News Politician

Even the British Labour party is likely to agree to this reform, as the UK has one of the highest welfare rates in Europe.

Those forced to take up Work Activity Placements will be expected to spend 30 hours a week for four weeks at a time in a local business or project benefiting the community.
If they do not attend or fail to complete the placement a "significant" financial sanction will be imposed, such as withholding Jobseeker's Allowance for at least 3 months, government insiders said.
One source close to the plans said: "We know there are still some jobseekers out there who need an extra push to get them into the mindset of being in the working environment.
"This is all about getting them back into a working routine which in turn makes them a much more appealing prospect for an employer looking to fill a vacancy, and more confident when they enter the workplace.
"The goal is to break the habit of worklessness."
Some five million people are currently claiming out of work benefits in the UK, with 1.4 million claiming for 9 out of the last 10 years.
Britain has one of the highest rates of workless households in Europe, with 1.9 million children living in homes where no one has a job....
Under the plans, claimants face a new 12-month cap on their benefits, if ruled able to work. People who cannot work, for example the terminally ill, would be given support with no time limit.

Workfare in America began in the 1990s when President Clinton, under the influence of the Republican congress, instituted workfare reforms that helped get the nation's unemployed back to work. In Portland, Maine, the workers continue to speak well of the program:

Each morning, Portland's General Assistance office fills with men and women who need help paying their rent or some other basic expense.
But they're here for the day's job assignments.
One by one, they are sent off to clean the city's homeless shelter, do laundry at the Barron Center, clean up a park or do clerical work at City Hall, among other things.
These days, for thousands of Mainers, welfare is work. And people on the receiving end say they like it that way.
"I used to say these people are living off the state, and now I'm getting help," said Chris Conley, an unemployed 22-year-old. "That's why I like the work. ... I don't want to feel like it's handed to me."
Helping more Mainers move from welfare to work, by providing job skills, experience or education, is the one reform that virtually everyone supports.

Not exactly everyone supports it, of course. The Freedom Socialist Party wrote in 2008 that workfare programs and welfare cuts were:

Targeting the poor first. Going after welfare recipients isn't new. In 1996, Bill Clinton boasted that he was going to "end welfare as we know it." He then introduced TANF (temporary assistance for needy families), which put lifetime limits of five years on welfare aid and forced many parents into workfare - jobs that never pay a living wage. Since then, the U.S. government has dramatically reduced those who receive welfare to 1.8 million families, down from about 5 million in 1994....
This hardly means that millions have pulled out of poverty. Most families have moved into the ranks of the working poor, no better off than before.
Many have physical or mental health problems, few job skills and little work experience. Indeed, the government reports that 44 percent of TANF recipients have some sort of disability.
Others lack transportation or basic education. And in many locales across the U.S., there simply are no living-wage jobs available.

The socialist website went on to complain that the mothers on this program did not have back-up childcare available if their children got sick, and that they were unable to take their own sick days to take care of a sick child. Also, the workfare recipients were unable to unionize themselves on the level of powerful AFSCME unions.

I think they should wake up. Many middle-class workers also have to scramble to take care of sick children, sometimes losing pay for that day. And how can they say that lack of unionization is an excuse to scrap the entire program? How about the workers apply for a union job while on workfare, gaining work experience at public expense. They are more likely to get that job, than a welfare mom walking straight into a union job with no experience whatsoever.

Unemployment has become a huge problem in America with many able-bodied Americans currently out of work due to bad economic conditions. The few jobs available are held for those who have jobs already and are looking to switch. Those out of work often have bad credit and are sometimes in the foreclosure process, which shows up on a credit check, also making it more difficult to be hired by employers who may check credit before hiring. Workfare programs or any type of employment training, assistance and placement is desperately needed.

This story is interesting, as are the comments on BoomerJeff's site. He has a liberal troll who tries to refute his numbers and substitute new ones, but Jeff stands strong and shoots down the arguments pretty effectively. As for the idea that businesses making over 200K are less than 2% of businesses, that is designed to obfuscate the issue. Most small businesses barely support the business owner. Some support one or 2 extra employees. The ones in the market for hiring would have been the ones with profit over 200K per year, but Obama has targeted them. And where will this money go? Not to worker bees, but to welfare slugs and political groups.

After deliberately, adding more than $2 Trillion to the federal debt in his first 18 months in office the President and the Democrats are beginning to feel a sense of foreboding.

They have suddenly pivoted from profligate spending to seeking ways to wrench more money out of the private sector into the government till.

The first group Democrats want to suffer tax punishment as a result of the Obama deficits is “the rich,” defined as earning over $200,000, who are now targeted for a tax increase.

The problem with a tax hike on  “the rich,” as more and more Republicans are finally saying out loud, is that it’s also a tax hike on the small business sector that creates most of the new jobs.

Read more by BoomerJeff here.

Thanks, Obama. I recall specifically being assured by a doctor in early 2009 that you would not socialize medicine. Only a madman would so something so radical during an economic crisis. Now Obamacare and your other socialist policies hang like the sword of Damocles over employers and Americans alike. You hurt this country in your zeal to remake America in the image of your redistributionary socialist Utopia. You are certainly the worst president of my lifetime. And that has nothing to do with your color or race. It has everything to do with your character and policies. Look what your wrong-headed ideas have wrought:

Raghavan Mayur, president at TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, follows unemployment data closely. So, when his survey for May revealed that 28% of the 1,000-odd households surveyed reported that at least one member was looking for a full-time job, he was flummoxed.

"Our numbers are always very accurate, so I was surprised at the discrepancy with the government's numbers," says Mayur, whose firm owns the TIPP polling unit, a polling partner for Investors' Business Daily and Christian Science Monitor. After all, the headline number shows the U.S. unemployment rate today is 9.5%, with a total of 14.6 million jobless people.

However, Mayur's polls continued to find much worse figures. The June poll turned up 27.8% of households with at least one member who's unemployed and looking for a job, while the latest poll conducted in the second week of July showed 28.6% in that situation. That translates to an unemployment rate of over 22%, says Mayur, who has started questioning the accuracy of the Labor Department's jobless numbers.

See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/bjW9Zv