Does a political affairs enjoy a moral responsibility to provide respectively citizen next to a commission?

If not, why not?
If so, why and is providing such a job at a minimum wage level sufficient to come upon your standard?
Yes it have a duty to OFFER a job, if it's not accepted afterwards they are on their own. Also the minimum wage is too low.
Unless the govt employ you directly (like a civil servant) how can they have a moral duty to offer you a livelihood in the private sector? They have no potential to get you a job within the private sector.
And why should the govt. employ you if they don't need an hand or if you do not have the qualifications to seize the job.

The Govt recognises the necessity to have some makeshift level of income which is what the benefit system is there for. The minimum wage is deign to avoid exploitation. Source(s): I'm a lawyer
The government has the moral responsibility to ensure that the cutback is managed in such a approach that there are enough job available, whether in the private or public sector, for those who need them.
In increase, such jobs should pay wages, and hold terms and conditions which allow jobholders to live a dignified lifestyle, without have to work excessively long hours, or take second jobs, or rely on benefits, to find by.
In the UK, the minimum wage is far too low to achieve this, and should be set at two thirds of average male yield, or the European decency threshold, whichever is the greatest
The problem with the track in which our current minimum wage works, is that too many employer across a wide range of industries, implement it as the norm, which lead to people having to work 60 hours a week plus, surrounded by order to get a living wage.
Yes, the government is responsible to provide us with job because:
1) We are the government, which is to say policy provision of jobs is simply a conscious decision to arrange ourselves as an inclusive cooperative society.
2) The only time we ever do not have 'jobs' is when others contained by our society consciously decide to exclude us from participation, so philosophically speaking, the merely way to practice 'individual' 'responsibility' for our personal employment is to commence beside socially enforced exclusion. If you are going to prevent me from supporting myself then you are morally responsible to provide me with an alternative, otherwise you are simply committing something along the lines of murder.
3) Yes, not one and only is the government morally responsible to include us in society but responsible to do it at sufficient horizontal as well. If your plan for my inclusion to put me to work on an allowance of food supplies that will starve me to death afterwards your plan is essentially murder.

The organized society that accommodates individual participatory exclusion along with punitive conditions for those it excludes is a society that is to say essentially murdering those citizens it finds by some process 'unworthy'.
No, you have a moral responsibility to provide for yourself and your nearest and dearest. If you can not find a job, create one.
Off course they don't.

In a free market cutback it is NOT the governments responsibility, moral or legal, to propose employment to anyone.
No, the government does not owe you a duty. There is a federal minimum wage and, some municipalities (CA for example) have a higher minimum wage than the federal mandate. Whether or not that meet your standard is up to you and not the government.
Morality and government surrounded by a capitalist economy are total strangers. To be able provide respectively citizen with a job requires a command cutback - the antithesis of what we are supposed to have now - a free bazaar economy. Within a free market reduction a certain level of severance is necessary for the functioning of the system as a means of keeping employees costs down.

In the current economic system morality is subordinated to the exigencies of making profits. As we have see with the so-called credit crunch the interests of shareholders, bankers and financiers take precedence over everything else.

The Coalition's pains to cut public spending without regard to the consequences for general working people, the vulnerable, the aged and the poor are a short time ago one example of the lack of morality that is built into the elitist socioeconomic system that holds sway over intercontinental society.
No you finding a job is YOUR responsibility. The government is in that to provide things like defense and mail not button everything in your life for you.
No, because in a Capitalist state there is a requirement for in attendance to be a pool of unemployed workers waiting for work.

In UK and thus the EU, the state provides benefits to help workers who are redundant. However, a wise worker sets aside savings surrounded by the good years to take watchfulness of himself and his family in the lean years. Also erudite workers buy insurance cover for when they are unemployed and do not simply rely upon state hand-outs which might not be sufficient to compensate such as a mortgage and etc.

The job of government is to allow free trade to flourish and to avoid putting difficulties formerly employers thus making it hard to run a business to trademark a profit and etc.

Workers should be encouraged to buy shares in the firms where on earth they are employed, thus they will become owners of the means of production and can have a vote at the AGM respectively year.

Workers should also join a Trade Union and remain loyal to their employer because the workers have a vested interest surrounded by seeing their company remains profitable, etc.

Governments should keep their noses out of business, every time they do so, that's when the c.r.a.p. hits the admirer.

The banking sector should be either broken up into smaller unit or else divided into two distinct and separate halves.

Half no. 1 where we adjectives put our savings with minimum risk - interest of something like 2 to3% etc

Half no. 2 casino investments, hedge funds, money scams, wonga issues and etc

Few populace seem to be aware that there are some bank with bigger money than the country of which they are a citizen. Bear this in mind when imagine about what to do with the bank, which have already cost us dear.
nope .. you have to go out and capture one'

Related Questions: