Benefits - Only for lazy, stupid people....

Original post by Iron Lady

In the current climate everyone needs to do their bit. The government needs to reduce foreign aid significantly if there are national issues.

Without wanting to sound crude, if they're in pain and barely able to move (by that I mean severe pain) it must be very distressing for families and themselves, they have a low standard of living.

Spoiler

Evidence? Can you direct me towards a link, please?

Such is life.

oh hello Margaret Thatcher, didn't realise you were on here :rolleyes:

Reply 922

Original post by Iron Lady

Evidence? Can you direct me towards a link, please?

http://fullfact.org/factchecks/ATOS_ESA_assessments_overturned-3135

There are many articles stating similar.

Most people on benefits do not have loads of money.

Exactly. The vast majority are struggling to get by.

Reply 923

Jevon177

7

Benefits need to be dealt with on a case by case basis, someone like the lady who was mentioned in the original post deserves to have as much support as the state can give, however the type of person who is characterised oh so often in the Daily Mail (Scrounger) doesn't deserve anywhere near the amount of support she would get. Like I said, it should be case by case.

Reply 924

Original post by Jevon177

Benefits need to be dealt with on a case by case basis, someone like the lady who was mentioned in the original post deserves to have as much support as the state can give, however the type of person who is characterised oh so often in the Daily Mail (Scrounger) doesn't deserve anywhere near the amount of support she would get. Like I said, it should be case by case.

If you have a genuine handicap that prevents you from working, such as severe autism or diabetes, imagine how demoralising it must be to have your needs "assessed", not just once but on a regular basis, with the threat of having your benefits removed if they decide on some impersonal basis that you are fit enough to work.

It's no wonder you think that when you take your information from the Daily Mail lol. I'm sorry but "scroungers" are such a small minority it's hardly worth the hype or attention that people are giving them.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 925

Jevon177

7

Original post by MrHappy_J

If you have a genuine handicap that prevents you from working, such as severe autism or diabetes, imagine how demoralising it must be to have your needs "assessed", not just once but on a regular basis.

It's no wonder you think that when you take your information from the Daily Mail lol. I'm sorry but "scroungers" are such a minority it's hardly worth the hype or attention that people are giving them.

I was merely referring to a stereotype the Daily Mail promotes. I don't actually read that rag xD I just believe that assessment is needed to decide who can have access to the top tier of benefits and who doesn't really deserve or need them. If the problem is a life long handicap like Diabetes then I think the assessments should be less frequent than say someone who can't work due to stress. Before anyone else says anything I know stress can be a problem but my own Uncle stayed on benefits due to stress, and he was genuinely stressed to start with but after he was over it he remained on the full benefits for nearly 2 years. All I'm saying is someone like him should have been assessed.

Reply 926

Original post by Jevon177

I was merely referring to a stereotype the Daily Mail promotes. I don't actually read that rag xD I just believe that assessment is needed to decide who can have access to the top tier of benefits and who doesn't really deserve or need them. If the problem is a life long handicap like Diabetes then I think the assessments should be less frequent than say someone who can't work due to stress. Before anyone else says anything I know stress can be a problem but my own Uncle stayed on benefits due to stress, and he was genuinely stressed to start with but after he was over it he remained on the full benefits for nearly 2 years. All I'm saying is someone like him should have been assessed.

Also the vast majority of people who "abuse the system" are those who are on benefits for a while and then don't inform the government when they no longer need them. I mean that is unfair but if I was in that situation and I needed the money I wouldn't really care, I'd just do what I must in order to get by.

Agreed, assessment is needed, but recently the government has taken to reassessing everyone who is on disability benefits, which I think is a bit unfair. it's caused quite a bit of panic from those who genuinely need it. You can neg me if you like but I think a "case by case" system would not only be unfair but it would also be time consuming and cause extra unnecessary expense.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 927

Original post by Jevon177

I was merely referring to a stereotype the Daily Mail promotes. I don't actually read that rag xD I just believe that assessment is needed to decide who can have access to the top tier of benefits and who doesn't really deserve or need them. If the problem is a life long handicap like Diabetes then I think the assessments should be less frequent than say someone who can't work due to stress. Before anyone else says anything I know stress can be a problem but my own Uncle stayed on benefits due to stress, and he was genuinely stressed to start with but after he was over it he remained on the full benefits for nearly 2 years. All I'm saying is someone like him should have been assessed.

Why isn't a qualified GPs opinion enough? The people who carry out the assessments have 2 days of medical training. I probably know more than them, due to being in the unfortunate situation of having disabilities myself and having many friends and relatives who also have disabilities. Someone posted on another website about the handbook used by the assessors, which claimed that if you have a diagnosis of Syncope, you don't faint. Every single website on Google states otherwise. :rolleyes:

Reply 928

Original post by OU Student

Why isn't a qualified GPs opinion enough? The people who carry out the assessments have 2 days of medical training. I probably know more than them, due to being in the unfortunate situation of having disabilities myself and having many friends and relatives who also have disabilities. Someone posted on another website about the handbook used by the assessors, which claimed that if you have a diagnosis of Syncope, you don't faint. Every single website on Google states otherwise. :rolleyes:

The people that carry out the assessments don't care what illness you are diagnosed with, they are only interested in your particular needs. It doesn't matter to them if you're diabetic, for example, if they see that otherwise you are reasonably fit then they'll just tell you to get a job. Same with depression, they won't pay much attention to a psychiatrist's recommendations. If you're in a wheelchair they could just tell you to get a job that doesn't require standing up.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 929

Original post by MrHappy_J

The people that carry out the assessments don't care what illness you are diagnosed with, they are only interested in your particular needs. It doesn't matter to them if you're diabetic, for example, if they see that otherwise you are reasonably fit then they'll just tell you to get a job. Same with depression, they won't pay much attention to a psychiatrist's recommendations. If you're in a wheelchair they could just tell you to get a job that doesn't require standing up.

I know that the diagnosis is irrelevant; but they still contradict what someone's qualified GP says.

Reply 930

Original post by OU Student

I know that the diagnosis is irrelevant; but they still contradict what someone's qualified GP says.

exactly, which makes these assessments pretty much void. I agree, I think a gp's expert opinion should be enough.

Reply 931

Elissabeth

Original post by KimKallstrom

Actually I can tell you for a fact, through my current job, that there are people living on the New Kings Road, SW6 for example who get all their rent paid for them through housing benefit.....for properties whose values are approaching a million quid.

Since you specifically mentioned Kensington, I'll tell you that there are tons of identical cases there too, even around Holland Park.

Trust me, DSS isn't limited to dumps. It's wherever housing associations are retarded enough to pay for it.

There is one housing association that has properties worth easily over a million in Danvers Street, Chelsea though I have never personally dealt with them.

Thank you.

There are also properties in Ealing worth over a million, which housing benefit is paid for.

£12K a month seems pale in comparison.

Reply 932

minimarshmallow

18

Original post by Elissabeth

Thank you.

There are also properties in Ealing worth over a million, which housing benefit is paid for.

£12K a month seems pale in comparison.

And you continue to think that extreme, rare cases are the norm.

Reply 933

minimarshmallow

18

Original post by OU Student

Why isn't a qualified GPs opinion enough? The people who carry out the assessments have 2 days of medical training. I probably know more than them, due to being in the unfortunate situation of having disabilities myself and having many friends and relatives who also have disabilities. Someone posted on another website about the handbook used by the assessors, which claimed that if you have a diagnosis of Syncope, you don't faint. Every single website on Google states otherwise. :rolleyes:

Original post by MrHappy_J

The people that carry out the assessments don't care what illness you are diagnosed with, they are only interested in your particular needs. It doesn't matter to them if you're diabetic, for example, if they see that otherwise you are reasonably fit then they'll just tell you to get a job. Same with depression, they won't pay much attention to a psychiatrist's recommendations. If you're in a wheelchair they could just tell you to get a job that doesn't require standing up.

My mum was recently reassessed and the assessor reported: 'Can cook all meals unaided' because my mum said she could put a ready meal in the microwave if my dad was in work (he would take time off if she couldn't walk).

Reply 934

Original post by minimarshmallow

My mum was recently reassessed and the assessor reported: 'Can cook all meals unaided' because my mum said she could put a ready meal in the microwave if my dad was in work (he would take time off if she couldn't walk).

This doesn't surprise me at all. I've read things like this over and over again. People have received their reports have said it's like the assessor was talking about someone else.

Reply 935

WelshBluebird

16

Original post by MrHappy_J

The people that carry out the assessments don't care what illness you are diagnosed with, they are only interested in your particular needs. It doesn't matter to them if you're diabetic, for example, if they see that otherwise you are reasonably fit then they'll just tell you to get a job. Same with depression, they won't pay much attention to a psychiatrist's recommendations. If you're in a wheelchair they could just tell you to get a job that doesn't require standing up.

They are not even interested in your needs.
They are interesting in getting you off benefits, no matter what the consequences.

Reply 936

Elissabeth

Original post by minimarshmallow

And you continue to think that extreme, rare cases are the norm.

Its not at all rare for a large amount of housing benefit to be claimed in London though.

You have never lived in London.

Reply 937

Elissabeth

Original post by MrHappy_J

Also the vast majority of people who "abuse the system" are those who are on benefits for a while and then don't inform the government when they no longer need them. I mean that is unfair but if I was in that situation and I needed the money I wouldn't really care, I'd just do what I must in order to get by.

Agreed, assessment is needed, but recently the government has taken to reassessing everyone who is on disability benefits, which I think is a bit unfair. it's caused quite a bit of panic from those who genuinely need it. You can neg me if you like but I think a "case by case" system would not only be unfair but it would also be time consuming and cause extra unnecessary expense.

I completely agree.

A lot of council-housed people don't actually need their property but just keep it!

Reply 938

Original post by WelshBluebird

They are not even interested in your needs.
They are interesting in getting you off benefits, no matter what the consequences.

True but if they didn't give them benefits when they clearly were in dire need then I guess they could take them to court.
The amount of benefits you can get also does not depend on your needs, they depend on how much you could potentially be earning if you worked. Whatever that figure is, the amount in benefits has to be less. For example 16 to 24 yr olds are entitled to less jobseekers' allowance not because it is seen that they need less but because their earning potential is less.

Reply 939