Benefit cuts

“I want the Tories on here to acknowledge that the system is tragically crap”

They won’t. They’re tories; they never admit they’re wrong. Which is pretty much most of the time. They simply couldn’t suffer the abject humiliation of being wrong. So they persist in trying to believe they are right.

If they admitted they were wrong, they’d have to stop being tories.

Good to see Labour also want to keep the benefit cap and also reduce in certain areas

http://www.labour.org.uk/manifesto/social-security

The difference is, that Labour would tackle the areas that create the need for benefits, by providing homes, training and jobs, and addressing the issues that result in such a large welfare burden.

The tories aren’t going to do that. They’ll simply make things worse. As they are currently.

Good to see Labour also want to keep the benefit cap and also reduce in certain areas

http://www.labour.org.uk/manifesto/social-security

Don’t worry, there’s enough communists in this thread they will claim labour are a right wing party and don’t have any humanity either.

All you’ve done is link to some numbers which may or may not explain anything, and may or may not have been compiled using methodology which may or may not be flawed, presented by a government department which may or may not be telling the actual truth.

Sorry for answering your question rich, please ignore my link. The independent body is of course a secret centre of flawed analysis and propaganda whose sole objective is to support far right wing idelogies. My bad. Please refer instead to clever-clod, his imagination and the anecdotes of his great Aunt Fanny.

Let’s look at what facts actually are, THM.

I though that they were unimportant – please make you mind up.

Facts are in the ever increasing numbers of homeless people and families. Facts are in the ever increasing number of people using food banks (ask your wife, she will explain this to you). Facts are the numbers of suicides of people being declared ‘fit to work’ by an assessment system which isn’t fit for purpose. Facts are the rise in chronic mental illness in young people. Facts are the increased burden of debt of anyone wanting to go to university (to get the same level of education you and I got for free). Facts are the increase in violent crime. Facts are the increase in hate crimes.Facts are what affect real people.

All true, but not related to the question a hand.

Stick that in your abacus and see what you come up with.

Thank you. Regards to Great Aunt Fanny. Looking forward to the next diatribe already…

I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?

I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?

Confirmation bias. They want to be able to justify their existing point of view. Which is, in many cases, that they are better than the others. As in, I’ve succeeded or managed, and they haven’t, therefore I’m better than them.

Some people’s lives are ruled by a kind of competitiveness that in most cases they don’t even notice. They posture to put themselves above others where they can, even if it’s just through passive-aggressive behaviour.

I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?

Closed lazy selfish stupid dogmatic – sociopaths (trending here) – pick any – likely very similar to the objects they stereotype.

Lots of accusations flying about but few solutions

I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?

If such a person imagines themself surrounded by a sea of villains/lesser beings, then it makes the shining hill upon which they imagine themselves to stand that much higher and brighter. This type of generalising can work both ways, but it boils down to the same thing – “I’m not a f***up, but ‘they’ are. I’ll never be like ‘them’ because I’m better’

Looking down one’s nose at others is very simple ego-boost. Negative stereotypes are their fix, so they swallow as many as are offered. This is one reason why tabloids are so addictive. Us vs them.

Is it beyond comprehension that “Foodbank Sharon” had bought that iPhone while in work?

“I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?”

What Malvern Rider said, and:

It stems from a basic human insecurity, which is linked to the survival instinct. Often manifests itself in the behaviour of young children; a child can be happily playing with a whole load of toys, but if they see another child being given a toy, they will suddenly become very jealous, and possibly even attack the other child to get the toy, regardless of the number of toys they already have. It’s essentially a fear of not having as much as possible, or what my wife calls a Fear of Missing Out™ (FMO). In adults, it manifests itself in ways such as jealousy towards someone with a more attractive partner, bigger house, nicer car etc. It’s really very common. Whilst adults won’t generaly attack each other, they often seek to belittle or denigrate their ‘rival’, by criticising them and/or the thing they are jealous of. I suppose we all have it so some degree, but it’s more apparent in some than in others. Tory ideology relies on appealing to such base fears, and feeds into this by creating a mythical narrative that the ‘other’ has more than you and it’s not fair; you deserve it ‘more’. The fear nourished, it is then easier to attack that which causes the fear in the first place.

The right wing media will create fictional narratives of ‘benefit scroungers’ etc, knowing that this will trigger the FMO in insecure people, who will then be more amenable to attacking the mythical ‘beast’. They will use extreme examples, often exceptions of he general rule, to whip up a greater frenzy amongst their audience.

It’s why the Daily Mail, Jeremy Kyle, Benefits st etc are so popular. From Bullingdon boys burning banknotes in front of homeless folk, to people on internet forums bleating on about a particular example they are knowledgable of, which ‘proves’ the myth is ‘correct’.

And it’s why the tories get votes.

Lots of accusations flying about but few solutions

Well – in the short term, forget about the austerity benefit cuts – easy one that. Borrowing against future taxes probably won’t work so tax something.

In the longer term – I’ve asked this before, but what’s the problem with job creation for the persistently unemployed? I mean it doesn’t have to be trivial – there’s a lot that needs doing. Can’t we get some people working on HS2? Instead of hiring civil engineering companies who won’t employ the long term unemployed.

That gives money directly to the workers, rather than filtering it through a big company. But then – I’m in favour of certain industries being state run, and Tories are not.

“Is it beyond comprehension”

Apparently so.

Is it beyond comprehension that “Foodbank Sharon” had bought that iPhone while in work?

To some. But they choose the most negative interpretation, as above.

Same for homeless people smoking. Assuming they are spending their money on cigs when if you pay attention you often see passers by sharing a smoke with them as a gesture of kindness.

Not to mention nicotine is an addiction, so not much of a choice, more a necessity, especially when the individual is already in a state of agitation

Fear of Missing Out™ (FMO).

It’s FOMO™

I’m glad you’ve all agreed that all Tories are ****. When do we start stereotyping the middle class Labour voters?

Not to mention nicotine is an addiction, so not much of a choice, more a necessity, especially when the individual is already in a state of agitation

https://www.nhs.uk/smokefree/help-and-advice/local-support-services-helplines#gu5jAFJsVoYecJI5.97

“I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?”

You mean like how all Tories are heartless bastards?

My worse side just snorted with derision at my better side’s awful grammar.

Fear of Missing Out™ (FMO).

Agreed. In addition if we automatically assume a homeless/disabled/benefit-claiming person to be villainous it makes it so easy not to give a flying fark. Worse still, it makes it that much easier/more satisfying to punish/sanction them. Which is most often unspeakably cruel considering the situation they are already in.

You mean like how all Tories are heartless bastards

Like I said, it can work both ways.

Define “Middle Class”

If you need a job to keep the roof over your head and feed your kids, delude yourself with whatever job title your position warrants, you’re working class

As per molgrips – job creation – benefit probation officers – – investment in future – it will take time – more tax on booze.
Its harder than just cutting – but cheaper in the long run.

Easy to argue against the investment and work required – especially if you are far removed from any of the real issues involved.

The last prime minister wanted to help “problem” families unfortunately nothing came of that..

If you need a job to keep the roof over your head and feed your kids, delude yourself with whatever job title your position warrants, you’re working class

Not a common definition though is it.

Ninfin, when people are under extreme stress, rational thoughts and actions that look clear cut to an outside observer, often fly out the window…

“It’s FOMO™”

Its not; the ‘of’ is silent.

” When do we start stereotyping the middle class Labour voters?”

You can start with me if you like. I’ve got a Jeremy Corbyn badge and everything.

Not a common definition though is it

But it’s a realistic one

Its not; the ‘of’ is silent.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fomo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_of_missing_out

Obviously, the references we should all be looking at 😛

But it’s a realistic one

Only if you have two classes without the one in the middle.

My wife uses the medical abreviation. 😀

This is just another heart breaking story which doesn’t quite give us enough information upon which to base a judgement.

How did he end up single with four children? Are they all his? Why is he the sole carer? What happened to their mother/father if they aren’t all his? What is his background? Has he ever worked? What is his educational background? Can he perhaps work from home? Does he need help filling in the complicated form? Perhaps a journalist could help!! etc.

On the other hand… why is the rent where he lives so expensive? Is he tied to that house/location? How many people are claiming for houses they don’t need in areas’s they don’t need to be in? Are the children really going to be made homeless or are they simply having to downgrade accommodation to fit within the cap?

So the Guardian has given us half a story is clearly the only conclusion I can draw.

Whilst I don’t particularly agree with a lot of the comments on here, the posters are entitled to make them.

What I find much more offensive is how certain posters on here belittle and demonise others who hold a differing opinion to them. Its prevailent throughout this thread (and Singletrack and general), and really needs cutting out.

Just because you are sitting behind the anonymity of your keyboard doesn’t make this kind of thing ok

why is the rent where he lives so expensive? Is he tied to that house/location? How many people are claiming for houses they don’t need in

The last time you moved house, what did it cost, even if you hired a van and did it yourself?
Where will he find the cash for the bond?

I haven’t read the whole thread but the real issue is not benefits are too high – its that private renting is too expensive. HUge numbers of council houses have ended up in the hands of private landlords who rent them for twice council rents. Rent controls were abolished.

Deliberate tory policy has led to this huge increase in rents with the profits going to those who are already rich and has meant the supply of fair cost rented property is far less than it used to be.

this is the root of the problem.

In the longer term – I’ve asked this before, but what’s the problem with job creation for the persistently unemployed? I mean it doesn’t have to be trivial – there’s a lot that needs doing. Can’t we get some people working on HS2? Instead of hiring civil engineering companies who won’t employ the long term unemployed.

DWP are already on with this.

There were/are three programmes currently underway to help the long term unemployed back to work.
Work Programme, Mandatory Work Activity and Community Work Placements. There’s also a lot of extra money from the European Development Fund to help with training. (Used to work in the industry and with DWP)

There’s also a lot of private companies (M&S, Timsons, ASDA, McD, etc….) that run programmes to help people. Don’t be under the assumption that help isn’t out there already.

Helping people gain employment gets them out of poverty, creates self esteem and reduces other issues. Handing out more benefits just traps people in poverty.

“Just because you are sitting behind the anonymity of your keyboard doesn’t make this kind of thing ok”

I’m more than happy to discuss anything with anyone, any time or place, face to face. I’ve very rarely ever found a tory supporter with sufficient balls to be able to do so though. I think the fact that they will inevitably be proven wrong is sufficient for most to not want to suffer public humiliation.

It’s an emotive subject. I think it’s perfectly understandable for folk to want to vent at what they perceive to be unjust and socially destructive. Why conform to some repressed notion of ‘politeness’, when that’s not how you really feel? I applaud Binners for his composure, in particular.

Is it beyond comprehension that “Foodbank Sharon” had bought that iPhone while in work?

And now she’s claiming she can’t feed her kids?

Sell it.

It’s not rocket surgery.

“I wonder why it is that for the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others, they choose to use the negative example instead of the positive one that they all know about?”

You mean like how all Tories are heartless bastards?

@nifan, I wondered why only one example was needed. I guess some people might call Tories ‘heartless bastards’ (your accusation) after numerous examples of nasty attempts at policy changes (not just one)e.g scrapping the Human Rights act, the ‘snoopers charter’, reduce union and employment rights, slash subsidies for clean energy, re-draw electoral boundaries, recent scrapping of a public inquiry re the Battle of Orgreave, our current Prime Minister (in previous role)was responsible for the bus driving around London telling immigrants to go home…..I could go on and on and on ……

The work program? You mean Slave labour, which in turn encourages wage repression?

Pre-taxes and benefits the income of the top 20% is 14x larger than the bottom 5%. Post taxes and benefits, this gap is reduced to 4x. So we have a progressive system that works albeit far from perfectly.

Cheers for the link THM, wasn’t me that started ranting after it. You meant bottom 20% 😉 So I guess then what is the impact of the cap on these figures, presumably gap would increase to around 5x? And disposable income from 6x to 8x. Would be better to see that in 10% splits IMO.

the people who only need one example to stereotype thousands of others

I have many of examples. That was just one.

How does she arrange job interviews? Maybe a data plan on that smartphone is her only online access to universal job match?

Of course it is. Stop making excuses.

Or hows about you quit being such a judgemental t*at?

Bravo. That’s how thin your argument is that you have to resort to namecalling? Hopeless.

You mean Slave labour

#facepalm

Right to Buy. Should have been stopped years ago. Not a party political issue as Labour sold off record amounts 1997-2010. Govt should use a council house building programme to boost construction and train British citizens. Govt should also means test council housing including size needs (in central London we had many council house developments filled with mainly retired people with security of tenancy – in a family sized flat ?). We need more 1 & 2 bedroomed places for refired and single people.

“Austerity” what we are seeing now is a dry run for what’s coming when (if) eurozone hits real crises

Welfare Cap. Given the level it’s set at and given it’s an after tax amount I don’t really see what the fuss is about.