How to stop whining like a baby Pages 1 2 3 NEXT | |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/economics-blog/2012/feb/29/youth-employment-rate-slumps-ons Quick source, but basically there aren't enough jobs, and the baby boomers are living longer & are taking all of them as they have more experience. He should obviously try a bit harder as he's more likely to find something that way, but he's not entirely to blame if there aren't enough jobs for 100% employment. | |
I'm not going to argue that he shouldn't clean up his act... but as someone who was unemployed in the UK for some time even before this recent crisis, I'd like to pick a few holes in your attitude.
Formal education does NOT suit everyone. I did terribly in it. Even at 31 I do awfully at any structured educational system. I did a vocational course recently and my tutor.. very kindly.. let me pass purely on the verbal answers I gave her because my coursework was terrible. Not wrong, just poorly written, overdue and waffling because I've never been very good at book work. Further, really, the idea that everyone should have a degree is absurd. There are plenty of jobs in the world that do not, or hopefully do not, require this level of education. The problem with the education system when I was at school was that it almost solely concentrated on the GSCE - A Level - Uni progression. The only people in Uni should be people it suits, others should have other options. The only jobs that require degrees, should be ones that actually need that knowledge to do.
Really? Your saying he should uproot himself to an entirely different country? From having no job? Do you have any idea how expensive that can be, not to mention the fact that most of Europe.. and the western world.. is struggling at the moment. I moved to Australia, for personal reasons.. it took me years to save up the funds while un employed and in low income jobs, including aid from a friend here to fund it. It took me years to find a decent job, as well. Even with an education, unless you have a job /before/ you move and a ton of experience to get that job, the process is insanely hard. Frankly, your whole attitude makes it clear you begrudge him any sort of life while unemployed. Having been so for many years, I can tell you that after awhile you do give up... because it becomes progressively harder not to do so.. it is a soulcrushing experience that makes you want nothing more than to escape, and if you don't have a form of escape (video games, etc) then you go crazy. Yes, he should shave, dress better, etc... but when you are struggling to find an interview, let alone a job, it starts becoming difficult to justify the costs of a nice set of clothes you rarely use, or razor blades. | |
That first really is an idiot. Now failing like that is demotivating, true. I also like the night. I work best in the evening, and I can't guarantee the safety of those who are between my bed and the coffee machine when I first wake up. So if there's no reason to get out of bed I tend to study at night, sleep untill 10-11 and only really swing into action after 14.00. My favourite time is the second shift because of that. 15.00-22.00. Mostly peace and quiet, no clients, people leaving, and a lot of hours where there's only one receptionist, and plenty of time to read books and study while being paid to do it. But, if you've got stuff to do that requires a daytime timetable, you need a day-night cycle. And that doesn't spring up overnight. You need to acclimatise to that, meaning you need to start waking up early 3-4 days in advance. Meeting or interview on monday? Start waking early on thursday, force yourself to go to bed at least 7 hours before needing to wake up. There's no other way to do it. Now you've got a small chance that the interviewers are both heavy smokers and won't notice, but most of the time it's going to work against you. If your first impression is 'that guy/woman who stank when we shook hands' you can pretty much forget about it. Smokers seem to think chewing gum or drinking a bit of water fixes it, but it doesn't, you still smell it pretty badly. But if he's only had small menial jobs for a few months, he also really needs to teach himself something, because such small jobs, without a fulltime education next to it, just screams not being motivated.
Uneducated work is a really small segment of the job market, and suffering enormously because it's literally the worst job one can have in terms of competition, because any jobseeker can do it. I can remember news articles about employment where analysts basically said that for the truly uneducated, temporal jobs interspersed with gaps of a few years of being unemployed is basically the best they can hope for these days. So yes, everybody needs a degree in the sense that everybody needs skills. Comparing: I got my security 'degree' in four days. Could've been one day if they'd foregone the silly practises with actors and just given me the tests. Even pretty thick people graduate that course in the 2 weeks it normally takes. I think pretty much everyone can do it, and once you have that a whole new world opens up, which is a growing market and pretty well-paying because of the dreadfull hours and risks in some cases. | |
People in the UK have it so good. I have to pay for college out of my own pocket because I'm not eligible for financial aid, and I can't afford insurance so I can't get medical treatment when I'm sick or even get my cavities filled. America blows. | |
So Limbaugh was right all along! Who fills your cavities is really your own business mate. | |
Yep, I agree that the first miserable sod in particular needs an invigorating kick up the backside. Based on the last "pep talk" thread you made, however, I forsee that approximately the next 14,493 posts in this thread will consist of people wagging their fingers, furrowing their brows and tutting disapprovingly about your cruel lack of empathy for a 25 year-old manchild who doesn't understand how to use either an alarm clock or a razor. | |
I can't believe how long it took me to get that. I think I need to phrase my sentences more carefully. Correction: I can't afford to get the cavities in my TEETH filled. And I'd prefer the other cavities be left alone. | |
In order to automatically blame the guy for not having a degree, they'd have to be free. Or the government offer everyone student loans that could pay for tuition and living expenses (when combined with a part time job that left room for studying). Some poorer segments with no family support just can't earn enough to pay for tuition fees alongside they day-to-day living expenses, and if they could it'd be from a full time job that'd leave them with no time to study. The guy's obviously let himself go, but with the job market being what it is, and higher education not being available to everyone regardless of financial standing, a good whipping isn't necessarily all he needs (though it's undoubtedly part of it). He should certainly be grateful that society has chosen to grant him the additional positive right of being kept alive when at his own wit's end, but one can't inherently assume he can or could've done better than he did. Be it due to their genetics, their environment, or that society don't really have any need for them, some people are just failures for whom no doors will ever open. ... Now, when people are complaining that their unemployment benefits will be cut after two years on them, because they'll have to sell their autocamper, then you can talk about a messed up sense of entitlement. | |
I'll do the following instead:
I think I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say, to be honest...Unless that dude reads the forums here, I'm not sure what's the purpose of this thread. I mean, it's common knowledge that people like that exist, so that's not exactly news. Yeah, he does need to get his act together and stop being a waste of time and space, but I suspect he'd need some antidepressants for that. But an attempt to push this forward as an example of your average unemployed person who happens to currently having to rely on benefits to get through the month would be a rather underhanded thing to do and I you're above such pettiness and gross generalizations, now aren't you? *daisy-covered voice* | |
Eh, it's all very well and good blaming him, but there aren't enough jobs to go around. That's sort of a massive problem for people you want to condemn for not getting a job. At worst, all you can really say about him is that he doesn't have the self-respect to try harder to get a job so that someone else is unemployed instead. Which is making an assumption and is quite harsh, but I can understand that thinking. | |
I don't really see anything useful behind the OP's exercise in shaming an individual online, unless he's attempting to generalise this case to unemployed people in general, which is obviously unjust i mean heck just look at the second person interviewed in that article. One thing i'd point out though is that just because the OP may have managed to drag himself out of the British underclass, as i recall from previous threads, it doesn't mean he should expect everyone else to follow his example. This is because not everyone's going to be like himself. By judging strangers to ones own standards you only reveal ignorance about people in general and a lack of empathy. I can say that university isn't for everyone, and in the same way that upping sticks at moving abroad isn't for everyone, joining the army isn't for everyone or being a teacher isn't for everyone. We all have different skills and abilities, and i don't think it's very wise to look back on your life expect any Joe Bloggs to walk your path. | |
Yes, you are right. | |
Sorry man, you lost me there. If you can call anything the smallest problem the UK has, its this "work ethic" you speak of.
The number of jobs out there vs the number of people out there looking for them is a sign of your decline, not the odd thousand lazy young people lounging around. | |
You know, signing your name on a forum is akin to shoving a dildo up your ass and wondering why it hurts. Anyways, I refuse to pass judgement on this guy because I don't know the entire story. Maybe you should do the same but considering you made this thread with the express purpose of being an asshole and showing the world that unemployment is your own damn fault because capitalism, you won't. I mean how fucking low can you go to actually shame a person online just to make yourself feel better? And don't even fucking dare go on a rant about how you pulled yourself up from the lowly underbelly of society and blah blah blah, I don't give a shit. I've heard that crap a million times over by now. Instead, why not considering the possibility that not everyone's situation is the same as yours. How about that? | |
I think in British English (and thus, rest of the world English) they're called "carries". I think it might serve people well to do better mental health screening of people receiving benefits. The guy seems to be rather obviously clinically depressed, and it's probably affecting his applications. The old guy pretty much is screwed. 64 is just too old of an employee to invest in. | |
I agree with you that passing judgement on this guy is rather pointless and doesn't apply to EVERYONE who goes without a job for a long period of time, but I think it's the subtle details that are getting to people, here. That picture in the article shows he desperately needs a shave and a haircut, and unless he doesn't have access to running water and soap there is no excuse for him to be drinking from a tea mug with mold on it. Either he's suffering from clinical depression, or he simply has lower standards of hygiene which always affects how well you do in an interview. So I don't think that his situation is entirely his fault, but just based on those things he probably isn't the epitome of someone trying to dig themselves out of the hole. | |
i was unemployed for about a years after i graduated college, i lived with my parents who covered virtually all of my living expenses. It was the worst experience i have ever had in my life. I never got quite as bad as this guy, but i definitely understand the sentiment. Not being able to find a job is one of the worst feelings in the world because it's basically the entire world telling you that you're worthless. Some of the most self-confident and talented people i've ever known have been broken down into depressive blobs by unemployment. | |
The point though is that it is extremely dishonest and disingenuous of both the BBC and Nightspore to use this guy as an example of the "typical unemployed young person", and it's extremely dishonest for Nightspore to then go on and use implied generalisation to denigrate all those on benefits. It's even questionable whether a decent human being would be such a judgmental arse about this guy. Look Nightie, we get it, you despise the poor and the destitute because you have an inspiring personal story about how you bootstrapped your way out of the ghetto to live a life of prosperity among The Right Sort Of People and you've somehow deluded yourself into thinking that this was entirely due to your own herculean efforts, and so anyone who cannot replicate it is simply lazy. There is no need for your monthly poor-bashing thread; we're still going to think you're a bit of a twat who cherry-picks extreme examples in order to support his medieval views on the subject, and you're still going to think we're all horrible evil commies, so just give it a rest. | |
Why would he need a shave and a haircut? Your appearance, bar personal grooming, shouldn't factor into your ability to get a job.
I haven't seen any picture of his tea mug but shit, that's the best insult you can come up with? That his mug is dirty?
Most likely considering his attitude.
Having a beard and long hair automatically make you a dirty stinking hippie piece of shit. Sound logic there buddy. | |
It shouldn't, but it does. Grooming says a lot about who are are as a person and how you manage yourself. And even if he is a good person but just prefers to have a long, untamed mane, the least he can do is tame it for the interview then set it free as he gets more familiar with the boss. Dress to impress.
Straight from the article linked in the OP:
Yes, depression would explain this behavior, but I have seen guys who live like this so it wouldn't surprise me either if he was just like that.
Again, dress to impress. With so few jobs to go around, it's really the boss's pick, and it can come down to only a few things when choosing who to hire. And who would you rather choose, the guy who bothered to trim and comb his hair before the interview or the guy who possibly hasn't washed his in the last 30 days? | |
And because it "does" that means we should just roll over and take it like a bitch.
And how does having long hair and a beard automatically mean you're not "groomed"?
I bet that sentence wasn't used for to keep the flowof the phrase going. Journalists never do that nor do they EVER exagerate.
Sure. | |
Well done Nightspore, you completely misunderstand how the job market and people work. Do you think that all unemployed people are filthy layabout scum and if they buy enough razors to shave their dirty hippy beards, that will generate enough jobs in razor manufacturing that suddenly the amount of people looking for work don't massively outnumber the amount of jobs available? If this guy suddenly turned himself into the most employable man on earth, it would just mean he takes a job off of someone else. Lack of jobs is the problem, complaining about caricatures of jobless people is just needless social wankery. | |
If it means getting out of the cycle of unemployment, why not? Get a job, get some money, then if ever you're in that same position of power run it how you'd rather run it. This is a recession, not the Industrial Revolution where people were working in impossibly unsafe conditions for completely unlivable wages. We're talking about getting a haircut before an interview, not overturning a reign of horribly oppressive labor barons.
To some it does, and I certainly wouldn't call his appearance in that picture one that of a man who keeps his beard and hair well groomed. I worked at Disney on an internship. Men who work at Disney cannot have facial hair, save for a few kinds of mustaches (and even then they must be trimmed and well maintained), and their hair couldn't be longer than about two inches. There are actually barber shops backstage in every park so that men can't come into work with long hair and say "whoops, my hair's too long, guess I need to take the day off and get it cut!" It does have a lot to do with how you present the long hair and beard, but for some it's simply an automatic turn-off.
Well if you are going to discount every bit of the article as lies or exaggeration just because you find it to be implausible or to be working against your case, can I then make the case that perhaps this whole event took place on the moon and they're simply altering the location to make it more relatable to their earthbound audience? I mean really, if you're going with the logic "they are the media and they can't be trusted" every time I quote the article let's just turn this into an episode of Doctor Who and be done with it. | |
It means you get a job and someone else doesn't. You're better off, but you've only profited by taking a job that some other dude would happily be doing if not for you. It means you're a bit better off, but makes no difference at all structurally to how things are run. So yeah, feel free to dress yourself up nice, but that's a side issue and doesn't address the main problem (Too many people looking for work, not enough jobs) in any way.
This is the kind of thing that should be fought against at every turn, not conceded to. Human beings at the moment, either through nature, nurture or a combination thereof have a lot of personal prejudices. Women are less likely to be treated seriously by men and will suffer when getting jobs. Ethnic minorities as well. Obese people have a much smaller chance of getting jobs, especially if they are women. If someone doesn't like the way you look, chances are they will be less likely to hire you. That type of shaggy beard would fall into that category for most people, true. But if people are discriminating based on your looks, they're in the wrong. You can change your looks to a degree if you want to and I totally understand it if people do, but the problem is with the employer not the employee.
Honestly, discounting every bit of an article as lies or exaggeration until it can be confirmed is actually for the best. The budgets of news media have been massively cut at the same time as workloads have increased. Journalists are relying more and more on unchecked information from wire agencies, other newspapers, PR agencies, etc. The work they do themselves is often not checked to the standard it needs to be. Simply the way it is. | |
As I put in the edit, which apparently I did just after you quoted me: This is a recession, not the Industrial Revolution where people were working in impossibly unsafe conditions for completely unlivable wages. We're talking about getting a haircut before an interview, not overturning a reign of horribly oppressive labor barons.
This isn't the slow but sure discrimination people. That is how Disney has operated since they opened the parks. It's a part of the employee's uniform. They want to present their employees a certain way, not only so that they know all of them go to work looking groomed but also so that they are easier to recognize as employees when guests are looking for one. Ever had that awkward situation where you can't tell if someone at the supermarket works there or not? That is something they are trying to prevent. From grooming, to costumes, even to how they gesture (you are also taught the "Disney Point," where when giving directions you point with two fingers rather than one because pointing with one finger is offensive to some cultures) they want cast members to be easily identified and universally approachable for customer convenience. And I think asking people to have their hair cut a certain length is a far cry from asking them to be a different weight or race. There are situations where, for some reason or another, people simply are a certain weight. I have never, in my life, heard of someone who requires a serious medical intervention to get a haircut.
Then why did you even bother starting this discussion if you don't even want to believe any it could have possibly happened? Tell you what. You go over to this Ben's place, survey the situation with your own eyes, and then we will continue this discussion. Until then, I'm done. | |
All I have to say is: "lolwut?" You may need to check sources from some time after the 1980's there, dear chap. | |
And that there's been a global recession for the last 5 years. But yeah, he needs to get up at normal-people hours. | |
You're missing this point. If this guy dressed himself up really smart, exercised until he was super buff, had lessons on how to be amazingly charming and did everything else he could to get a job, he'd have a much better chance of getting a job. However, this job he gets wouldn't be created out of thin air. If he doesn't get it, someone else will. If he gets it, someone else is out of a job. Whatever happens, there still aren't anywhere near enough jobs for the amount of unemployed people. Sure, articles like this put a human face on it, spinning it a certain way depending on the intent and the person in question. They also don't matter at all, because until the labour market balances out with the jobs market, there are going to be millions of people in the UK (well, 2 million) who might as well sit in a basement playing computer games all day because there just aren't any jobs for them to have. Capitalism needs to be severely reigned in, because the free-market consensus of the last 30+ years has left us with a business sector that profits over an incredibly elastic and flexible workforce, with the average labourers fighting against each other for the far too small supply of jobs.
You seem to be mentioning this on the basis that Disney is a sterling example of a place to work rather than a hellhole. Sexism is not the same as racism is not the same as ageism, etc. Those were examples I listed, however there are similarities and even interplay between the different forms of discrimination (Women are held to especially rigorous standards of beauty, discrimination based on weight is biased towards women, etc). Someone who is less physically attractive will be discriminated against regardless of talent, which has been backed up by numerous studies: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00157.x/abstract Someone's physical features and cultural norms of attractiveness should have no impact on how well a person will do their job. That they are is sad but no-one should feel under pressure to bow down to someone else's discrimination. None of their business, none of your business.
Because people are coming up with frankly disgusting views that need to be challenged? Also, that's misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I'm saying. Although I don't trust articles like this, the point is it doesn't really matter, I only brought it up to defend someone else's point. This guy could lie in bed jerking off into his own mouth all day, because when the jobs that unemployed people need don't exist it doesn't matter if some people aren't trying to make themselves the job market's most attractive whore. If you do want to know more about the numerous failures of the the media to report news accurately and fairly, I recommend picking up Flat Earth News. It's by an award winning journalist who was one of the guys who helped reveal the NotW phone-hacking scandal and backed up by research he got a grant to pay a University to conduct. | |
This may surprise many of you, but I am actually quite left wing on many issues. In many countries only the rich can get an education. I think that is appalling. Education should be available for all. In the UK education is free to 18 and university is heavily subsidized with special subsidies for the poor and low interest student loans that you don't have to pay back until you are making more than 21k. I support all that and think all nations on this earth should afford such opportunities for their young people. Oh, lemme see. I also support the British NHS. Universal free healthcare for all at the point of need. And progressive taxation. And the UK has all the above. In many countries I have visited the above makes me and the UK rather left wing, liberal and even socialistic. Even "socialist" countries I have visited (China and Vietnam) don't afford their youth these opportunities. So what I don't like is grotesquely self-entitled people taking the above privileges for granted and then bitching and moaning about how there are no opportunities for them. What they fail to understand is how privileged and lucky they actually are to have been born in a country like the UK. The opportunities are there in the UK and until you have taken advantage of them then you have no real right to complain about a lack of opportunities in your life. And to Magichead. I don't despise the poor and destitute. Have you ever met anyone who is actually poor and destitute. REALLY poor and destitute. And if you did, did you do anything to help? Poverty is relative mate, but that understanding is kinda abstract until you have travelled a bit and seen real child and youth poverty and real destitution first hand. I personally consider real poverty a blight on the world and a shameful and intolerable thing. I moderately subscribe to the philosophy of Peter Singer on poverty and give to charity several times a year to help build schools in Africa because those kids actually are poor and destitute. Do you really honestly believe that the likes of Ben Gillet are poor and destitute? Poor and destitute as he sleeps all day, plays video games all night, drinks tea, pockets 135 quid a fortnight, gets his rent paid, has access to free healthcare, had access to free education to 18, and has access to further education with no cash required up front. The UK is a rich and privileged country comparatively speaking and so are its citizens. Now I know it is convenient for you to tell me what I think and what I am (a bit of a twat who despises the poor and destitute apparently) because it fits your quaint dogmas, but it is probably more constructive and fair to ask me my opinions first in future because you are making a habit of insulting me on these forums for things that I didn't actually say and for beliefs that I dont actually hold. Regards Nightspore | |
This is complete and utter bullshit. A person's appearance, bar basic hygiene standards, shouldn't factor into how likely someone is to get a job. This sort of attitude is what got us into the mess we are in today and if we keep bowing down to "the man" and taking it up the ass just because the "status quo" is what it is then we'll end up with a society where the only important aspect of ones life is material gain and our entire personality and appearance would reflect that goal.
Sure, he's not well groomed. That might have to do with the depression but in the end, having long hair and a beard means jack shit.
Really? So we're going to factor in appearance when talking about jobs? What about women then? I mean, being slightly chubby is an extreme turn off for most people. Should we then disallow women from getting jobs and shame them for their weight? What about people who are considered ugly? Should we shame them as well because they didn't take the time to get a plastic surgery and make themselves look "better"? This argument falls flat on its face when you actually start to think about its implications.
Oh good, a strawmann. Haven't seen one of those in a long while slash sarcasm. I suggested the author might have exaggerated certain things to keep the flow of the article intact and you went around and turned that into "YOU'RE DISCREDITING THE ARTICLE OH MY GAWD SPEEHS!!!1111".
More bullshit. Honestly, at least make it less obvious the next time you try to use fallacies to discredit your opponent. Even though my opinion of the media is less than stellar I never once said anything about the it not being trustworthy. | |
It's about respect and professionalism, Boleyn. You come into a place in a dirty t-shirt and jeans with the hair of a hippie, you don't look professional, because you're not -acting- professional. | |
Oh wow, you sure do have some amazing liberal credentials. I guess it would be impossible for you to have an awful opinion on employment then. Seriously, don't even know why you start randomly waffling on about tangentially related and completely unrelated stuff.
No, this isn't some happy clappy magic hour bullshit where you get to make spurious statements about wanting things and getting them because you try hard enough. There is a real empirical and measurable lack of jobs. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdEZjaWlPT2dMTXpaLUQ1ZXcxSUNvU1E Just world fallacies are the stupidest fallacies.
You are literally a Lucky Ducky cartoon.
The fact that poor people in this country don't have it as bad as poor as people in other countries is moot. That there is someone worse off in a different country does not in anyway minimise the pain, hardship and troubles felt by people in this or other countries nor change the fact that these problems should be combated wherever they are. You can choose to prioritise those in other countries as I do, I do that myself, but you can't just disregard those who are living in poverty in this and other countries. Also, when you say you gave to Africa, I sure hope you mean you gave to the Democratic Republic of Congo. DRC has the lowest average purchasing power per person. I mean, what if you gave to someone in Somalia or something? That would be terrible because there aren't any poor people in Somalia, obviously, because the country has an average of twice the pay per person as the DRC. It is literally impossible to be poor in Somalia because of the opportunities you have there compared to other poorer places in the world, right? Poverty is relative, dontcha know. | |
I think whoever wrote that is a pompous ass, that's what I think. | |
You didn't read my first or second post properly. Because I mentioned relative poverty and was at pains to point out that that's what I was talking about. You haven't written anything here to refute a single thing I said. My point is that relative poverty in rich countries does not match the "poor and destitute" line that Magichead threw at me. You simply come back and argue that: (a) Poverty in the UK still = pain, hardship and troubles. Except my entire first and second post was refuting this typical mantra with a real example of someone who is in relative poverty and who told his story to the BBC because he wanted people to understand his tough life that he wouldn't wish on anyone. Except that his life does not match what I think of when I think of pain, hardship and troubles even in relative terms. (b) I don't understand relative poverty. But I do and maybe it is yourself whose understanding is a little weak. Relative poverty is a useful tool because it acknowledges that societies, technology and standards change unequally across history and across different nations. However, you are aware that when a nation reaches a certain level of wealth and prosperity that relative poverty starts to measure inequality moreso than the terrible hardships that the relatively poor in say 1930s Britain endured. In a country of billionaires a millionaire is relatively poor dontcha know? (c) Happy clappy magic hour. You give evidence of unemployment that I never denied and I have never refuted in order to refute my post and have the cheek to refer to me as representing "the stupidest of fallacies" lol. I didn't say there wasn't a lack of jobs in the UK because I am not that stupid but some of you seem terribly eager to want me to have said such things so that you can fill me up with straw and knock me down. I said that (even with high unemployment) there are still loads of opportunties in education. I said that if you have a degree and are like Ben Gillet then you are internationally mobile and can go overseas to work. I list things that young people like Ben Gillet could do that are possible and doable in the UK right now. So I suggest that you refute what I actually said with evidence showing how those educational opportunities are actually non-existent for young people and then I would be happy to reconsider my position if the evidence and analysis were plausible. (d) The cartoon was the nicest part of your post. It is funny and witty and has a grain of satirical truth to it. However, the reality of what relative poverty is, what it measures and inherent problems with those measurements in rich countries is a tad more complex than a cartoon. Regards Nightspore | |
| Pages 1 2 3 NEXT | |
Here is one case of a whiner who needs to stop making excuses. I have seen many like this in the Brit broadsheet press over the years but I shall stick with this one for now.
So here is Ben Gillet from this BBC article.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17015699
Please read first for my response.
Ok mate. Here is a wee list for yeh.
1. Have a shave and clean your act up.
2. Sleep properly and stop playing video games all the time.
3. There is a more obvious reason why you are failing to get a job. You have very little to offer, look unkempt and are self-pitying. You are a young man so need to grow a pair and learn a skill that can get you a job which leads to point 4
4. You are 25. Do you have a degree? If not then why not? Because education in the UK is free to 18 and is heavily subsidized beyond that. No excuse imo for not getting yourself a degree in the UK. None at all. Given all the opportunities the UK affords I would say that if you don't have a degree then it is YOUR own fault.
5. You got a degree? You are an English speaker? Then you are internationally mobile. Go where the jobs are. Seriously, move out of the UK and get a job and do your resume a favour.
6. To quote him:
"I get £135 a fortnight in Jobseeker's Allowance and out of that I have to pay for my food, my electricity, my water, any luxuries, anything else that might crop up," he says.
"It's not a life I would wish on anyone, to be quite honest. As for making ends meet, I do my best."
Yeh mate, YOU don't have to pay at all. Such self-entitled arrogance. It is taxpayers' money. It is this attitude - that he is the one burdened - that has messed up the work ethic of the UK.
Yeh, he wouldn't wish that life on anyone. Sleeping all day, playing video games all the time and drinking tea. And he only gets 135 quid a fortnight (with no time limits) after his rent is paid (with no time limits) by the state. Such a terrible existence that he wouldn't wish it on anyone while in most other parts of the world there are young people who can only dream of the opportunities that he has had, which he still has and which he has squandered and is squandering.
There are way too many people like this in the UK.
It is a sign of our decadence and decline.
What do you think?
Regards
Nightspore