Hulver's site || Society should take care of the most vulnerable

Society should take care of the most vulnerable

Yes, it should	5 votes - 71 %
No, fuck 'em, it's MY MONEY! (the Breaker option)	1 vote - 14 %
but what if it happened to YOUR little one, would you be happy to spend the rest of your life paying for care out of your own pocket?	0 votes - 0 %
Just keep the scroungers away from my money!!!	1 vote - 14 %

7 Total Votes

Let's hear it for capitalism.... | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback

Let's say by jump the ladder (4.00 / 1) #1 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 08:04:50 AM EST

A million people are longterm unemployed and/or on incapacity benefit. £80*52*1 milion is around 4 billion quid minimum. If you take council tax relief, housing benefit and other subsidies, it's double to around £10 billion. So we are not talking peanuts here.

This is probably the wrong time to be tightening up on welfare payments as it's bad enough trying to find a job even with a good skillset and experience but long term I think we should be trying to move as many as possible off benefits in the long term if they can work but need help to do so. There hads to be some stick as well as carrot involved.

It's the disabled I was concerned about by xth (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 08:25:14 AM EST

I fear many of them will end up like the mentally ill when Maggie closed up mental institutions - on the streets, selling the Big Issue.

[Splitting comments into subject and body is soooo 1994]

[ Parent ]

I suspect that many who are signed off by Herring

(4.00 / 1) #5 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 09:19:03 AM EST

are off with depression.

The closure of mental hospitals bothers me - I went to school with this woman.

[ Parent ]

Terrible by xth (2.00 / 0) #6 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 09:34:58 AM EST

[Splitting comments into subject and body is soooo 1994]

[ Parent ]

I know it's illegal in the US by sasquatchan (2.00 / 0) #11 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 02:07:05 PM EST

but I thought the nanny state of the UK would forcibly medicate and institutionalize such types..

[ Parent ]

: Institutionalizing requires by Herring (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 03:25:15 PM EST

an institution. Government policy through the 80s and 90s was to treat mental illness "in the community".

[ Parent ]

The thing is by Herring

(4.00 / 1) #3 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 08:27:17 AM EST

If you read into it carefully, it is not really going to "tighten up on welfare payments". OK, it might catch a few (innocent or guilty) but the main purpose of the exercise is being seen to be tightening up. I am willing to bet (/me checks pockets) £1.27 that this exercise costs more than it saves.

See also the recent thing on social housing "people from the area will be given priority". People from the area are already given priority under the current rules. But pretending to do something by making an announcement is much easier than actually doing something (like replacing all the council houses that were sold off).

[ Parent ]

: They are re-testing all disabled claimants by xth (2.00 / 0) #4 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 08:36:16 AM EST

Either implying the original tests weren't carried out properly, or, as you say, just spin.

[Splitting comments into subject and body is soooo 1994]

[ Parent ]

Much disability benefit by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #8 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 09:37:41 AM EST

Is paid out to long term unemployed in areas with very little work, so I'm not sure what they're trying to achieve. It'll certainly make the unemployment figures a lot worse.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!
[ Parent ]

: What by jump the ladder (4.00 / 1) #13 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 03:54:06 PM EST

This govt does something totally counter-productive, unpossible :)

[ Parent ]

I see a flaw in their plan by nebbish (4.00 / 2) #7 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 09:35:58 AM EST

"I can't stand up any longer" /lie

The East Coast Main Line is likely to be sold on to a private company at the end of the year at a loss. Yeah great idea.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

but not to worry by xth (4.00 / 1) #9 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 10:13:40 AM EST

if they screw up, the government will kindly bail the out using our taxes, while the executives will claim their bonuses and then leave

[Splitting comments into subject and body is soooo 1994]

[ Parent ]

: On the bright side by Herring (2.00 / 0) #10 Wed Jul 01, 2009 at 10:24:47 AM EST

At least we're not wasting it on useless public-sector employees.
Plus if ministers didn't line the pockets of these big companies, where would they find jobs afterwards?

[ Parent ]

Fuck you, motherfucker. by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #14 Thu Jul 02, 2009 at 12:16:45 PM EST

Don't conflate "vulnerable" with "lazyfeckless".

And don't try to misrepresent my opinions either.

Quote -
"if you lose your job there's a safety net so you don't have to steal or starve. "

------

We spend ~15% of GDP on welfare. That's a sizeable chunk of our yearly income. 2.4 million people claimed incapacity benefit 2007, which has risen to 2.64 million

Now, that's quite a large proportion of our population of working age to be on the sick, isn't it? About 7% by my reckoning. Seven percent of our working age population is too unwell to work.

I don't doubt that there are genuinely people who are too ill to work, but you've got to also recognise that some people are taking the piss. Even the fucking government realises that - "too many people were working the incapacity benefit system to avoid work" - Frank Field, Labour MP former cabinet minister

Clamp down on those fraudulently claiming IB and then those who are genuinely too unwell can have more.

-------

Railways - that privatisation was a complete fuckup from when the Tories started it to Labour finishing it. Railways can be run privately - who do you think built the fucking things in the first place?

I don't remember swearing at you, Breaker by xth (4.00 / 2) #15 Thu Jul 02, 2009 at 12:57:02 PM EST

Take it easy, it's only bits of text in a database.

I don't doubt there are people cheating the system etc, but I don't believe the new changes will address that. Rather, it will be the usual expensive exercise, where middle managment will be called in, and in order to justify their existance they'll end up throwing the baby out with the baby water.

[Splitting comments into subject and body is soooo 1994]

[ Parent ]

And I don't remember by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #16 Thu Jul 02, 2009 at 01:28:45 PM EST

Misrepresenting you either.

[ Parent ]

: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA by Herring (2.00 / 0) #17 Thu Jul 02, 2009 at 01:41:23 PM EST

Comedy gold

[ Parent ]

Let's hear it for capitalism.... | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback


Make a new account
Username:
Password: