|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 27, 2024 12:02:58 GMT
They’re generally kids between 14-16. This needs to be for young people between 18-24 for me. 18-24? How about 18-84? There are plenty of people of all ages without direction. There are plenty of people who believe that their weekends should be spent drinking in pubs. Get the lot of them out there and volunteering. I cant argue with that however it’s easier to manage smaller numbers logistically and from experience having being involved with a few charities and organisations 18-24 is often used as a benchmark figure. Good point though and far better put than mr Angry  The age things an interesting one but for me isn’t part of it about helping those with the most to give for the longest period a foot up and to build up a work ethic whilst they’re still young. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 27, 2024 12:16:12 GMT
It's a complex issue with some good points and some bad. But whatever, does anyone seriously think a Tory government could organise it properly and make it attractive for those taking up the offers? They couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery never mind something so complex as this idea. And what's going to happen to those who don't want to volunteer for anything? Many students work weekends just to earn a bob or two to see them through college or uni. And how many real forces personnel are they going to need to do the training if they decide to carry the volunteer forces recruitment through? The professional forces bods are already needed for the defence of the realm without making them train raw recruits in just the basics. It takes 4 months (full time) in the regular army just to learn how to make their beds properly, never mind training them for modern warfare. This isn't the 1930's/40's where most conscripts were trained to be basic fodder like most of the Russian lot are now. As the top brass military guy said... "It's bonkers." The same facets of what I said could also apply to the NHS, Fire Service, and Police. And finally, I can see a point where the voluntary part becomes compulsory without financial reward of any kind. Even those old sods who had to do National Service and support this scheme got paid to do it. As Bayern says above, anyone taking part should be well paid to do it whatever scheme they decided to 'volunteer' for. But instead of it costing 2.5 billion a year, you can quadruple that sum if it was to be done properly. It ain't gonna happen. OS. Bang on about the forces Mick, we prove time and again on NATO exercises that man for man we have the best trained armed forces in the world. There's a significant danger that this could jeopardise that, not sure the risks are worth it. If it had to be done it should be in support roles only with the possible option to progress to full service. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2024 12:21:47 GMT
18-24? How about 18-84? There are plenty of people of all ages without direction. There are plenty of people who believe that their weekends should be spent drinking in pubs. Get the lot of them out there and volunteering. I cant argue with that however it’s easier to manage smaller numbers logistically and from experience having being involved with a few charities and organisations 18-24 is often used as a benchmark figure. Good point though and far better put than mr Angry The age things an interesting one but for me isn’t part of it about helping those with the most to give for the longest period a foot up and to build up a work ethic whilst they’re still young. Call me cynical but not one part of me believes that this scheme is about helping to “build a work ethic”. However, if it is I also go back to my point that there are plenty of people all around the country who do not have a great one and could further benefit from building that. When I was at uni, I worked 30 hours a week in a bar to afford the stupidly inflated car insurance etc. I didn’t have time to do extra free labour for the government. If it’s work ethic, don’t punish an age group. If it’s work ethic, attach it as a requirement to job seekers allowance. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 27, 2024 12:25:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on May 27, 2024 12:26:06 GMT
1 year is not long enough,after training it will be nearly time to leave again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on May 27, 2024 12:32:24 GMT
I keep seeing that line but I've yet to come across any particular constituency for it. There are plenty of representatives of that age group you seem to delight in taking aim at on this board and I'm not sure any of them are in favour. Whilst the only bloke I know in favour is my father in law and he's old enough to have done natio al service last time around and has dementia. It's made up shite |
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on May 27, 2024 12:38:27 GMT
When I did my regular service back in the 70s the size of the Army was around 240,000. Todays army size is 75000. Maybe getting the strength back up to effective levels on a professional basis rather than trying to do it on the cheap. The territorials have around 45000 personnel. When I left in the mid 80s you had to go once a year to do your shooting assessment and get updated on things relevant to your role. In effect you had an endless supply of trained soldiers who could be called upon if ever needed. Seems we have lost our way in maintaining a sufficient force to combat any threats.
|
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on May 27, 2024 12:38:50 GMT
Cracking idea if they tailor it in a way that allows the youth of the country to help out needy pensioners. Bit like how the cubs used to do that Bob a job back in the day and go and do things like the shopping for pensioners or clear the gutters etc to earn 50p and help raise money for a good cause.
High time the yoof did something for their elders instead of watching tiktok on their phones all day 🤔
I'd say have a limit of say up to 45 years old. I'm a smidge older than that now, plus I have a bit of a dodgy back so wouldn't be much use to the pensioners really. In fact I could do with my gutters cleaning as well..defo some mileage in a scheme like this 😃
|
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on May 27, 2024 12:41:13 GMT
I don't seem to remember having anything handed to me on a plate. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on May 27, 2024 12:42:32 GMT
I don't seem to remember having anything handed to me on a plate. It’s certainly a weird outlook to have, generally perpetuated by the have everything for nothing lefty philosophy |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 27, 2024 12:45:02 GMT
I don't seem to remember having anything handed to me on a plate. It’s certainly a weird outlook to have, generally perpetuated by the have everything for nothing lefty philosophy 🤣🤣yeah I’d love to have been able to buy a house for the price my parents did. The bastards. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on May 27, 2024 12:51:13 GMT
It’s certainly a weird outlook to have, generally perpetuated by the have everything for nothing lefty philosophy 🤣🤣yeah I’d love to have been able to buy a house for the price my parents did. The bastards. You can buy plenty of houses in Stoke for about 10k chief. Fill your boots.. |
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on May 27, 2024 13:00:30 GMT
I keep seeing that line but I've yet to come across any particular constituency for it. There are plenty of representatives of that age group you seem to delight in taking aim at on this board and I'm not sure any of them are in favour. Whilst the only bloke I know in favour is my father in law and he's old enough to have done natio al service last time around and has dementia. It's made up shite It's an urban myth, or something perpetuated that might be true in the home counties but not here. My secondary education was diabolical. I've never had a leg up from anyone, certainly haven't inherited any property and provide for my parents who are poor enough to be on pension credit and share a roof for my partners mum. None of mates are in much different circumstances and those whose parents passed away lost the house to the state to pay for care. Who are these folk? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2024 13:11:19 GMT
I keep seeing that line but I've yet to come across any particular constituency for it. There are plenty of representatives of that age group you seem to delight in taking aim at on this board and I'm not sure any of them are in favour. Whilst the only bloke I know in favour is my father in law and he's old enough to have done natio al service last time around and has dementia. It's made up shite It's an urban myth, or something perpetuated that might be true in the home counties but not here. My secondary education was diabolical. I've never had a leg up from anyone, certainly haven't inherited any property and provide for my parents who are poor enough to be on pension credit and share a roof for my partners mum. None of mates are in much different circumstances and those whose parents passed away lost the house to the state to pay for care. Who are these folk? I like both comments because I do believe that there are two sides to this. My generation and below have been hoodwinked into taking out monumental debt to get a degree. It didn’t matter what the degree was or if it would lead to a career, there just had to be a degree. Now, Gen Z are also looking at needing a Master degree in something as well to “stand apart”. My Grandfather left high school with barely passing grades, got a job, married a lady and they had kids at 18. She only worked part time later in life and they still managed to purchase a house on a reasonable mortgage. However, he will not end up with much in the way of savings by the end of it and his house will likely be consumed by the State, as you rightly point out. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 27, 2024 13:31:45 GMT
I know 'limited to 30k'. There are 750k 18 year olds. So as you say weekend volunteering scheme with 12 sessions in total. Why is no one discussing this point on the media? Are you supportive of young people volunteering their time for free? Would you support retired people also volunteering for free? Maybe 2 weekends a month as they have more free time. I am not supportive of anyone of any age volunteering their time for anything unless they want to. Someone asking or telling them to volunteer is not really volunteering at all. Volunteering - Volunteering is a voluntary act of an individual or group freely giving time and labour, often for community service. |
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on May 27, 2024 13:37:15 GMT
The word voluntary has a dual meaning I think which is where the confusion stems from. It means both 'optional' and 'without pay'.
Might be wrong but my understanding is that Tories are using it in the latter sense, i.e. something that is mandatory BUT voluntary, without pay. Go figure.
A truly regressive policy that causes more problems than it solves.
|
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on May 27, 2024 15:04:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on May 27, 2024 15:05:07 GMT
I don't seem to remember having anything handed to me on a plate. You didn't. It's the 60's, 70's and 80's as revised by whining millenials who weren't there. |
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on May 27, 2024 15:09:59 GMT
The word voluntary has a dual meaning I think which is where the confusion stems from. It means both 'optional' and 'without pay'. Might be wrong but my understanding is that Tories are using it in the latter sense, i.e. something that is mandatory BUT voluntary, without pay. Go figure. A truly regressive policy that causes more problems than it solves. The word "voluntary" literally means "Done or undertaken of one's own free will". The unpaid bit is just an add on - in fact voluntary work can be paid or unpaid. This isn't voluntary work - its state enforced free labour. If I was 18 I'd tell them to pay me or fuck off. The military angle is a complete red herring. The Tories are calling it National Service purely because its a dog whistle term beloved of nostalgic right wing old farts who think Britain was great in the 50s when in fact it was pretty shit. There is an issue with military funding and numbers but this does very little to address it. And to cap it all the funding is coming from the pot ear marked for levelling up. And what's the odds on the admin contracts being handed out to friends and donors of the Tory Party? Nothing to see here.... |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on May 27, 2024 15:21:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 27, 2024 15:27:37 GMT
I don't seem to remember having anything handed to me on a plate. You didn't. It's the 60's, 70's and 80's as revised by whining millenials who weren't there. Alright boomer. |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on May 27, 2024 15:37:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by fortressbritannia on May 27, 2024 16:30:18 GMT
Mandatory national service should be given to those claiming jobseekers?
Why should those paying into the system or studying to become teacher, doctors, social workers etc be forced to give back while there are those who take without paying in?
|
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on May 27, 2024 16:37:57 GMT
Its like they are actually going out of their way to lose votes. I can see why Labour are keeping their mouths shut and giving bugger all info about their plans. Because these half wits are doing it all for them. Its actually quite funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on May 27, 2024 16:41:15 GMT
Its like they are actually going out of their way to lose votes. I can see why Labour are keeping their mouths shut and giving bugger all info about their plans. Because these half wits are doing it all for them. Its actually quite funny. Still, surely it would be better if Labour announced some policies to woo the voters? Call me cynical but it’s got all the hallmarks of remaining the status quo for years to come from what I can see so far. There is nothing to get behind so far from any party (the main two that is) |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on May 27, 2024 16:45:51 GMT
Its like they are actually going out of their way to lose votes. I can see why Labour are keeping their mouths shut and giving bugger all info about their plans. Because these half wits are doing it all for them. Its actually quite funny. Still, surely it would be better if Labour announced some policies to woo the voters? Call me cynical but it’s got all the hallmarks of remaining the status quo for years to come from what I can see so far. There is nothing to get behind so far from any party (the main two that is) They haven't got any plans thats why. There's no money left anyway. Often over looked but it's mostly because we burnt our way through nearly half a trillion quid during our ridiculous response to covid. We're goosed. Well on our way to becoming a second rate nation.. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2024 16:46:15 GMT
Mandatory national service should be given to those claiming jobseekers? Why should those paying into the system or studying to become teacher, doctors, social workers etc be forced to give back while there are those who take without paying in? I’d have far less issue with this concept than the one currently laid out. People should need to turn up to something and have the supervisor of that task sign off before JSA is released. It doesn’t even have to be a lot of hours but it should be something either useful to the country or directly relevant to the type of career that the applicant wishes to pursue. If nothing else, it would provide some with a job reference. |
|
|
|
Post by Foster on May 27, 2024 17:53:05 GMT
Mandatory national service should be given to those claiming jobseekers? Why should those paying into the system or studying to become teacher, doctors, social workers etc be forced to give back while there are those who take without paying in? My opinion is that unemployed should be required to do charitable work or supporting the local community in some way. Prisoners and young offenders should be litter picking and regenerating run down neighbourhoods. Not a fan of national service as it's just a means to send the less desirables off to some bullshit conflict. National service, non-military, has some merit though. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on May 27, 2024 17:57:01 GMT
Mandatory national service should be given to those claiming jobseekers? Why should those paying into the system or studying to become teacher, doctors, social workers etc be forced to give back while there are those who take without paying in? My opinion is that unemployed should be required to do charitable work or supporting the local community in some way. Prisoners and young offenders should be litter picking and regenerating run down neighbourhoods. Not a fan of national service as it's just a means to send the less desirables off to some bullshit conflict. National service, non-military, has some merit though. spot on. It almost feels that nowadays it’s a sin to question people who are fit and healthy (and aren’t caring for someone) who can’t be bothered to work or contribute and are happy to live off the taxpayer. Is it wrong to say actually that’s not fair. |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on May 28, 2024 7:50:21 GMT
its a fucking brilliant idea for a national/community service plan for 18 year olds. the benefits for society could be massive
but its a huge "but"
it should only apply to 18 years who fall in to NEAT status - Not in Education / Apprentice / Training
|
|
