How to Stop the MP 2nd Mortgage Problem

team47b

Chicken please!

Giraffoto

Back in the day when MPs weren't paid, they were nearly all wealthy landowners - or they were in the pocket of a wealthy landowner. The people who work for free are the ones who can afford to work for free.

To examine the issue a bit more closely, MPs do have a rather peculiar job inasmuch as it requires them to spend their time in two distinct places: their constituency, where they may or may not already have lived before they were MPs (let's leave that point for another thread) and London, or at least somewhere close to it. Rather than investing in a student hall of residence in Staines for the MPs, my suggestion would be to make parliament virtual, keep the buildings for a few annual events and meetings, and do most parliamentary business by teleconference. Eliminate or minimize the London bit of the equation and the rest will follow - they can all stay in a hotel for the state opening of parliament, then head home.

bianchimoon

VTech wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

verylonglegs wrote:

I would have thought the banking crisis has unequivocally proven that paying someone high wages doesn't mean you get high performance. Corruption is a cultural issue, using low wages as an excuse for having no integrity is a false argument.

well said

Not really. To get the best you need to pay the right salary. You won't get top execs taking an 80% pay cut to become a politician. I am not saying this will end corruption, we all know money breads this illness.

yes really... no correlation between a CEO and an MP
Your statement above argues against itself

mr_goo

Vtech.

I want my MP to be someone who has worked in the community and understands the needs of the people they will represent. Somebody like a GP who has worked in practice for 20-30 years. A lawyer who has represented victims of crime for the last 25 years........ Oh wait. 5hit! ...... Start again. Somebody married to a GP and has seen how hard they work and the problems of the health service. Someone married to a Lawyer who works hard for their clients.................Oh wait. 5hit! that won't work either.

Here's a little intrigue for you. Miriam Clegg, the other half of the dipstick deputy PM. She just happens to be an expert on European Law, Trade Law and Economic Relations. She is a non exec director of Acciona SA. A Spanish corporation involved in renewable energy. What do they make? Answer = Wind Turbines. What's the Lib Dems and European Unions favourite method of renewable energy? Answer = Wind Turbines. What are the UK obliged to build (by law set from EU) in ridiculous numbers on Hills. Down Dale. Off the Coast? Answer = Wind Turbines.
Plus, although I cannot find it at moment, she is on a government Quango for renewable energy, which rubber stamps proposals for said developments in UK. WIN WIN WIN for the Cleggs.

Power Corrupts / Money Entices.

VTech

Mr Goo wrote:

Vtech.

I want my MP to be someone who has worked in the community and understands the needs of the people they will represent. Somebody like a GP who has worked in practice for 20-30 years. A lawyer who has represented victims of crime for the last 25 years........ Oh wait. 5hit! ...... Start again. Somebody married to a GP and has seen how hard they work and the problems of the health service. Someone married to a Lawyer who works hard for their clients.................Oh wait. 5hit! that won't work either.

Here's a little intrigue for you. Miriam Clegg, the other half of the dipstick deputy PM. She just happens to be an expert on European Law, Trade Law and Economic Relations. She is a non exec director of Acciona SA. A Spanish corporation involved in renewable energy. What do they make? Answer = Wind Turbines. What's the Lib Dems and European Unions favourite method of renewable energy? Answer = Wind Turbines. What are the UK obliged to build (by law set from EU) in ridiculous numbers on Hills. Down Dale. Off the Coast? Answer = Wind Turbines.
Plus, although I cannot find it at moment, she is on a government Quango for renewable energy, which rubber stamps proposals for said developments in UK. WIN WIN WIN for the Cleggs.

Power Corrupts / Money Entices.

But your points do not even remotely suggest that my reply was far off the mark.
Corruption is bad, everyone will have a different solution although I can't profess to know it myself.
What I do know is that when you pay someone enough to make them give 100% you get better results.

Thats why I have always run a bonus structure without a cap which is almost unheard of, most places who do offer bonuses run with a ceiling cap and yet I find that when you allow people to earn more from making the business more money you end up making more money.

Can I ask you what your thought is on why there are so many more cases of corruption in Brazilian and Mexican police forces ? Could it be because they are paid well and earn enough to support their families ?

bianchimoon

VTech wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

Vtech.

I want my MP to be someone who has worked in the community and understands the needs of the people they will represent. Somebody like a GP who has worked in practice for 20-30 years. A lawyer who has represented victims of crime for the last 25 years........ Oh wait. 5hit! ...... Start again. Somebody married to a GP and has seen how hard they work and the problems of the health service. Someone married to a Lawyer who works hard for their clients.................Oh wait. 5hit! that won't work either.

Here's a little intrigue for you. Miriam Clegg, the other half of the dipstick deputy PM. She just happens to be an expert on European Law, Trade Law and Economic Relations. She is a non exec director of Acciona SA. A Spanish corporation involved in renewable energy. What do they make? Answer = Wind Turbines. What's the Lib Dems and European Unions favourite method of renewable energy? Answer = Wind Turbines. What are the UK obliged to build (by law set from EU) in ridiculous numbers on Hills. Down Dale. Off the Coast? Answer = Wind Turbines.
Plus, although I cannot find it at moment, she is on a government Quango for renewable energy, which rubber stamps proposals for said developments in UK. WIN WIN WIN for the Cleggs.

Power Corrupts / Money Entices.

But your points do not even remotely suggest that my reply was far off the mark.
Corruption is bad, everyone will have a different solution although I can't profess to know it myself.
What I do know is that when you pay someone enough to make them give 100% you get better results.

Thats why I have always run a bonus structure without a cap which is almost unheard of, most places who do offer bonuses run with a ceiling cap and yet I find that when you allow people to earn more from making the business more money you end up making more money.

Can I ask you what your thought is on why there are so many more cases of corruption in Brazilian and Mexican police forces ? Could it be because they are paid well and earn enough to support their families ?

you really do think money is the solution to all problems don't you...
pay the crook more money he/she will stop being a crook?

VTech

bianchimoon wrote:

VTech wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

Vtech.

I want my MP to be someone who has worked in the community and understands the needs of the people they will represent. Somebody like a GP who has worked in practice for 20-30 years. A lawyer who has represented victims of crime for the last 25 years........ Oh wait. 5hit! ...... Start again. Somebody married to a GP and has seen how hard they work and the problems of the health service. Someone married to a Lawyer who works hard for their clients.................Oh wait. 5hit! that won't work either.

Here's a little intrigue for you. Miriam Clegg, the other half of the dipstick deputy PM. She just happens to be an expert on European Law, Trade Law and Economic Relations. She is a non exec director of Acciona SA. A Spanish corporation involved in renewable energy. What do they make? Answer = Wind Turbines. What's the Lib Dems and European Unions favourite method of renewable energy? Answer = Wind Turbines. What are the UK obliged to build (by law set from EU) in ridiculous numbers on Hills. Down Dale. Off the Coast? Answer = Wind Turbines.
Plus, although I cannot find it at moment, she is on a government Quango for renewable energy, which rubber stamps proposals for said developments in UK. WIN WIN WIN for the Cleggs.

Power Corrupts / Money Entices.

But your points do not even remotely suggest that my reply was far off the mark.
Corruption is bad, everyone will have a different solution although I can't profess to know it myself.
What I do know is that when you pay someone enough to make them give 100% you get better results.

Thats why I have always run a bonus structure without a cap which is almost unheard of, most places who do offer bonuses run with a ceiling cap and yet I find that when you allow people to earn more from making the business more money you end up making more money.

Can I ask you what your thought is on why there are so many more cases of corruption in Brazilian and Mexican police forces ? Could it be because they are paid well and earn enough to support their families ?

you really do think money is the solution to all problems don't you...
pay the crook more money he/she will stop being a crook?

Not at all, its exactly that type of comment that is the problem.

Pay the right money, get the right person.
You won't get the best by paying peanuts.

nathancom

Conclusion: the country should be run by CEOs with everyone following orders and knowing their place in the "natural" order.

bianchimoon

VTech wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

VTech wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

Vtech.

I want my MP to be someone who has worked in the community and understands the needs of the people they will represent. Somebody like a GP who has worked in practice for 20-30 years. A lawyer who has represented victims of crime for the last 25 years........ Oh wait. 5hit! ...... Start again. Somebody married to a GP and has seen how hard they work and the problems of the health service. Someone married to a Lawyer who works hard for their clients.................Oh wait. 5hit! that won't work either.

Here's a little intrigue for you. Miriam Clegg, the other half of the dipstick deputy PM. She just happens to be an expert on European Law, Trade Law and Economic Relations. She is a non exec director of Acciona SA. A Spanish corporation involved in renewable energy. What do they make? Answer = Wind Turbines. What's the Lib Dems and European Unions favourite method of renewable energy? Answer = Wind Turbines. What are the UK obliged to build (by law set from EU) in ridiculous numbers on Hills. Down Dale. Off the Coast? Answer = Wind Turbines.
Plus, although I cannot find it at moment, she is on a government Quango for renewable energy, which rubber stamps proposals for said developments in UK. WIN WIN WIN for the Cleggs.

Power Corrupts / Money Entices.

But your points do not even remotely suggest that my reply was far off the mark.
Corruption is bad, everyone will have a different solution although I can't profess to know it myself.
What I do know is that when you pay someone enough to make them give 100% you get better results.

Thats why I have always run a bonus structure without a cap which is almost unheard of, most places who do offer bonuses run with a ceiling cap and yet I find that when you allow people to earn more from making the business more money you end up making more money.

Can I ask you what your thought is on why there are so many more cases of corruption in Brazilian and Mexican police forces ? Could it be because they are paid well and earn enough to support their families ?

you really do think money is the solution to all problems don't you...
pay the crook more money he/she will stop being a crook?

Not at all, its exactly that type of comment that is the problem.

Pay the right money, get the right person.
You won't get the best by paying peanuts.

You really, really haven't thought this through have you.
By your reasoning there would be no young MP's, no socialist MP's, no housewife MP's.. al because they haven't 'proven' themselves in 'big' business. A country run by bean counters and profit makers... I'll stick to the present system thanks, though not perfect suits me better than your utopia.. over and out

slowbike

bianchimoon wrote:

over and out

Over is passing the comms back to the other party and invites a response.
Out is saying that's the end of the communication ....


make up your mind!

slowbike

Anyway.

MPs pay and what they are allowed to claim on "expenses" is two different things.
Perhaps MPs aren't paid enough.
But the mess of what they claim on a second home is terrible.

Actually I agree (partly) with Mr Goo - there needs to be some sort of Government provided accommodation within London where MPs can stay whilst on parliamentary business. Whether these should be suitable for family or not is debatable.

They should fund their own home in their own constituencies.

They can own as many houses as they like, but none should be contributed to through the expenses system.

They should be provided with free 1st class travel on the trains.

bianchimoon

Slowbike wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

over and out

Over is passing the comms back to the other party and invites a response.
Out is saying that's the end of the communication ....


make up your mind!

It's over and i'm out!

slowbike

bianchimoon wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

over and out

Over is passing the comms back to the other party and invites a response.
Out is saying that's the end of the communication ....


make up your mind!

It's over and i'm out!

stop replying then!

bianchimoon

Slowbike wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

over and out

Over is passing the comms back to the other party and invites a response.
Out is saying that's the end of the communication ....


make up your mind!

It's over and i'm out!

stop replying then!

OK!

pblakeney

Giraffoto wrote:

Back in the day when MPs weren't paid, they were nearly all wealthy landowners - or they were in the pocket of a wealthy landowner. The people who work for free are the ones who can afford to work for free.

To examine the issue a bit more closely, MPs do have a rather peculiar job inasmuch as it requires them to spend their time in two distinct places: their constituency, where they may or may not already have lived before they were MPs (let's leave that point for another thread) and London, or at least somewhere close to it. Rather than investing in a student hall of residence in Staines for the MPs, my suggestion would be to make parliament virtual, keep the buildings for a few annual events and meetings, and do most parliamentary business by teleconference. Eliminate or minimize the London bit of the equation and the rest will follow - they can all stay in a hotel for the state opening of parliament, then head home.

Are you suggesting that people do not HAVE to go to London?

Obviously total tosh which does not compute.

VTech

The amount of people on here who have absolutely no idea about how a country works is astounding.
I have never stated, even remotely that someone young, vibrant and eager couldn't be an MP. I have simply stated that you need someone with the mindset of a CEO type or management etc because this is EXACTLY what you are asking from the job.

An MP need to request and act in the best interest of his/her constituent and by that, they need to make decisions, which issues to follow, which to back, which are pointless and which are affordable.
Having a "yes man" is pointless because you make people happy for a short time until they realise you were full of nothing and everyone ends up in a worse position than when they started.

The best politician is the one that lets the people know what they can't have as much as what they can have.
As a country we have a pot of cash, it doesn't fill itself endlessly and where some areas gain, others lose.

I am shocked that so many have argued with me on this thread, I knew the likes of nathancom would but find it odd how others can argue when quite clearly what I have written is proven not only in the UK but the world over.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

verylonglegs

So you didn't read my post at 11:45am then?

frenchfighter

Agree with the idea of communal homes - it certainly has crossed my mind before. Maybe you should suggest it to your local MP?

VTech wrote:

I'm going to be flamed here but before you reply in anger I urge you to read what I have written and then wait for a few minutes for it to sink in.

Pay them more in the first place !

A lot of this has been said already on this thread but my few pence worth:

Not sure why people think a salary of 66k is not a lot. It is more than enough to live a very good life. The 'uniqueness' of being an MP and the potential to effect real change is unquantifiable.

Also dont kid yourself that you need to be super intelligent or hors-norms to get this job. Dont kid youself either that these people are giving up lucrative offers elsewhere - sure there are some that are but the a lot would be pretty average in terms of aptitude. If you raise the salary to 100k for instance you can be certain that the dynamics of those applying will not be changed.

Basically these people have had a free look in on the ridiculous house price boom in London courtesy of the tax payer. We are talking hundreds of thousands. And that is before the other sizeable perks. This is an affront.

I know my morals would be intact if I was paid 30k as a teacher or 66k as an MP. My morals are not relative to my salary and nor should anyone's be. If you consider yours to be then you need to analyse yourself as a person and change that. Immoral people have no place in society in an ideal World. You are not responsible for others but you are responsible for yourself and for setting a good example.

BillyMansell

VTech wrote:

The amount of people on here who have absolutely no idea about how a country works is astounding.

None more so than you with your simple-minded view of the world which is without any substance in relation to politics and your child-like knowledge of the route to Westminster through grass roots politics.

But to get back on the topic of Mr Goo's thread, why don't they make a block booking with Travelodge, Ibis and the likes at a preferential rate for when parliament is sitting? Bedrooms, wifi, breakfast and an evening meal within the £15 meal allowance which would mean you could also close the very heavily subsidised restaurants within parliament.

4kicks

verylonglegs wrote:

So you didn't read my post at 11:45am then?

he did. he just didnt understand it.

finchy

BillyMansell wrote:

VTech wrote:

The amount of people on here who have absolutely no idea about how a country works is astounding.

None more so than you with your simple-minded view of the world which is without any substance in relation to politics and your child-like knowledge of the route to Westminster through grass roots politics.

But to get back on the topic of Mr Goo's thread, why don't they make a block booking with Travelodge, Ibis and the likes at a preferential rate for when parliament is sitting? Bedrooms, wifi, breakfast and an evening meal within the £15 meal allowance which would mean you could also close the very heavily subsidised restaurants within parliament.

I don't think I'd wish Travelodge on even an MP!

VTech

BillyMansell wrote:

VTech wrote:

The amount of people on here who have absolutely no idea about how a country works is astounding.

None more so than you with your simple-minded view of the world which is without any substance in relation to politics and your child-like knowledge of the route to Westminster through grass roots politics.

But to get back on the topic of Mr Goo's thread, why don't they make a block booking with Travelodge, Ibis and the likes at a preferential rate for when parliament is sitting? Bedrooms, wifi, breakfast and an evening meal within the £15 meal allowance which would mean you could also close the very heavily subsidised restaurants within parliament.

Isn't it laughable that as of yet, no one has been able to argue a single point I have made.
I also see a remark around the £66k salary, again I beg those who think this a lot to look at it like someone looking to hire chief of a company with 900,000 staff and ask them to manage with £66k.
The candidates you would get would be very low grade and I wouldn't want them working for me.
My salesmen take more than that, and before anyone jumps on the back of that, there MUST be people here who work for companies where their salesmen get more than £66k !

Again, for the sake of the stupid, please understand that I am not saying this is fare, I am simply explaining it as it is.

nathancom

VTech wrote:

Isn't it laughable that as of yet, no one has been able to argue a single point I have made.

I think your incisive intelligence just intimidates people.

rick_chasey

2 comments: one facile, one less so.

1). Pay peanuts, get monkeys. If you take being an MP is the cream of the political crop, given all the people who stood and didn't get elected, let alone all the party members and local councillors etc etc, then £66k is pretty weak, especially in London which is just not comparable to the rest of the UK>

2) conviction politics is the worst kind of politics. Totally overrated. You want good governors, not good politicians. A politician's political persuasion will colour by what principals they govern, but ultimately the most you can expect from a politician is to govern as well as possible within those principals. If the UK stopped banging on about conviction and started looking at good governance it'd stop lurching from one extreme to the other and failing to sort anything out.

slowmart

The argument of providing more food for the snouts in the trough is simplistic at best with no acknowledgment of the wider issues which lead us to having the current brood which inhabits Westminster.

No one with aspirations to serve this nation chooses the most economically rewarding route to retirement. Nor do I accept you need a Parliament of CEO's. The strength of Parliament is in its diversity of culture, means , religious beliefs or atheiest views from a selection of individuals which encompasses all aspects of our society.


We have a Parliament made up of people we have voted for.

The issues we have are closer to home and are of our own making. We have a selection of politicians who make good sound bites, look presentable on the TV but lack any depth of character or substance as individuals. It seems polish is a substitute for substance and my point is would any of the great politicians of our past survive under the scrutiny of the modern press? Attlee was probably one of the greatest British politicians of modern times yet he had a reputation for being dour with little grasp of public relations. What he did do was be an effective leader and help deliver changes to our society which still resonate.


So who in their right mind would go into politics given the background of media scrutiny and relentless search of squeaky clean individuals. I'd rather have one colourful individual who is effective, honest and actually serves this country than any of the current crop of polished turds we have to suffer and that's across the entire spectrum.

nathancom

Rick Chasey wrote:

2) conviction politics is the worst kind of politics. Totally overrated. You want good governors, not good politicians. A politician's political persuasion will colour by what principals they govern, but ultimately the most you can expect from a politician is to govern as well as possible within those principals. If the UK stopped banging on about conviction and started looking at good governance it'd stop lurching from one extreme to the other and failing to sort anything out.

Nice sweeping statement: you want your legislature (not government) to be the uniform, to represent the same narrow set of interests, whereas in truth we want a broad range of people for all backgrounds and experiences to *represent* as well as possible the diversity of the British people so that the will of the British people might be manifest in a set of laws that best enable each of us to live our lives as we see fit.

A nation is not a business and we are all equal in the eyes of the law therefore this talk of bringing the hierarchical and undemocratic governance of business into our politics is invidious. Unsurprisingly it is spouted most by our new political class that seeks to entrench its hold on the levers of power, your Cleggs, Mandelsons and Camerons.

I don't see much banging on about conviction politics in the UK but when people criticise it, they are usually attacking politicians who stand up for ordinary people, whichever side of the political divide.

Richard_D

In principle I agree with the OP. Why should MPs get second mortgages paid for it does not work like that for businesses. We have people living in one country who are expected to spend significant percentage of their time elsewhere they are not having second mortgages paid for.
With respect to the comment about 66K being quite a low sum.
For how many MPs is this their sole source of income? Many are paid or sponsored for consultancy work by companies or unions.
What exactly are the standard MPs terms and conditions as they seem to be in recess ( on Holiday) more often than university students? How about making it performance related like they have done to the rest of us. Link it to the number of surgeries they run, the hours spent in committee or in the chamber?
When you pay a CEO, salesman or a professional a significant wage you expect that to be their primary job with most if not all their time spent doing it. That does not appear to be the case for MPs.

VTech

Richard_D wrote:

In principle I agree with the OP. Why should MPs get second mortgages paid for it does not work like that for businesses. We have people living in one country who are expected to spend significant percentage of their time elsewhere they are not having second mortgages paid for.
With respect to the comment about 66K being quite a low sum.
For how many MPs is this their sole source of income? Many are paid or sponsored for consultancy work by companies or unions.
What exactly are the standard MPs terms and conditions as they seem to be in recess ( on Holiday) more often than university students? How about making it performance related like they have done to the rest of us. Link it to the number of surgeries they run, the hours spent in committee or in the chamber?
When you pay a CEO, salesman or a professional a significant wage you expect that to be their primary job with most if not all their time spent doing it. That does not appear to be the case for MPs.

Spot on, just like Rick Chasey above.
Its very funny how people have latched on to the CEO as if I said you need a CEO to run it when you only want that type of person, I actually think Rick said it better in the term he used of "governor" which when we go back to the old greek days was the work they used.

I guess this thread is actually perfectly representative to the population in that we all moan about the problems we face, we all know that there is a solution but there are so many stupid reasons as to why the solution isn't put into fruition.

When you look at it like that, I kind of think it genius that when I have looked after myself and my family over the past few years and since being on here have been ridiculed for acting in that way, in the end it will be them having the better life.

In a kind of weird way its biblical, I've built my family our Ark and people like nathancom are sat around biatchin at all the wood I'm using, "its going to kill humanity" he shouts, "think of the rest of us who need wood but have no money to buy it" but whilst I've been building that Ark, nathancom has been sitting in the sun playing soccer with his friend.

You see, I've seen the water coming, I've built my Ark and although most have batched, my kids won't be drowning when the tsunami hits.

I genuinely feel for the kids of today, I think my generation was the last if the "easy possibilities" for a long time.

BillyMansell

VTech wrote:

BillyMansell wrote:

VTech wrote:

The amount of people on here who have absolutely no idea about how a country works is astounding.

None more so than you with your simple-minded view of the world which is without any substance in relation to politics and your child-like knowledge of the route to Westminster through grass roots politics.

But to get back on the topic of Mr Goo's thread, why don't they make a block booking with Travelodge, Ibis and the likes at a preferential rate for when parliament is sitting? Bedrooms, wifi, breakfast and an evening meal within the £15 meal allowance which would mean you could also close the very heavily subsidised restaurants within parliament.

Isn't it laughable that as of yet, no one has been able to argue a single point I have made.

That would be because you haven't made a valid point in relation to the world of politics. Whatever you think may work in your own autistic little world cannot be extrapolated to apply to the whole of society.

Again, for the sake of the stupid, please understand that I am not saying this is fare, I am simply explaining it as it is.

As you've adequately proved even a stupid person has at least one person who believes them correct but as has had to be pointed out to you in the past just because you believe something correct doesn't make it so.

VTech

BillyMansell wrote:

VTech wrote:

BillyMansell wrote:

VTech wrote:

The amount of people on here who have absolutely no idea about how a country works is astounding.

None more so than you with your simple-minded view of the world which is without any substance in relation to politics and your child-like knowledge of the route to Westminster through grass roots politics.

But to get back on the topic of Mr Goo's thread, why don't they make a block booking with Travelodge, Ibis and the likes at a preferential rate for when parliament is sitting? Bedrooms, wifi, breakfast and an evening meal within the £15 meal allowance which would mean you could also close the very heavily subsidised restaurants within parliament.

Isn't it laughable that as of yet, no one has been able to argue a single point I have made.

That would be because you haven't made a valid point in relation to the world of politics. Whatever you think may work in your own autistic little world cannot be extrapolated to apply to the whole of society.

Again, for the sake of the stupid, please understand that I am not saying this is fare, I am simply explaining it as it is.

As you've adequately proved even a stupid person has at least one person who believes them correct but as has had to be pointed out to you in the past just because you believe something correct doesn't make it so.

So by that very statement you are arguing with me when I say life isn't fare for some ?
Now thats a real stupid statement as I believe that was the one thing we were all in agreement on. ?

Ill sum up my point in a single line. Then, hopefully there can be no misunderstanding of my meaning.

'I look after myself and my family because no one else will, I suggest others take the same approach.'


Why is it that so many people look for what the government can do for them ? It isn't the job of the government to look after the people, I would suggest it is to make the best of what is available. Its the job of the father, mother, family members to look after their own and do what they can to survive, hopefully doing so with the least amount of impact on others as possible.

I made a point a week ago about I would always chose to feed my family. I wouldn't claim unemployment because I do feel there is work for anyone who wants it. It may not be the type of work wanted, or the pay that people want but a job is a job and beans on toast isn't to expensive even at minimum wage.