h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm just wondering what I posted that made everyone think I was looking for a job in engineering! Computing, yes. Engineering, I know nothing about!

That sure took a long tome to read through!

Everyone!

(Ormandroyd, "The Fish" mentioned engineering, I think it got confused somewhere along the lines)

I too am quite amazed at how this debate, shifted so drastically from one about licence fees and tax. To people claiming JSA. Maybe it's more closely related than people assume.

But chear up everyone! You're all using a PC aren't you, surely that means you should ALL be grateful for that at least!

(vanishes off, to lurk quietly some more)

i live in the usa and i pay almost $60.00us for digital cable services, i get only one bbc channel and watch it along with the news channels and music channels. if i could get just the 8 bbc channels for $15.00 ? all i would need is the music which i can get in plenty on the internet. to my mind that is pretty inexpensive! and without advertising (which is added even to the bbc by my cable provider) it would make for a very pleasant viewing experience indeed.

you would have music - The BBC broadcast 6 National Radio Station (all also availible over the internet http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/ ) and whole host of Local Radio Stations

Fish, sorry I thought I made it quite clear early on that I was in favour of the Welfare State as a catch all safety net. I was just stating I had little (note not "No") sympathy for people who claimed, because in my experience most of those that do claim things like dole do it at worst dishonesty or at best as a lifestyle choice (I do realise things will be far different in an high unemployment area to an high employment area like London). For those who are genuine I have every sympathy BUT I still say £2.12 a week is the sort of value they are not going to find elsewhere.


And Ormondroyd, computing makes the search for a specialist Agencies a lot easier as most of the big high street offerings have specialist department for this.

Bargain I say....

woohoo! happiness prevails!
^. .^
= ' =

i just read the backlog!

skip to the end to read the bit that's actually relevant!

ok, regarding temping jobs, i have worked for several temping agencies. they are a varied bunch, i suggest anyone interested signs on with several different ones. dont worry about the typing speed thing, most of the jobs they actually have are mainly photocopying and filing anyway.

a good move is an agency that does light industrial labour as well as or instead of just office.

i my illustrious carreer as a temp in the gaps between education i have worked
*clears throat*
in a hospital laundry
in a jelly factory
as a loo restocker for a huge office place and cleaning their cafe after lunch
filing
answering phones
photocopying
cleaning loos and science labs and life skills classrooms
etc.

at college i have worked in a bar and a toastie bar FOR NO MONEY

and i've worked at M&S for a year.

Thereofore I conclude I'm not sitting on my bum or afraid to work hard.

However, I lived with my parents in the holidays and while i was doing these jobs between courses. I do not believe any of them would have paid enough for me to live on very easily.

I live in cambridge, there are lots and i MEAN, lots of jobs here. but the cost of living is so high that unless you are prepared to commute for at least two hours and day you simly cant do it. you need to earn at least £12500 a year to do this too. anywhere cheaper and there are no jobs.

A girl i was friends with at Marks had left sixth form and was just 18. she was working full time plus overtime because her mum had a tiny kiddy that she was staying at home to look after and it was just the three of them. when my friend turned 18 obviously they lost her child support. her mum could go to work because of aforementioned small kiddy because safe cild care costs more than her job made.

it's a rut. once you get in it's very hard to get out.

I dont wnat to start another argument because you are all so chilled out now, but i do think that there is a serious problem with the current economy. i know there has always been problems and there has always been people stuck in dead end jobs etc. but it does seem to be getting more common place that it is not possible to find a job that pays enough to live on. i dont mean live on and pay a mortgage, car repayments, sofa repayments, washing machine repayments, holiday to ibitha repayments etc. i mean rent a place to live and get to work and back live.



finally....getting round to the question in hand

the license fee.

if you are broke, totally, then you cant aford a license fee. full stop. end of story. have to give up eastenders then.
on the other hand, if you can save the money for a license then do because it's about the cheapest form of entertainment you can get, and if you really get into the learning zone thing it might also help you improve your lot as well.

i think the license fee is justified and good value.

however, i do think it's a little weird that ITV and channel 4 which are not covered by the license fee are governed by the same thingy. there should be a way to just recieve those two and not bbc as they are payed for by advertising.

but then you'd miss buffy, so that would be baaaaaaaaad

FABT

Absolutely spot on, FABT. As you rightly say, the problem is that if you're poor, it's practially impossible to afford to live in a prosperous area where jobs are available, and that does leave you stuck in a rut that's very hard to get out of. Benefits don't come with London weighting, and the minimum wage won't cover the rent plus bills, even if you live somewhere very tiny and grim. I speak from unhappy experience, and it sounds as if you do too.

BTW, now that the formal complaint I put in about one particular posting has been upheld by the Towers, I do indeed feel reasonably chilled - although I'm still shocked that such an outrageous libel about me was ever posted on h2g2.

As for the licence fee - the more of the BBC's World Cup coverage I watch, the more convinced I am that it's good value!

oh good, glad i didnt start a flame war going again!

fabt

This post has been removed.

With the exception of my condition for issuing an apology can I just apologise to anyone offended by the above post – I’ve reposted to try and highlight a problem with the moderation system – (two very different decisions being apparently made over two very similar complaints (that the posting MAY (not dose) contain libellous material)).

BTW it wuz also me that hit the yikes button.

As the case of Secretary of State for Social Security v David CA Times 30-Jan-2001 demonstrated that in order to recieve job-seeker's allowance you have to be "available for work without restriction as to either hours or days. He would be ready to take work on any day of the week, to work at any time" - noe correct me if I wrong but I'm sure in the backlog Ormondroyd inicated there are certain types of work available within his are that he is unwilling to do now that dose not fit in with "available for work without restriction" in my book so I stick by what I said.

Yes, HappyDude, you yikesed that posting. Then it was restored the following morning, because you're not allowed to yikes your own postings. (The idea is, I believe, that you should take care about what you post, rather than posting and then trying to retract your offensive remarks afterwards.)

So after the libellous posting re-appeared, I re-yikesed it, and put in a very strongly-worded official complaint. My complaint was upheld. And the posting WAS libellous, HappyDude. Trust me on this one - I used to be a journalist. It's hard to imagine a clearer case of libel than falsely accusing someone of committing a criminal offence, which is precisely what you did.

Sorry if I am being argumentative. If it’s any help, I am going through nicotine withdrawal and you guys are getting the worst end of it

"falsely accusing someone of committing a criminal offence, which is precisely what you did."

Prove it and I will apologise but as I understand it, under the standard Jobseeker's Agreement states that the applicant agrees to be available for work without restriction as to either hours or days. The applicant will be ready to take work on any day of the week, to work at any time. Which as you have stated is not the case.

When you sign on, HappyDude, you draw up a contract with the government called a Jobseeker's Agreement, which is re-negotiated every so often. As long as you stick to the terms of that agreement, you are legally entitled to Jobseeker's Allowance. Most Jobseeker's Agreements, including mine, specify the types of work you're looking for and the hours you're prepared to work. There is no obligation to look for, let alone get, jobs that don't fall within the terms agreed in your Jobseeker's Agreement. Thus I am legally perfectly entitled to the money I get. I am also entitled to take the strongest possible exception to anyone suggesting otherwise.

read the small print

Ormie is correct. The post was left standing because you yikes-ed it yourself, we wanted to check with Ormie to see if he wanted it removed, before we removed it. We have just removed the posting above that you just yikes-ed, even though you did it yourself, because Ormie told us that he didn't want the libellous comment on site, and you just reposted it. And yes, it was libellous.

I hope the giving up smoking goes well HappyDude, try not to take it out on others though. Being unemployed isn't nice, nobody wants to not have a job. I know for a fact that Ormie is looking for work, because I'm one of his references. So please, take it easy?