Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Sun Oct 28, 2012 8:17 am  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

Now let’s look at this from a slightly different prospective. Mozart came from a broken family which were similar to the ones you probably resent today. Now let’s pretend that Mozart was born in the same circumstances today as he was born into back in the day. Let’s pretend he was born in Britain where the government is looking to cut benefits for Family’s that have more than two children. He would be absolutely doomed and when he grows up he’d probably be sent to stack shelves at the local supermarket for £0 an hour. But hey that’s ok because he comes from a broken family and they on benefits – too right they should work. What a great talent we would have lost.

No we wouldn't, he'd have gone on X Factor, ended up in Gary Barlows group and would by now be leading the community singing jump up and down and clap your hands while I sing a Gary Barlow nursery rhyme at a venue near you - in other words he'd have replaced Robbie Williams.



The rest of your post has some validity but has one fatal flaw, it assumes that musical or artistic people have to sit around waiting for their time to come while the state pays a subsistence to them, rather than the musician or artist funding their own way through life via totally unrelated jobs and practising their skills in the other 16 hours of the day when they aren't doing the day job. <holds hands up - me here >

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:46 pm  

JerryChicken wrote: No we wouldn't, he'd have gone on X Factor, ended up in Gary Barlows group and would by now be leading the community singing jump up and down and clap your hands while I sing a Gary Barlow nursery rhyme at a venue near you - in other words he'd have replaced Robbie Williams. The rest of your post has some validity but has one fatal flaw, it assumes that musical or artistic people have to sit around waiting for their time to come while the state pays a subsistence to them, rather than the musician or artist funding their own way through life via totally unrelated jobs and practising their skills in the other 16 hours of the day when they aren't doing the day job. <holds hands up - me here > If Mozart won the X Factor then Simon Cowell and co would absolutely stifle the creativity out of the bloke. The best classical thing Simon came up with was IL Divo and they certainly are forgettable and will be forgotten in a century’s time. Despite that jot of criticism, I’m a big fan of Simon Cowell because he’s made stars out of artist from working class backgrounds and sure that has had a trickle down affect for their family and friends which brings me onto your next point. Try telling Tom Jones that he needed to do unrelated jobs to fund his music career because he like many other artist before and after him spent time pursuing a career in entertainment rather than look for shift work at the local factory. However what Tom Jones needed to succeed was the unrelated work of others to fund his benefits whilst he pursued a career in music. He’s probably paid more taxes than the likes of Sal ever will now he’s a worldwide mega star. With regards to you having to do unrelated work in order to progress with your career as an artist, your circumstances are lot different to every other artist out they and circumstance is something every ten a penny ‘kick them out of bed and get them stacking shelves’ brigade fail to comprehend when putting an argument forward. This country is not a utopia where everyone works nor is it a utopia where every sits in front of the TV everyday eating cake. It’s a fantastic mix of both because as a society we haven’t figured out a system yet that keeps everyone happy. Well everyone happy apart from North Korean Dictators or Sal.

JerryChicken wrote: No we wouldn't, he'd have gone on X Factor, ended up in Gary Barlows group and would by now be leading the community singing jump up and down and clap your hands while I sing a Gary Barlow nursery rhyme at a venue near you - in other words he'd have replaced Robbie Williams. The rest of your post has some validity but has one fatal flaw, it assumes that musical or artistic people have to sit around waiting for their time to come while the state pays a subsistence to them, rather than the musician or artist funding their own way through life via totally unrelated jobs and practising their skills in the other 16 hours of the day when they aren't doing the day job. <holds hands up - me here > If Mozart won the X Factor then Simon Cowell and co would absolutely stifle the creativity out of the bloke. The best classical thing Simon came up with was IL Divo and they certainly are forgettable and will be forgotten in a century’s time. Despite that jot of criticism, I’m a big fan of Simon Cowell because he’s made stars out of artist from working class backgrounds and sure that has had a trickle down affect for their family and friends which brings me onto your next point. Try telling Tom Jones that he needed to do unrelated jobs to fund his music career because he like many other artist before and after him spent time pursuing a career in entertainment rather than look for shift work at the local factory. However what Tom Jones needed to succeed was the unrelated work of others to fund his benefits whilst he pursued a career in music. He’s probably paid more taxes than the likes of Sal ever will now he’s a worldwide mega star. With regards to you having to do unrelated work in order to progress with your career as an artist, your circumstances are lot different to every other artist out they and circumstance is something every ten a penny ‘kick them out of bed and get them stacking shelves’ brigade fail to comprehend when putting an argument forward. This country is not a utopia where everyone works nor is it a utopia where every sits in front of the TV everyday eating cake. It’s a fantastic mix of both because as a society we haven’t figured out a system yet that keeps everyone happy. Well everyone happy apart from North Korean Dictators or Sal.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:32 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote: Try telling Tom Jones that he needed to do unrelated jobs to fund his music career because he like many other artist before and after him spent time pursuing a career in entertainment rather than look for shift work at the local factory. However what Tom Jones needed to succeed was the unrelated work of others to fund his benefits whilst he pursued a career in music. He’s probably paid more taxes than the likes of Sal ever will now he’s a worldwide mega star. Between the article that you link to and the Wiki article on Mr Jones AND reading between the lines, I think you'll find that Mr Jones did enough from the age of 16 when he had a child to support and his mid-20s when he started to be noticed - according to Wiki that included working in factories and building sites, according to the Telegraph article that included singing in a band and earning enough money for the staff to remark on his smart clothing for one who was "signing on". What he did have going for him, and for many others like him of those times, is that there was a hugely lucrative social club circuit to gain entertainment employment in, and to be paid in cash on the night, no accounts, no invoices, sign the receipt with your stage name and goodnight. Thats not quite the same as drawing unemployment benefit and waiting for your boat to come in, thousands of "club turns" good and bad have followed his route in the past fifty years, most of them didn't get the lucky break but did make a living at it. You don't have that opportunity any longer.

Damo-Leeds wrote: Try telling Tom Jones that he needed to do unrelated jobs to fund his music career because he like many other artist before and after him spent time pursuing a career in entertainment rather than look for shift work at the local factory. However what Tom Jones needed to succeed was the unrelated work of others to fund his benefits whilst he pursued a career in music. He’s probably paid more taxes than the likes of Sal ever will now he’s a worldwide mega star. Between the article that you link to and the Wiki article on Mr Jones AND reading between the lines, I think you'll find that Mr Jones did enough from the age of 16 when he had a child to support and his mid-20s when he started to be noticed - according to Wiki that included working in factories and building sites, according to the Telegraph article that included singing in a band and earning enough money for the staff to remark on his smart clothing for one who was "signing on". What he did have going for him, and for many others like him of those times, is that there was a hugely lucrative social club circuit to gain entertainment employment in, and to be paid in cash on the night, no accounts, no invoices, sign the receipt with your stage name and goodnight. Thats not quite the same as drawing unemployment benefit and waiting for your boat to come in, thousands of "club turns" good and bad have followed his route in the past fifty years, most of them didn't get the lucky break but did make a living at it. You don't have that opportunity any longer.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:38 pm  

It is often people who have never been unemployed or made redundant that make comments about the unemployed being lazy, dole-scrounging scum. Perhaps if they lost their own jobs then they would have a different view on the subject. The stress that you endure worrying about the mortgage, bills etc is incredible. Having been made redundant myself at the end of 2007 I would not wish it on anyone (Osborne, Clegg and Cameron excepted). I fortunately found work in my chosen field(chemical industry) almost immediately but doubt that would be the case at the moment. I have a friend, who is currently unemployed, who is a Ph.D. qualified Chemist in his early 50s. He is currently looking into becoming a bus driver!

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:52 am  

dr_feelgood wrote:

It is often people who have never been unemployed or made redundant that make comments about the unemployed being lazy, dole-scrounging scum. Perhaps if they lost their own jobs then they would have a different view on the subject. The stress that you endure worrying about the mortgage, bills etc is incredible. Having been made redundant myself at the end of 2007 I would not wish it on anyone (Osborne, Clegg and Cameron excepted). I fortunately found work in my chosen field(chemical industry) almost immediately but doubt that would be the case at the moment. I have a friend, who is currently unemployed, who is a Ph.D. qualified Chemist in his early 50s. He is currently looking into becoming a bus driver!

You are so right Dr F. I get it too being disabled......well surley you can do some work? Yes I probably could.....for a while, then I need to go and rest and probably fall asleep because the fatigue (which is a cause of my illness) is so bad, so if you wouldn't mind providing me with a bed or sofa at work??? And how about that day once a month where I won't be in work because I have to be at the hospital having my body infused with drugs, or when I'll be in late because I have to go for blood tests, or the extra long lunches I have to take to go and pick up one of my 9 prescriptions I take every day. People who have never been there themselves have no idea, but the problem is, these people listen to the propaganda given by the Tory boys and the media that they have made up their minds that we are lying. I always try and tell them you are only a heartbeat away from having an illness, being disabled or made redundant yourselves and unless it happens to you then you can't possibly comment on what I can or can't do.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:03 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

Between the article that you link to and the Wiki article on Mr Jones AND reading between the lines, I think you'll find that Mr Jones did enough from the age of 16 when he had a child to support and his mid-20s when he started to be noticed - according to Wiki that included working in factories and building sites, according to the Telegraph article that included singing in a band and earning enough money for the staff to remark on his smart clothing for one who was "signing on".

What he did have going for him, and for many others like him of those times, is that there was a hugely lucrative social club circuit to gain entertainment employment in, and to be paid in cash on the night, no accounts, no invoices, sign the receipt with your stage name and goodnight.

Thats not quite the same as drawing unemployment benefit and waiting for your boat to come in, thousands of "club turns" good and bad have followed his route in the past fifty years, most of them didn't get the lucky break but did make a living at it.

You don't have that opportunity any longer.

We can speculate and read between all the lines we want but the truth is Tom Jones was on the dole. For all we know his smart clothes could have been bankrolled from a wealthy family member or he could have simply just saved up for them. Alternatively Tom Jones could have earned his money to buy nice clothes from the gigs he did on that lucrative social club circuit but I’m assuming that pay was split between all the band members. That pay would have gone towards the expenses of getting to the Gig as well surely?

I couldn’t tell you if he spent more time on the dole or more time working in the factories and on building sites because I do not have that information. However the fact that he needed out-of-work benefits to get by is the important point in all this because it provided him with a stable income when the working world couldn’t. This is the type of income that some taxpayers want taken away from people less capable than Tom Jones to make something of themselves in this world and that to me is not on but it would be boring if we all had the same opinions in the world!

Finally my generation might not have a lucrative social club circuit but your generation didn’t have much left of the old variety show theatres and music halls which provided a good living for entertainers as well. Having watched a brilliant BBC documentary a couple of years back on about variety show performers, most of them got away with doing the same thing for twenty years and it provided an alright living for them. You wouldn’t get away with that today because the audience expects new stuff all the time. My generation still has venues to perform in but the standards have risen and therefore it’s a lot harder than it used to be to earn a living in this industry these days.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:12 am  

Hull White Star wrote:

You are so right Dr F. I get it too being disabled......well surley you can do some work? Yes I probably could.....for a while, then I need to go and rest and probably fall asleep because the fatigue (which is a cause of my illness) is so bad, so if you wouldn't mind providing me with a bed or sofa at work??? And how about that day once a month where I won't be in work because I have to be at the hospital having my body infused with drugs, or when I'll be in late because I have to go for blood tests, or the extra long lunches I have to take to go and pick up one of my 9 prescriptions I take every day. People who have never been there themselves have no idea, but the problem is, these people listen to the propaganda given by the Tory boys and the media that they have made up their minds that we are lying. I always try and tell them you are only a heartbeat away from having an illness, being disabled or made redundant yourselves and unless it happens to you then you can't possibly comment on what I can or can't do.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:59 am  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

... My generation still has venues to perform in but the standards have risen ...

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:07 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

What I said was for someone who has a job can you not understand the frustration of those i.e. me who pay taxes against those who simply do not want to work - I was speaking only of myself - I would be surprised if I were a lone voice...

Then learn to write what you actually mean.

Because that is not what you wrote.

Sal Paradise wrote:

As has been pointed out on numerous threads on here corporation tax is a relatively small tax revenue stream - even if it were collected properly and assuming there will losses in other countries who would be far more stringent on UK companies operating in their countries - it will not cover a potentially huge deficit. Your suggestion makes you look silly...

Indeed. Billions in uncollected corporation tax is absolute peanuts.

Sal Paradise wrote:

It would be interesting for someone to look at how many threads include your self righteous diatribe.

Then do it yourself if you're so obsessed.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:13 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

My generation still has venues to perform in but the standards have risen and therefore it’s a lot harder than it used to be to earn a living in this industry these days.

I know you were laughing when you wrote that but I'll give you a nugget of information.

My old man was well involved in the Leeds & West Yorks Working Mens Clubs, he was an amatuer entertainer himself and also a secretary at his club so he knew a lot of the "club turns" of the 1970s.

Even the most successful of those usually had a "day job", the most expensive "turns" were usually the comedians and you'd book them up to 18 months in advance because they were so popular and because most clubs would only employ them for a Saturday or Sunday night - the most popular would easily do 104 gigs a year and didn't have to leave South and West Yorks in order to do so.

What would kill their act, and they knew it, was a TV appearance for as soon as you appeared on TV your act was blown and your next weeks bookings wouldn't want to see your TV routine again, on the other hand you could go back to the same club in 12 months time and do exactly the same routine and they'd think you were fantastic.

The sort of "entertainer" that you are speaking of has no such concern and neither have any singers or bands EVER - you'd quite happily pay to watch a band play consecutive gigs during a tour and would complain if they DIDN'T include a song that you'd heard the night before.

There are fewer venues because the WMC's have declined but any decent performer will still make a living at their target audience, I have a cousin who has been a full time professional guitarist for nearly 40 years now (you will have seen him on TV ) and he has never had a problem following the work around the country and is gigging across Europe at the moment with a group of singers (was playing in Manchester on Saturday & was in the Daily Mail )

Bottom line Damo - its not harder, its always been hard, you're just starting to realise though.