after.

    • RickB Says:

      I think you are right, the far right will seek to answer people’s bewilderment with lies about immigration, etc so it becomes even more pressing to engage as a kind of information missionary. In fact I should mention you do also write at Pickled Politics
      you big blogging superstar you! So you are fighting the good fight there too.

      • earwicga Says:

        Thank you! I really should blog my thoughts on this election but am still forming them really. Despair would be far too easy and I am in no way ready to admit defeat. Damn that Pandora and her package of hope!!

        • RickB Says:

          To some extent other than stated aims (as above) we don’t have anything to go on, so taking time to figure out the lay of land is wiser and to be honest the are enough instant judgements on what the ConDems will bring that it’s all a bit like crystal ball gazing. How (if?) Labour renews/rehabilitates itself is a big thing too.

  8. Mike Says:

    Yeah. I think I’ve go the cynicism to carry of Ham/Ironside – and not a hope in hell of ever being a real ‘hero’.

    I also seem to remember Robert Englund in his pre-Freddie days.

    I think I’d prefer to live in the past as the ‘now’ sucks big time at the moment. The sheer insanity that seems to have gripped a lethal enough industry (politics) at the best of times is depressing in the extreme.

    • earwicga Says:

      Don’t be despondent Mike! Now really is a great time to make change. The left has to take this opportunity to change the debate and truly offer something different to the same same that New Labour and the Tories have been alternating for decades.

  9. Mike Says:

    Someone braver and smarter than me could set up a boycott of any company who employs and ex-MP who voted for war and hasn’t surrendered them self to the ICC to be tried for war crimes before being considered employable again.

    Any takers? You know – someone smart, with their own blog, in a safe location…

  10. RickB Says:

    Surely Ham would just cap ’em!?!
    Actually not a bad idea, I mean I can think of Clarke and Smith already who lost seats, I wonder if though they would be in jobs because of their support for torture and war so only boycotts that lose them money would work, shaming them will be a non starter probably. Andy Worthington is doing a list of MP’s in relation to human rights, I can see possibilities here, sort of a they work for you but a human rights/cvil liberties war criminals focus, unless such exists, some research is in order (but you know every nation should have such a site/wiki/database especially as tribal team loyalty to parties is blunting dissent on human rights abuses, look at Obama and Miranda rights).

  11. RickB Says:

    Further to that does anyone have experience of doing wiki sites?

    • Mike Says:

      Not me. Although there used to be a few places on the Net where you could sign up for free wiki based sites but most were funded by them slapping ads all over them. Wet Paint comes to mind, and I think PB Wiki.

      Or you could just add a forum section to your new blog if your hosts allow it. There is free forum software out there you can simply install, although forums have a reputation for being extremely time consuming.

  12. RickB Says:

    I think ideally a searchable wiki or database, a forum would not work so well. Skeptical voter did one for the election, something between that and they work for you maybe.

  13. earwicga Says:

    Have you seen the 55% rule? Thoughts?

  14. RickB Says:


    hmm, seems a cunning ruse dressed up in ‘stability’ and reform, it should not be passed.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: