Review: 'Through the Shadowlands’ describes Julie Rehmeyer's ME/CFS Odyssey
I should note at the outset that this review is based on an audio version of the galleys and the epilogue from the finished work. Julie Rehmeyer sent me the final version as a PDF, but for some reason my text to voice software (Kurzweil) had issues with it. I understand that it is...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Arbeit Macht Frei UK: Work for no pay, or benefits to be cut!

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by SilverbladeTE, Feb 19, 2012.


    the true face of so-called "conservatism" shows itself, as many of us warned as the Tories and rest too, are all degenerate traitors selling their nation out to the corporations and megarich elite.
    They'd happily lick the Devil's arse crack if they thought they'd find a shilling up there! :rolleyes:

    Next up in the Parliament of Scum: involuntary euthansia (to cut costs) and war with Iran (to make more money, divert public attention etc)
    You betcha! Dominoes fall...

    Parliament is a nest of treacherous scorpions and honourless prostitutes (and i do NOT mean honest "working ladies" at that! :p)
    Near 80 years ago, WE fought this scum, and now our leaders have BECOME that scum.

    And note, the Scottish government refused to support this vile crap:


    note: I said "so called conservatism"
    they are NOT "conservatives" in the now almost defunct meaning of that word, alas
    LaurieM likes this.
  2. Calathea

    Calathea Senior Member

    Quite apart from the obvious way in which this is totally horrific, it doesn't even make sense financially. If you're going to force people to work, surely you'd be better off getting them paid by their employers so that you can pay them less in benefits?
  3. Valentijn

    Valentijn WE ARE KINA

    It doesn't makes sense because you're assuming that politicians work for the country/government/people. The reality is that they work for their own financial interests, and those of the corporations that reward them.
  4. Exactly!
    Cameron's a multi-millionaire, yet he still claimed Disabled Living Allowance for his disabled child (who's now dead, alas, aged six :/ Cameron's scum but I wouldn't wish anyone to lose their kid, sigh)... DLA = same allowance he's going to cut for everyone else.

    we've got 3 MILLION Unemployed as is, there is no work, so putting more "out to work" is bloody insane...unless you are evil that is, in that case, it all makes perfect sense, as does the End Game.

  5. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    Question: is unpaid forced labour for the sick and disempowered slavery?

    I can understand volunteer work programs to assist unemployed develop job skills. This clearly isn't that.
  6. Marco

    Marco Grrrrrrr!

    Near Cognac, France
    As many have previously stated it was the labour party that brought Atos and Unum into the whole welfare process and the currrent government just inherited it. Given the current need to drive down government (i.e. taxpayer funded) spending. I'm not surprised that the current government are not inclined to change things.

    You like to throw around Nazi anologies? Perhaps you happened to catch 'Meet the Authors' today on the BBC where the author (incidentally a Guardian columnist) was talking about the 'left's shame' in the 1930's when the doyens of the left including Bertrand Russel, Nye Bevan and Beveridge were all ardent supporters of eugenics (you know, the philosophy whereby it is assumed that the upper class are superior and the lower orders and disabled should be sterilised?).
    *GG*, Snow Leopard and Enid like this.
  7. Nielk



    I see Silver's analogy to the Nazi regime as an understandable conclusion and I don't take Nazi ism lightly. I lost family members at their hand.

    What is happening here, is a government sponsored prejudice towards disabled people. They single them out and give them no choice in the matter but force them to work for free!
    This was the aim of the Nazis in the beginning before they decided to exterminate a whole people only because they belonged to a religion. t didn't matter if they were young, old, ill or dying and put them into forced labor. Thus, Silver/s heading - "Arbeit Macht Frei"=Work will set you free. They tried to deceive the innocent, naive enslaved laborers. Not unlike what the U.K. government wants to do. Take disabled people and force them to work for free? It's worse then slavery because they are picking on a group of people who are unable to work and forcing them to do something that will most possibly harm or even kill them.
    Do you take this lightly?
    Battery Muncher, LaurieM and Wonko like this.
  8. Marco,
    some time ago I, me, the Left Wing Doom Goblin you seem to think I am :p, posted about the fact that the 2003, iirc, Labour Party Conference was part funded by UNUM.

    Also in my original post up top I said this:
    as many of us warned as the Tories and rest too
    ie, ALL the major parties are sell outs to the corporations nowadays, but it BEGAN like it or damn well not with the Tories, this stuff stretches back to the 80s, remember, government getting UNUM, Weasels etc all on board to bilk folk like us as one part of the corporate sell out.
    If you recall also, many government minsiters at the time promoted agendas that made some corproations richer, and went to work for them afterwards, iirc one who promoted sheep dip spraying ended up with a cushy job with ICI?
    And yes, this goes on today and with the so-called "Left", ex Labour Minister Tom Reid, who over saw the start of using corporate security firms for prison transfer for first time in UK and even our first private prison...then went to work for the same corporation afterwards,_Baron_Reid_of_Cardowan

    As I've also pointed out, you are four times more likely to meet a psychopath in Big Business, than anywhere else in normal life, it's an ideal environment for them, and these sociopathic wahoos actually are terrible for the business in the end (no they don't have someone's liver with a nice cianti :p but they dont' care, don't listen to others and make a mess...see bankers)

    You missed out H G Wells in the "eugenics" list amongst MANY others ;)
    what, ya think I believe that "my side" is made up only of fairies and hobbits? Pull the other one, it's got bells on! :p
    I didn't vote for "New Labour" bar once after seeign what they'd become.
    As I keep saying, people in groups, SUCK: right left, politicals, religion, science, don't matter. Put folk together and the average IQ,morality and survival sense of the group drops like the stockmarket after repealling Glass-Steaghal! :Retro Biggrin:
    No side is "perfect/right". Like it or not though the "right" does attract sociopaths more than the left, left though has problems with control freaks and the extremes on all sides ALWAYS attract more scumbags. Simplistic, but fair grain of truth.

    Tory Party in Westminster are in general ratbags (exceptions definately do exist), the end result of their push is horror, it is inevitable.
    merely a quesiton of how far it goes, if the British Public are gutless/stupid enough to go along with it.

    the UK and Commonwealth, US and Russia, stopped the Nazis in the end.
    Alas, we didn't do a thorough enough job of rooting the vermin out, they were left like an infection deep in the root of a tooth, so to speak.
    "Those who fight monsters, must beware least they become monsters themselves" :/
    Battery Muncher likes this.
  9. Marco

    Marco Grrrrrrr!

    Near Cognac, France

    If you do truly believe that all political parties are equally corrupt you undermine that position when using terms like 'Tory scum' and 'Like it or not though the "right" does attract sociopaths more than the left' (evidence?) and in the process alienate those of us who are not generally left leaning and find such rhetoric objectionable.

    I may have actually agreed with your position on this particular policy and I don't have a problem with objecting to policies originating from 'my side' of the political divide when I believe they are wrong.

    In this particular case I can see major pros and major cons. Yes, there is the danger that vulnerable people may be placed into inapproriate work placements and you can argue about the ethics of 'unpaid work'. On the other hand we are talking about people placed into the work related activity group. The problem to date with the old incapacity benefit system was that you were either considered able or unable to work and the only way to test your capacity to return to work was to get a job. If a temporary placement with a charity can help an individual test their capability to work without having to 'sign-off' or help to improve the self-confidence of those out of work for a long time then is it necessarily a bad thing and potentially helpful to those with fluctuating conditions?

    At the end of the day its likely that this will be a simplistic one size fits all approach that may benefit some and penalise others which is unfortunately often the end result of any bureaucratic system.

    I'm also not so naive myself that I really believe that the intention behind this stems from any genuine concern to help people enjoy the 'dignity of work'. But in the current economic context, spare a thought for the Greek's whose minimum working wage has been cut to somewhere in the region of 580 per month - before tax!

    It's also all too easy to blame the current economic crisis (and the resulting austerity measures) on corporations and greedy bankers. For the former, as you are well aware you need to create wealth before even beginning to debate how fairly or unfairly it should be distributed. As for the latter, anciendaze has eloquently set out what I believe to be a more accurate assessment that it was more the fact that no-one fully understood the risks involved in global financial transactions rather than 'greed' that led to the crash.

    Its also all too easy to blame others rather than acknowledge the part played by individuals running up record levels of personal debt and who were all too happy to buy into the idea that ever rising property prices were a 'good thing'. No bankers forced them to borrow beyond their means and it was politicians, not bankers, who insisted that mortgages were made available to the 'sub-prime' market.

    Once again things are just not black and white.


    If you really believe you can equate doing unpaid work in a charity shop to forced labour, starvation and eventual execution, you must have a strange sense of perspective.
    *GG* likes this.
  10. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member

    The other side.
    You seem to be under the impression that this programme is only to have people work in charity shops, why? This programme is being used, as intended, to provide labour for the UK's biggest corporations, paid for by the tax payer, for indefinate periods. Anyone who thinks this is not going to impact on these corporations hiring practises is dreaming.

    In the UK the government is already massively subsidising these companies via working tax credits (the company pays minimium wage and the government tops this up to a living wage), apparently this doesnt allow them to make enough profit so now the government is providing them free labour.

    According to various sources in the UK we have somewhere between 2.6 and 6.2 million unemployed and around half a million actual vacancies (of any description, inc part time), and whilst the DWP budget last year was a shade under 200 billion only 40 billion of this actually went to either disability or unemployment benfits (i.e around 5.7 percent of total government spending not the 30 percent claimed by ministers - they convientiently forget to mention that the DWP budget includes things like pensions, working tax credits etc. and is not entirely eaten up by scrounging criminal workshy scum!!!).

    This is an idealogically driven witch hunt, nothing else
  11. Marco

    Marco Grrrrrrr!

    Near Cognac, France

    Perhaps but whose idealogy?

    Working tax credits were introduced by the Labour Party, presumably to help low paid workers but were soon followed up by the abolition of the 10% tax rate which to me sounds like reduce the burden on employers and heap in onto the workers. A more benign interpretation might be that tax credits allowed employers to employ more workers than they otherwise might have by reducing labour costs while ensuring a 'decent' working wage which was unfortunately somewhat reversed by Labour withdrawing the lower tax rate to cover excess largesse elsewhere.

    Either way, they were nothing to do with 'Tory' ideaology.

    Plus, if we all agree that paid vacancies are in very short supply, how can they offer them as placements, particuarly as these placements are likely to be short term and as everyone knows it takes time and training for any worker to get fully up to speed.

    Of course I don't believe that all the placements will be in 'charity shops' but that example did serve the purpose of highlighting the nonsense of comparing this to genocide.
    *GG* likes this.
  12. Ok here's some points :)

    if you MAKE people become "volunteers", or they lose their benefits
    they aren't bloody VOLUNTEERS any more!

    And for your information,what actually brought the banking system down, or rather, was final straw, was the fact that Mexician/Central American drug cartels withdrew a vast sum of money, fearing increased US money laundering crackdowns AND they knew the banks were close to imploding.
    Wasn't "poor black folk buying houses they couldn't afford" as some think. That amount of money they were indebted by, is a complete pittance, a non-entity versus the mega-mess the banks did just by takeovers alone, never mind any other issue (and one reason they did those take overs, was the convulted corruption of bonus payments, each take over got those execs millions, so they went on a buying splurge...see Royal bank of Scotland).

    $378 BILLION dollars from drug money....ya think the banks didn't know where that came from?
    The bankers/execs etc WERE totally, completely at fault for the meltdown, those ratbags fired/retired or destroyed their risk assesment/similar folk who warned them...and paid nice big hefty sums or other gratuities to political systems to end "inconvenient" things like Glass-Steagall which helped lead ot the mess.

    yes, it's not simple, but attacking the weak and victimizing the poor has a loooong track record, and so are the consequences.
    In the end *WE* will pay for it.
    Should be the corporates/bankers in jail, but folk won't learn except the hard way.
    Which is usually after a real ugly, evil mess slaps them right in the kisser for being complacent, selfish bungholes.

    Ever noticed that no matter how much folk complain about a road traffic "black spot" for example, nothing gets done until a bunch of poor souls get turned into hamburger in a bad accident AND it hits the headlines?
    Could all have been avoided easily and been much cheaper ot fix things, but...nope, not gonna happen.
    As I keep saying "If you want to make enemies, try to change something...."

    I otherwords, 5, 10, 20 or whatever years from now, when things have got very ugly, and the body count is too high/obviosu, then and only then will folk wake up and admit that um, yeah, it was a BAD IDEA!

    And now...back to your regularly scheduled prgramming! :p
  13. Marco

    Marco Grrrrrrr!

    Near Cognac, France

    Blame the central American drug cartels then!

    That we can agree on.

    With interest rates being held at historical low to keep the UK's debt repayments down and to prevent mass defaults on the mortages Mr and Mrs UK average took out to keep up with the Joneses, those daft enough to have saved instead of spending are seeing their life savings rapidly eroded by high inflation. The worst hit are pensioners who can't top their savings back up from future earnings.

    Another policy being proposed is that health benefits (ICB/ESA and DLA/PIP) will be means tested and anyone with savings will be expected to exhaust their savings before they can expect any help from state benefits that they may have themselves helped fund through taxes for many years.

    But then we all know that the Tories are idealogically opposed to savers and comparatively well off pensioners don't we?
  14. DaiWelsh


    lol, good point, well made :thumbsup:
  15. ah huh...
    Clegg sounds like a Weasel, don't he? :p
    yes, you don't need paid for work, because work is therapy to avoid depression!!
    Hell, that should have been in "Catch-22" ;)
  16. Marco

    Marco Grrrrrrr!

    Near Cognac, France
    Hi Silverblade

    I watched the BBC coverage of this story yesterday and some of the young people interviewed seemed to find it quite valuable.

    The only people protesting seemed to be a bunch of twenty-somethings going around each employer carrying copies of 'Socialist Worker'.

    Which was a little odd as they didn't sound particularly working class and didn't appear to be working?;)

    There you go.
  17. marco
    Many moons ago....I was one of Maggie's Millions, I was on a YTS scheme (as per most of 'em round here, con game, hadd nothing to do with getting folks jobs)
    So, let me put on my Morris Dancing outfit, and I'll extend my bell-bedecked leg to let you shake it, ok? :p

    Old old adage that is so true:
    you pay peanuts, you get monkeys

    Hey if bankers and CEOs think they deserve mega bonuses just for doing their job, so does everyone else! ;)

    and back to the point:
    disabled are stuffed, this is the thin edge of the wedge, it just gets worse from here on out
    you have been warned, don't say you weren't when the poop hits the wind turbine :p

    "Austerity, terrorism, economic collapse!"
    ...Where's me TARDIS? :D
  18. currer

    currer Senior Member

    Well, Marco, it will be valuable to the young people only if they can receive a wage of some sort.

    Working at a menial job without pay or prospects is not likely to boost anyone's confidence.

    Tesco can afford it, we know.

    "If the profits in Cheshunt Overseas accounts were subject to corporation tax in the UK, Tesco could have been liable for 20m corporation tax. Those accounts state that Cheshunt Overseas paid 4m of foreign taxes, a saving of 16m. Most of this saving comes from one single full year of Cheshunt's existence to February 2007. Cheshunt Overseas accounts for 2008 have not yet been published. Tesco's lawyers told the Guardian: "Tesco rely upon [an] entirely legitimate tax exemption."

    The highly sophisticated tax strategies of global companies have recently been coming under close attention. Tesco was previously disclosed to be running a set of schemes involving partnerships and offshore unit trusts, designed to avoid up to 63m stamp duty land tax otherwise payable by the purchaser on property deals."

    And this;

    Adequate remuneration is a major concern for everyone, not only private citizens, but business too, it seems..

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page