Forum menu
Despite flaws in design, the benefit cap enjoys an unusually high level of public support if polls are to be believed and broad x-party consensus
Does anyone want to argue the case that no one believes what the Government tells them, particularity when it is written so colourfully through the media?
I suppose its Human nature to blame someone other than ourselves, for the problems that have been created in "society."
Rent control wouldn't be a bad idea either.It's a crap idea. Once it's in, it never gets raised enough to make it worthwhile for landlords to maintain the buildings and it all goes to shit. Why should landlords pay for market failure?
Rent controls were abolished in the 1950's. If you look at somewhere like Notting hill back then, it was a slum where the poor were housed, now the houses are bought by the wealthy for many millions.
So whether rent controls would encouraged landlords not to maintain buildings, the current situation of no controls has led the poor to be ejected, so either way they are screwed.
The poor or working poor have to live somewhere if they are to continue to service the needs of the economy as a source of cheapish labour, all we, and I mean the ones further up the ladder, are doing is cutting back on the support network that helps these people continue to do this, in our mean attitudes and collective rush to fill our pockets, be that as landlords ourselves(some of you are), or through cutting the benefits system.
If we cannot be responsible for each other, through all peaks and troughs, then there is no society.
Tax avoidance is perfectly legal and I can't blame anyone for doing it and don't see it as a problem.
Why do you have a problem with benefit scroungers doing the same - both exploiting societies rules for personal gain?
.why would someone not exploit the tax rules to minimise their tax bill
They dont need the money and they have a moral conscience - not every person or company does this only the really selfish ones.
You think folk admire Ebay, amazon , starbucks etc for their noble actions? Non doms etc. We dont hear much about them because they set the agenda.
Who's going to pay more tax than they have to? I got my bike on the c2w scheme to be more tax efficient rather than buying it with cash or interest free credit, therefore I'm avoiding tax.
Its a bit pointless to compare you to folk who avoid millions by elaborate tax arrangements and trust funds and/or companies who avoid billions with an individual who has an ISA or does c2W.
I don't get a pay rise from my boss if we were to have another child, and neither do those working people who are earning less than some take home in benefits and also contribute to the tax system.
I think you need to avail yourself of the rules- eveyone is bette roff in work - the system is designed to achieve this - the net gain may be marginal [ less than a tenner ] but you are always better off in work.
Child benefit and working tax credits would both increase so they would both get a "rise" from the benefits system.
I doubt knowing the actual facts will change your opinion though.
They have another mouth to feed - would you rather the child suffered so you can feel better about the scroungers?
The average loophole exploiter is already contributing to society, the benefits scrounger does nothing but take from it.
Both are giving less than they should and taking more than they should.
Both exploit societies rules for their own personal gain
One gets demonised one is admired [ the ones who take the most]
I fail to see why tbh neither is good and I know which costs us the most.
the benefit cap enjoys an unusually high level of public support if polls are to be believed
So would the death penalty
Its like a number of our [s]citizens[/s] subjects are ****s ....you can decide which ones on this issue 😉
I can see why, considering the misrepresentation of life on benefits, why working folk are angry but they are other things that cost us much more that they are comfortable with.
they dislike poor exploiters and admire rich exploiters....its the Tory way.
Neither are admirable to me and both need tackling.
The likes of Ebay and Amazon choosing to pay tax in a tax efficient way is really the obligation they have to their shareholders. The problem is countries who set themselves up with low rates of tax in order to attract business to be based there - in a global economy this has a terrible net effect.
Despite flaws in design, the benefit cap enjoys an unusually high level of public support if polls are to be believed and broad x-party consensus (with debates on the structure) So in that different context, then it would seem to be working.
However, the price we have paid for this 'support' is very high. We have gone from a society which was sympathetic to the disabled and indifferent to the unemployed to one which is becoming increasingly hostile to both. This cannot be a good thing.
Yes some people exploit benefits, they always have and always will, but to label everyone on benefits as 'scum' stealing from the 'hard working masses' is a national disgrace.
I don't like the idea of 'benefits scroungers' any more than the next well-adjusted Daily Hate reader, but let's not loose sight of the bigger picture...
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Beyond the headlines, the number of people abusing the benefits system is relatively small. So universal labels ("scum") etc, to the extent that they actually exist beyond sensational headlines, are clearly wrong. As it's the notion that we are a nation that is hostile to the disabled or the unemployed. Like the use of words like "scum" that idea does not hold up to scrutiny. The UK has an imperfect but still largely impressive system of looking after the needy of all sorts.
The Tories and labour both agree that the balance between rewards to working and support from benefits needs to be addressed but they disagree on the means. On the broad issue, they do have strong national support.
As it's the notion that we are a nation that is hostile to the disabled or the unemployed.
The problem is. like immigration, that the loud shouty voices [ of the far right but this is not a political point, is often heard the loudest.
Couple this. like the EU , where all the media stories are negative of scroungers rather than tales of honest hard working folk who have fallen in hard times and now need food banks to feed their families despite working for the last 25 years.
The UK has an imperfect but still largely impressive system of looking after the needy of all sorts.
Indeed we do and we should be proud of it rather than having a chancellor pointing out how much the EU spends on benefits v the world and presenting it like it is a bad thing.
As you note its a minority who abuse the system but the agenda is always about them and never about those who fall through the gaps and are in real hardship, loosing houses, unable to eat etc
The Tories and labour both agree that the balance between rewards to working and support from benefits needs to be addressed but they disagree on the means. On the broad issue, they do have strong national support.
Only because Labour and the Lib Dems have failed to challenge any of the nonsense pedalled by the Tories. The unemployed and disabled are being scapegoated for the drop in living standard of the middle classes and no one seems prepared to stand up to this.
We have tabloid papers, egged on my the Tory party, happy to peddle half truths about the massive benefit cost (ignoring the facts it's half pensions) and that we cannot afford it (when we obviously can). We have endless extreme examples given as 'typical' cases of excessive benefit payments.
From a purely budgetary standpoint, the cost of benefits and benefit fraud is far less than tax avoidance by the rich, yet one is never discussed and the other is a major issue which 'must' be addressed.
This is not about economics or fairness it's a ideological agenda about persecuting those who are least able to defend themselves.
As it's the notion that we are a nation that is hostile to the disabled or the unemployed.
Can't find it now but I seem to remember an opinion poll showing that we are becoming increasingly more so.
As JY says, yes by world standard we are great at looking after the disabled and unemployed - why are we constantly being told this is a bad thing rather than something to be proud of?
footflaps +1
Depressing to see so many people falling for it.
Can't find it now but I seem to remember an opinion poll showing that we are becoming increasingly more so.
http://www.scope.org.uk/news/attitudes-towards-disabled-people-survey
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19048294
Can't find it now but I seem to remember an opinion poll showing that we are becoming increasingly more so.
Is that a general trend or one that's affected by recession? Or more specifically, will that same poll show us becoming less hostile as people (in general) are less hard up?
One of the finest pieces of graffiti I've seen:
[url= http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8246/8654976662_6f349fc6c8_z.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/8654976662/ ]Blame poor people[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/brf/ ]brf[/url], on Flickr
Is that a general trend or one that's affected by recession? Or more specifically, will that same poll show us becoming less hostile as people (in general) are less hard up?
It's not rocket science:
There has been a significant drop in living standards in the UK since 2008. No shit, we had a financial crash.
However, from day 1, the coalition have been continually telling us, via the media and directly, that we have a massive unmanageable deficit all due to the unemployed and disabled living a life of riley, whilst the hard working families stay less well off BECAUSE of the deficit and therefore the unemployed / disabled.
Not a lot of mention of global economic conditions, reckless behaviour by the banks, oh no, that's nothing to do with it. Everything is wrong because the poor are stealing your money in benefit fraud!
rusty your second graphic makes my eyes hurt
mrs told me about a girl who lives near her surestart centre, she was confused by these people turning up everyday and asked why they came. "We come here to work to earn money to buy things"I do empathise with people born into what must seem like impossible situations, but on the flipside, have no time for those that won't help themselves.
"but my parents don't and we have things"
Girl was 9ish so still a way to go to learn about life, but how does someone who is 3rd or 4th generation benefits claimant with no concept of work help themselves? There's got to be some sort of outreach to them, not kicking all the ladders away and waiting for them to climb out of the pit themselves.
Grum haven't you got powder to shred*?
* pretty sure you don't shred powder but meh.
Girl was 9ish so still a way to go to learn about life, but how does someone who is 3rd or 4th generation benefits claimant with no concept of work help themselves?
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation published a study in December testing whether there were three generations of the same family that had never worked. Despite dogged searching, researchers were unable to find such families. If they exist, they account for a minuscule fraction of workless people. Under 1% of workless households might have two generations who have never worked – about 15,000 households in the UK. Families with three such generations will therefore be even fewer.
Having a day off today DONK - it's snowing really heavily so visibility is poor and I'm a bit knackered. Tomorrow should be grand though and I will be shredding mad pow with my gnarpoon again. 🙂
I'd like to stand behind junkyard and just say "yeah!" after every paragraph.
Footflaps.
You mention The Great Deficit Swindle. I can't remember the source of the quote, "The Tories, cutting the N out of cuts", but it has pinpoint accuracy.
To quote Joseph Goebbels:
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.
yes by world standard we are great at looking after the disabled and unemployed - why are we constantly being told this is a bad thing rather than something to be proud of?
Are we? Confirmation bias, or perhaps a more selective choice of news source is required. I have yet to hear a politician say that we should not be proud of looking after the disabled and the unemployed. I have heard quite a few argue that we could do it better mind.
In the last few weeks, the much chastised IDS:
said people should stop “disapproving” of people on benefits, whom he terms “our fellow citizens”, and instead blame politicians for creating a failing welfare system that traps people on benefits.
Worth remembering that the big jump in housing benefit costs was due to a former "socialist" government ignoring all the expert advice and introducing local housing allowance.
The current bunch of Muppets are just making a pigs ear of trying to control it again.
sorry that was our guess....probably based on cobblers media reports. Does the point still stand tho? that some have no concept of work?Despite dogged searching, researchers were unable to find such families.
day off? sorry does not compute 🙂
said people should stop “disapproving” of people on benefits, whom he terms “our fellow citizens”, and instead blame politicians for creating a failing welfare system that traps people on benefits.
Confirmation bias, political rhetoric that doesn't match his actions.
former "socialist" government
Nothing socialist about nu labour.
was it not helped by private landlords [s]milking the state[/s] taking advantage of the market and putting up their prices and the previous previous government flogging a load of the council housing?Worth remembering that the big jump in housing benefit costs was due to a former "socialist" government
LOL you say confirmation bias whilst claiming you have never heard a politician say anything bad about benefits to the unemployed [ which is a straw man as that is not what the quote says anyway]
You have both used clumsy language tbh and I am sure you know what they meant - they always bash the system never praise it - you saying no politician does this?
Your broader point is also true generally everyone accepts they should exist the debate is about what the level is
EDIT: that IDS speech is somewhere between delusional - who he comapres himself/his mission with and quite good
the big jump in housing benefit costs was due to a former "socialist" government ignoring all the expert advice and introducing local housing allowance
It was introduced in 2008 and was designed to reduce HB costs.
To blame the "socialists" for HB is somewhat at odd with reality and just lets us know how right wing and blue tinted your glasses are
So whether rent controls would encouraged landlords not to maintain buildings, the current situation of no controls has led the poor to be ejected, so either way they are screwed.
Bit of a weird argument: A doesn't work but neither is B, so we should do A again.
I'd question the accuracy of the claimed 1% figure for benefit fraud. By it's very nature fraud is hard to detect. Someone might claim benefits by claiming to live alone while living with a partner earning a good wage. How will that be detected?
1% detected benefit fraud maybe.
http://www.benefitfraud.org.uk/
Can I just make a prediction?
On looking into my crystal ball, I foresee that the utterly incompetent IDS's Universal Credit (and the caps, and benefits reforms generally) will rapidly dissolve into the biggest cluster-* that this country has ever seen. And theres been a good few.
It already appears to have become an utter shambles that, far from producing the savings predicted, will end up costing billions. This is what happens when you let ideology, rather than any actual evidence, dictate policy. IDS has been repeatedly exposed as peddling shameless disinformation to justify further cuts. The problem seems to be that he appears to actually believe the figures he's pulling out of the air
I suspect a lot of the shouty, finger-pointy stuff at benefits 'scum', sorry … 'claimants, is largely a cover to distract from this almighty * up!
The whole thing is going to end up as a completely unworkable farce, which will end up costing vast sums of money, while making the lives of millions of people imeasurably more miserable
This is what happens when you let ideology, rather than any actual evidence, dictate policy.
Well Binners it may get even worse! Ed Balls will not only broadly follow suit, he will also add pensions to the cap. These politicians must be cut from the same cloth! It's shocking isn't it and to think that so many folk fall for it?
The whole thing is going to end up as a completely unworkable farce,
End up???
Are we? Confirmation bias, or perhaps a more selective choice of news source is required.
What a stupid thing to say. The tabloid press is full of vile demonisation of people on benefits. I don't read them, but I see the headlines. Plus both the main parties make similar-sounding noises.
One cherry-picked quote from IDS doesn't prove anything.
Ed Balls will not only broadly follow suit, he will also add pensions to the cap.
If there's going to be a cap (which basically solves nothing) - why shouldn't it be applied to pensions too?
Well Binners it may get even worse! Ed Balls will not only broadly follow suit, he will also add pensions to the cap. These politicians must be cut from the same cloth! It's shocking isn't it and to think that so many folk fall for it?
Indeed. Thats a neo-liberal consensus for you. I'd blame Thatcher, but actually its mainly Blairs fault
You have proved the point Grum - the tabloid press. Exactly. If I was you I would ignore the headlines especially. The text is bad enough, but the headlines........
Of course one quote form IDS does not prove anything. But still waiting to see the quotes that show a politician who claims that we "should not be proud of looking after the disabled and the unemployed."
My choice of words was very precise.
It's all completely insane and economically unsound, concentrate on very expensive to implement changes to a system which will make an insignificant difference to the total costs of benefits, whilst offering absolutely no policies for encouraging growth.
What's more shameful is that all three parties are equally complicit in this failure of leadership.
Basically, blame the poor and hope the economy picks up in the meantime (of it's own accord) and then we can say 'told you so, it was the poor all along'.
But still waiting to see the quotes that show a politician who claims that we "should not be proud of looking after the disabled and the unemployed."
They're not that stupid, they set the sentiment and let the friendly tabloids to their dirty work.
Of course one quote form IDS does not prove anything. But still waiting to see the quotes that show a politician who claims that we "should not be proud of looking after the disabled and the unemployed."
Well I didn't specify politicians did I? Or specify that particular phrase. It's the general atmosphere deliberately created by the press and government.
You're straw-manning yet again.
Why should we ignore what the tabloid press is doing, especially when so many people believe it, and it then informs government policy? Because it doesn't suit the spurious point you are trying to argue?
'told you so, it was the poor all along'.
Source? There are serious politicians and commentators saying that, really? I must have missed those headlines that attribute the crisis directly to the poor.
Give it the attention it deserves ie, none. It's bollocks. As stated several times by me and others, benefit fraud is a tiny issue.
Straw manning? That old chestnut. A much needed 😀 to get through the supervision period. Thanks. Try reading specifically what I have said, rather than what you think it says or would like it to say.
Give it the attention it deserves ie, none. It's bollocks. As stated several times by me and others, benefit fraud is a tiny issue.
Yes, but demonisation of those on benefits isn't a tiny issue, as proved by some of the hateful crap in this thread.
Very true.
Source? There are serious politicians and commentators saying that, really? I must have missed those headlines that attribute the crisis directly to the poor.
Well we haven't recovered yet, so it is a prediction rather than a record of fact.
Any of course they won't be quite that explicit, it will be phrased along the line of the (insignificant) changes to the benefits bill have enabled growth ergo what a good job we did etc.
Does it not strike you as odd that the amount of focus and coverage from the coalition and media is completely at odds with the actual affect on the economy?
Well we shall see won't we. It would be odd to relate reducing a relatively small benefits bill to an economic recovery, but who knows. I have no doubt that claims of a good job done will be very common (if misplaced).
Of course once we recover and the good times return, there will be no need for a scapegoat and they'll probably stop bashing the poor / disabled and may even up their benefits.
However, right now in the absence of any real leadership a scapegoat is just what is needed to distract the masses from the fact that the coalition really hasn't got anything positive to offer the UK.
As hateful crap goes about demonising the poor, Edwina Currie took some beating the other night, with the statement:
"Food banks are putting high street shops out of business"
Yes Edwina. People so poor that they can't afford to feed their families are responsible for shops closing on the high street. You really couldn't make it up.
I should imagine that the public are more relieved that signs of a more sustained economic recovery can be seen, They might even prefer to read quality papers and see today that
FT today.Job vacancies rose at their fastest pace for more than 15 years last month...particularly in construction and engineering,....and.....Starting salaries rose across the country as skills shortages emerged in a growing range of sectors
We might even get some real wage growth soon!!!
We have a long way to go to get back to pre-2008 levels of living standards!
My main concern is that if Osbourne keeps cutting public services, as he plans to, that will suppress growth.
Edwina Currie? They should restrict her to marginal channels and talk shows with the likes of Katie Hopkins and her ilk so no one has to listen.