(Opinion) Unemployment and the 'Work For Experience scam'

While the coalition government pats itself on the back as 45,000 people found work despite of the well into 2 million people in the Britain who haven't, and the UK economy set to further contract, the future for many Britons looks bleak to say the least. While it was not bed of roses for working people as they saw their debt obligations rise and their wages stagnate or actively decrease, a dignified existence could be maintained, that is until the bottom fell out in 2007.

Now Britons, especially those of the working class variety, find ourselves in the quagmire of excessive competition for limited places and having to work for free which can explain why the stewards used for the Queen's Diamond Jubilee were largely apprentices or unemployed job-seekers.

While some may rush into the debate and see the relationship between apprentices and job-seekers drafted in by companies for free as purely exploitative, they largely haven't experienced job-seeking at the lower end of the labour market where the unemployed have to deal with one of the oldest catch-22s in the labour market; experience.

With their being a shortage of jobs and surplus in available labour, the main factor used to pick a candidate from all the others is experience, as it is rather costly for employers to train new staff and mitigate the likely cost of rookie mistakes.

To deal with this disadvantage, inexperienced or unskilled workers have to take work where they will probably will work for free or work well below the minimum wage. While those who see this relationship as exploitative are right to say so, without such a relationship there will be no way for inexperienced  or unskilled workers to deal with the major disadvantage in the labour market, and employers know it.

Now with their being a major labour surplus, many unemployed jobseekers, especially those who lack experience, have to work for free while companies may say they are working for experience, anyone with sketchy knowledge of  exploitation will see those people are working for free and companies who take advantage of the labour surplus profit.

In conclusion,  while the relationship between companies and inexperienced workers has always been exploitative, it has increasingly, especially due to large unemployment levels, become necessary as workers seek to mitigate one of the biggest barriers to employment.The furore over the stewards who took part in guarding the event were working for free has only revealed a relationship that has existed for decades and, at one point, was about to become a government backed scheme.

(Video) Classic: Hitchens V Galloway

(Video) It's The Ideas, Stupid !!

TEDTalk on what really drove the Arab Spring.

(Opinion) Monarchy, 1, Politicians, 0.

While there is no good argument to support it and five bibles thick evidence against it, the Queen's diamond jubilee proved the symbolic power of monarchy has not waned.While the British public confidence in it's political class has diminished, it's reverence for the monarchy, especially for the Queen, has been unwavering for some time.

This has been accomplished by The Queen, unlike her easy to ridicule offspring, managing  not to take a strong position on anything or saying anything period. she has managed to keep a sense of mystery about herself in a age where celebrity is full frontal to say the least.

It is surprising to find that the royal family is so popular as people stood in the lashing rain to get a glimpse of the monarch waiving flags and wearing warm smiles as such largess on the dime of the public in times of austerity are usually frowned upon, but the Royal family remains unscathed.

This can happen because people in Britain are rarely, if ever taught about how Britain became a constitutional monarchy in the first place. People in Britain are rarely taught about the English Revolution of 1688  and its ramifications. To the modern Brit, the modern royal family are just glorified celebrities with the best PR machine around, but for  Englishmen and women up to anytime before 1688, the monarchy were public enemy no.1.

It is hard to be a republican as you would to have argue that should one of the current crop of politicians ascend to office, he or she should referred to as 'president' in an age where the British public are coming to the same conclusion that George Orwell did sixty years ago, our political class aren't much to crow about. The modern politician seems to have no real answers and is hated for it, but unlike the modern Monarch, the politicians is elected to make decisions and can't behead anybody who dares to object (fortunately).

(Video) Wolf on Austerity V Growth Debate

 The Financial Times columnist take on the choice dominating economic policy.