Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Some interesting articles. Thank you.

    He does seem to have an agenda like most guardian journalists.
    She(!) has a pro-disabled people agenda on account of being disabled, I would imagine. That is kind of what you asked to see!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Some interesting articles. Thank you.

    He does seem to have an agenda like most guardian journalists.
    everyone has a agenda.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    I've never heard of a first hand account of the poor or disabled suffering.

    It's always somebody taking up their cause.

    We have a poster on here called illegal to be poor. He often bemoans how the government treats disabled people. Disabled people often tell him to shut up as he portrays them in a negative light and doesn't tell the truth
    Pop down to your local Citizens Advice Bureau and meet the very ill who are being declared fit for work to get them off the disability figures and make great Telegraph articles.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    I don't really think the comparison with the post war economic situation is really fair. The economic situation was very different. Europe was being rebuilt creating vast potential for economic growth, the government was rebuilding the country and above all else we saw vast amounts of American aid, as they began to rebuild Europe to create a new market for themselves. I don't think any foreign power is about to start throwing money at us.

    We also may not need to pay off all the debt, but at the very least we need to be seen to be a credible debtor.
    Growth is priced into that graph as it's per cent of gdp. But yes you're right. Which is why I voted Labour as they wanted austerity lite with some investment, and not say green. Debt should not go above 100% though it has continued to rise under Osborne from I believe 67 to 83%

    What the graph does show is that Labour were never profligate in the 2000s. Not by world war standards but by post 1975 standards.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moosferatu)
    Pop down to your local Citizens Advice Bureau and meet the very ill who are being declared fit for work to get them off the disability figures and make great Telegraph articles.
    It's a pity you don't seem to want to criticise the feckless ones clogging up the system.

    You seem to have a problem with people continually being reviewed. I've met too many, including members of my family who aspire to get signed off on the sick.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moosferatu)
    Pop down to your local Citizens Advice Bureau and meet the very ill who are being declared fit for work to get them off the disability figures and make great Telegraph articles.
    As a result of the disability review i believe that perversely more people are being declared disabled than before. The problem is that this only happens after they win their appeal.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Growth is priced into that graph as it's per cent of gdp. But yes you're right. Which is why I voted Labour as they wanted austerity lite with some investment, and not say green. Debt should not go above 100% though it has continued to rise under Osborne from I believe 67 to 83%

    What the graph does show is that Labour were never profligate in the 2000s. Not by world war standards but by post 1975 standards.
    In terms of capital spending i don't think Labour were planning any more than the Tories (already at £53bn+Help To Buy). Unless by investment you mean general health and education type stuff.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    With regards to the thread title i don't think that austerity will be as damaging this time. In 2011-2012 we had negative growth in the Euro-zone (now slowly growing), the coalition had halved capital spending (now higher than it was under Darling) and business investment was still negative (now positive - indicates business has confidence). While growth did slow to near zero during that timeframe it's worth noting that the service sector still grew at over 1% even with restricted credit supply.

    Essentially i think that we may struggle to maintain moderate growth (2-4%) but that i think we should be able to maintain something in the 1-2% range until austerity passes.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Your "calculations" - presumably subtracting one number from another - are nonsense. To assume paying down a certain level of deficit implies an identical cut in public expenditure is quite simply wrong: tax yields, for example, vary dramatically, as do other decisions which the government makes.

    You quoted the OBR. Well, if you'd given have a toss, you could have looked up what the OBR is saying that public expenditure will be in these years and the numbers that have formed their presumptions.

    I've been lovely and done it for you, taken from the most recent Economic and fiscal outlook published in March. This is how much the government is forecast to spend in each year (TME)--



    So, um, yeah, you're talking out of the back of your head.
    Rekt.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moosferatu)
    Pop down to your local Citizens Advice Bureau and meet the very ill who are being declared fit for work to get them off the disability figures and make great Telegraph articles.
    Being fit to work doesn't mean you're disabled or not disabled. Most disabled people are fit to work: the Work Capability Assessment is a measure of incapacity.

    You may think I'm splitting hairs here, but it's a very important distinction. Disabled people aren't ill, or unfit, or destined to be thrown on some ****heap of lifelong unemployment. We've seen a real change in attitudes towards disabled people in the workplace in recent times, and long may it continue.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Being fit to work doesn't mean you're disabled or not disabled. Most disabled people are fit to work: the Work Capability Assessment is a measure of incapacity.

    You may think I'm splitting hairs here, but it's a very important distinction. Disabled people aren't ill, or unfit, or destined to be thrown on some ****heap of lifelong unemployment. We've seen a real change in attitudes towards disabled people in the workplace in recent times, and long may it continue.
    sure that is why only 2% of the sacked remploy workers have found work since their factories where closed from 2010.

    attitudes are really changing.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by illegaltobepoor)
    sure that is why only 2% of the sacked remploy workers have found work since their factories where closed from 2010.

    attitudes are really changing.
    I'm sure that's a lovely figure, but dates back to about 2012. In May 2013, the Government stated that well over half who'd taken up the offer of employment support had entered work or training.

    But let's face it, that wasn't a policy decision - it was an entirely technocratic one. It implemented the recommendations of the Sayce review, and was supported by virtually every disability charity going. Sheltered employment was a relic of an age long past.

    Remploy itself said that for the money spend on supporting an employee in one of their supported enterprises, they could help find work for many more. The average cost of employing someone in their factory operation was £25,000. These weren't real jobs, they were loss-making.

    In February 2014, it stated around 700 of the 1500 made redundant who had engaged with the Government's support package were in jobs, with more in training and other destinations.

    If you're going to make a party political point on this, I remind you that Labour closed 18 of the factories (without giving those who could make a business case the opportunity to continue) leading to a drop in staff from 5,000 to 2,900.

    None of this was done for any financial advantage. In all cases, the money was reinvested in Remploy employment services.

    I don't know about you, but being in loss-making, segregated and sheltered employment isn't my ambition for disabled people. As I said, they have huge talents and it harms everyone that they are being lost out on.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ridwan12)
    1) Tories wanted further deregulation than what labour did...
    Tories did not want bank deregulation. They wanted a series of deregulations on pensions, healthcare, ISAs, mortgages and vulture/hedge funds. The prospect of a commercial and investment bank merger was NEVER on the table.


    (Original post by ridwan12)
    2) Labour rebuilt schools and hospitals up and down the country, we don't face an infrastructure crisis like the US. Saying labour overspent is a silly blame game as they would have had to been rebuilt sooner or later. It's not like the money was thrown in the air.
    Yeah obviously. We should just build a hospital every 5 km, because everyone knows that if we build happy things like schools and hospitals it doesn't matter how much we spend. Emotion economics have never worked.

    (Original post by ridwan12)
    3) Is that why the tories haven't commited to an £8 minimum wage? loool
    What are you even referring to? Nothing in his post.

    (Original post by ridwan12)
    4) A country is not run like a household that is the analogy the Tories have used, austerity merely limits growth, productivity and hits the poorest.
    Austerity does not limit growth. Austerity combined with private sector growth means growth. Government spending has never been a major part of the economy in any country.

    Productivity? What? In what way does austerity limit productivity? Did I miss some economics classes or something?

    (Original post by ridwan12)
    One way they could raise money is by scrapping non-dom's
    And those non-doms will leave and take their jobs and investment with them. Emotion economics.

    (Original post by ridwan12)
    and reintroducing 50p tax rate
    Yeah we all know how brilliantly the tax rises worked for Belgium and France.

    (Original post by ridwan12)
    and committing to tackling tax evasion via banning UK controlled tax havens. It won't happen though as they protect their own...........
    What a great way to encourage a flux of money from Cayman to Monaco.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    I've never heard of a first hand account of the poor or disabled suffering.

    It's always somebody taking up their cause.

    We have a poster on here called illegal to be poor. He often bemoans how the government treats disabled people. Disabled people often tell him to shut up as he portrays them in a negative light and doesn't tell the truth
    http://calumslist.org/

    But it's all still a myth, right...?

    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by looseseal)
    http://calumslist.org/

    But it's all still a myth, right...?

    :rolleyes:
    I went to the first page of that, which listed an individual at the top of it.

    The 'evidence' for it all was, admittedly, a doctor - but one who is attached to the so-called Black Triangle Campaign. Having encountered them previously, I know they're utter lunatics, as well as party-political activists. They are not reliable, and anyone attached to them really has quite incredibly poor judgement.

    So yes, I stopped reading at that point.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    I went to the first page of that, which listed an individual at the top of it.

    The 'evidence' for it all was, admittedly, a doctor - but one who is attached to the so-called Black Triangle Campaign. Having encountered them previously, I know they're utter lunatics, as well as party-political activists. They are not reliable, and anyone attached to them really has quite incredibly poor judgement.

    So yes, I stopped reading at that point.
    Very valid reason. Let's just ignore all of the reports from reputable news outlets such as the BBC that the site references...

    I've seen this so many times where people ignore evidence put in front of them or refuse to take a proper look because it would invalidate their point of view.

    I'm not posting the link for this site solely as an attack on the Conservatives. As in actual fact the medical examinations (for fitness of work) performed by the private healthcare company Atos were first commissioned by (new) Labour. I'm posting this link just to remind people that although they've been unaffected by these cuts, the effects of austerity are very real and very damaging to numerous groups of people.

    £12billion is not just some number. It's something that can and most likely will have a serious effect on thousands of people's lives and the fact that you're unaware of that doesn't make it any less true.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    It's a pity you don't seem to want to criticise the feckless ones clogging up the system.

    You seem to have a problem with people continually being reviewed. I've met too many, including members of my family who aspire to get signed off on the sick.
    I absolutely have a problem with fraudulent and dodgy benefit claimants. Fortunately they are an extremely low proportion of people actually claiming benefits. However in right-wing propagandist land, the issue has been massively overblown to translate into 'the whole welfare system is made up of frauds and cheats, let's get rid of the damn thing piecemeal'. As a side note I'm guessing you would see fraudulent benefit claimants garroted but 100% believe in the right for fraudulent bankers to steal billions of pounds from the public, corporations to avoid tax, etc.

    Do you want the terminally ill and those with lists of medical complaints as long as your arm paraded in front of ATOS (or whoever is leading the show now), medical feedback ignored so they can be kicked off the figures into the draconian Job Centre system to go look for work in ASDA and Tesco under risk of sanctions (sanctions = penury), who would never hire them in a million years? That's what's been happening in practice in this quest to root out the fakers. What would you do if you were long-term sick, socially isolated, dependent on state support, and your money was cut, and you were waiting for 9 months?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    It's a pity you don't seem to want to criticise the feckless ones clogging up the system.

    You seem to have a problem with people continually being reviewed. I've met too many, including members of my family who aspire to get signed off on the sick.
    We have spent 5 years criticizing the feckless ones clogging up the system. Now its time to find out what is preventing them from getting a job?

    But no! Don't ask questions! Just do as your told! Keep scapegoating these people on benefits street.

    Here is a start!

    Lets look at the situation of a member of the Underclass joining the Precariat class.

    1. Majority of jobs for the un skilled require them to be flexible. This means they must sign a contact for 12 hours and be available as and when work comes. In the process of taking this contract for work they will be no better off than on benefits. If they earn over their entitled to benefit amount they have to pay it all back in the form of community tax. If they choose to stop claiming benefits they risk times when there is no extra hour to tide them over.

    2. If a Precariat takes the brilliant advise of a Conservative politician and moves off benefits with their 12 hour contract they will risk getting into debt. Sadly debt mounts up and along with it comes social illnesses like depression, obesity and criminality. These social illnesses make people less viable for jobs and these people are turned down. Some of these people become so ill that they then decide to apply for disability benefits because they have became feckless!

    3. But lets say all goes well and the underclass manages to not get any hours taken off them and makes there way to become sustainable precariat (if only there was one lol). What happens if someone is so stressed and mentally ill that they have a in work accident and become genuinely disabled! I think we know the solution to that? Tories send them to the ATOS testing centre where the burecrats can whip up some lies and fibs to declare the genuine disabled as able.

    BRING IN THE PASSION OF OSBORNE!!!

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by illegaltobepoor)
    What happens if someone is so stressed and mentally ill that they have a in work accident and become genuinely disabled! I think we know the solution to that? Tories send them to the ATOS testing centre where the burecrats can whip up some lies and fibs to declare the genuine disabled as able.
    Then they're obviously a lazy layabout with such massive character deficiencies they ought to pay a price for their crimes. Perhaps cleaning graffiti off walls. Good experience for a CV obviously.

    Although I feel if one found themselves in that situation the rhetoric would suddenly disappear.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    As a result of the disability review i believe that perversely more people are being declared disabled than before. The problem is that this only happens after they win their appeal.
    I still have tremendous difficulty believing that the party could leave IDS in charge of welfare. Thought they might take the approach as they did with Education by hiring a more media-friendly stooge. Even for this government the man is a dangerous ideologue, compulsive liar and psychopath. I remember reading somewhere that Cameron/Osbourne want him out and hands are tied because IDS refuses to move but can't remember where I heard that claim and I doubt it's true anyway...

    Maybe having IDS in welfare is the best place for him. If he was somewhere more important and far-reaching like Justice Secretary I can only imagine the horrors we'd witness. Perhaps the death penalty back for the smallest of crimes.
 
 
 

2,834

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.