Tories are considering reducing ESA disability benefit by 30% Watch

Poll: Should disabled people bare more austerity?
Yes (13)
30.23%
No (30)
69.77%
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...kers-allowance

Remember when I constantly kept telling this forum that the Tories don't like the disabled? Well here is more proof. It looks like the Tories are copying UKIPs policy to reduce ESA to the same level of Job Seekers Allowance.

Come on Tory supporters. Come out and defend the continued austerity.

Please tell us why disabled people need to suffer more.
1
reply
Arkasia
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
"The Department for Work and Pensions said the ESA proposals were not government policy"

What is it with you and posting stupid reactionary threads about the Tories? Are you paid to do this?
0
reply
Muulka
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by Arkasia)
"The Department for Work and Pensions said the ESA proposals were not government policy"

What is it with you and posting stupid reactionary threads about the Tories? Are you paid to do this?
I don't think the word reactionary really works here- the Tories are the only reactionaries in this discussion...
0
reply
Arkasia
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Muulka)
I don't think the word reactionary really works here- the Tories are the only reactionaries in this discussion...
I am using it in the context of people reacting in an overly aggressive and instantaneous manner, and not in the political stance of people reacting to change to the status quo or conservative ideals, which I would agree with you on.
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by Arkasia)
"The Department for Work and Pensions said the ESA proposals were not government policy"

What is it with you and posting stupid reactionary threads about the Tories? Are you paid to do this?
That would be my dream job.

The proposals aren't policy right now but it really does show the Tory mindset. £2 min wage and ESA cuts.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by illegaltobepoor)
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...kers-allowance

Remember when I constantly kept telling this forum that the Tories don't like the disabled? Well here is more proof. It looks like the Tories are copying UKIPs policy to reduce ESA to the same level of Job Seekers Allowance.



Come on Tory supporters. Come out and defend the continued austerity.

Please tell us why disabled people need to suffer more.
If we didn't have so many people abusing the system, further cuts wouldn't be needed.

Shouldn't you be commenting on those capable of working sitting on benefits?
1
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by illegaltobepoor)
That would be my dream job.

The proposals aren't policy right now but it really does show the Tory mindset. £2 min wage and ESA cuts.
I suspect you are paid for it.

Where did you get the £2 minimum wage from? Have you made it up again.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
I suspect you are paid for it.

Where did you get the £2 minimum wage from? Have you made it up again.
He got it from Lord Freud's comments a while back, although also ignoring the true meaning of it (£2 paid by the employer, topped up by the state to NMW) which, yet again, isn't policy and nor is it likely to be in the manifesto.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
If we didn't have so many people abusing the system, further cuts wouldn't be needed.

Shouldn't you be commenting on those capable of working sitting on benefits?
No, because almost nobody is abusing the system. Why not get angry at where the real money is being stolen from you: that is, your employer stealing your labour.

And the lower benefits and minimum wage are kept, the more downward pressure on your wages.

Only when everyone gets a citizen's income by default, as neo-liberal economists have always prescribed, will any worker receive a fair wage for their labour.

But I guess it's just easier to bury your head in the sand and kick the poor, isn't it?
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
He got it from Lord Freud's comments a while back, although also ignoring the true meaning of it (£2 paid by the employer, topped up by the state to NMW) which, yet again, isn't policy and nor is it likely to be in the manifesto.
It certainly shows what papers he reads that he didn't hear about this...

I hate the Tories for their persecution of the disabled but even I couldn't get angry about that comment.

Of course the idea of sending disabled people off to work for the sake of it is a bit Arbeit macht frei, but you can't expect much from the Tories.

In the context of their twisted beliefs about work the idea is a pretty good and not incompassionate one.

Still, it seemed to kick off a bit after the comment and to be frank anything that gets in the mainstream media about the Tories' persecution of the disabled, even if misrepresented, is fine by me.
0
reply
Alfissti
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by scrotgrot)
No, because almost nobody is abusing the system. Why not get angry at where the real money is being stolen from you: that is, your employer stealing your labour.

And the lower benefits and minimum wage are kept, the more downward pressure on your wages.

Only when everyone gets a citizen's income by default, as neo-liberal economists have always prescribed, will any worker receive a fair wage for their labour.

But I guess it's just easier to bury your head in the sand and kick the poor, isn't it?
Do share what you been smoking.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by Alfissti)
Do share what you been smoking.
Not sure what the Guardian puts in their newsprint but it sure is good.

Guess Milton Friedman was a strung-out junkie too then... Hayek too
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by Arkasia)
"The Department for Work and Pensions said the ESA proposals were not government policy"

What is it with you and posting stupid reactionary threads about the Tories? Are you paid to do this?
Who would even be paying him? It's not like there's any political party, media outlet or otherwise influential organisation in our society that is against austerity for the poor. It really is telling that when someone criticises the government you immediately assume some shadowy patron is paying them. Is that tinfoil hat on tight enough?

When the UN rapporteur criticised our prohibitively expensive housing market, Tories spluttered and said "she doesn't even get paid for this, why should we trust what she's saying?" You can't have it both ways. And it doesn't seem to occur to Tories that some people believe in things and care about helping people rather than the Tory way of not getting off their arses unless there's a few bob changing hands.

Why would you want to shield any sitting government from criticism, even if it was bankrolled by a large organisation? To say nothing of Murdoch and the Tories' big business/non-dom donors, of course.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by illegaltobepoor)

Please tell us why disabled people need to suffer more.
I think more to the point is why do those ESA recipients who are not in receipt of PIP/DLA (which is designed to pay for the additional care and transport needs of the disabled) need 30% more income than the unemployed?
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by scrotgrot)
No, because almost nobody is abusing the system. Why not get angry at where the real money is being stolen from you: that is, your employer stealing your labour.

And the lower benefits and minimum wage are kept, the more downward pressure on your wages.

Only when everyone gets a citizen's income by default, as neo-liberal economists have always prescribed, will any worker receive a fair wage for their labour.

But I guess it's just easier to bury your head in the sand and kick the poor, isn't it?
My employer doesn't steal
My labour.

My employer pays for my labour.

I'm hazarding a guess your working experience consists of a a fee shift at Burger King and a paper round.
0
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by illegaltobepoor)
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...kers-allowance

Remember when I constantly kept telling this forum that the Tories don't like the disabled? Well here is more proof. It looks like the Tories are copying UKIPs policy to reduce ESA to the same level of Job Seekers Allowance.

Come on Tory supporters. Come out and defend the continued austerity.

Please tell us why disabled people need to suffer more.
ESA is primarily a benefit for incapacity or sickness, not for disability.Calling it a "disability benefit" is just inaccurate.
0
reply
Arkasia
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by scrotgrot)
Who would even be paying him? It's not like there's any political party, media outlet or otherwise influential organisation in our society that is against austerity for the poor. It really is telling that when someone criticises the government you immediately assume some shadowy patron is paying them. Is that tinfoil hat on tight enough?

When the UN rapporteur criticised our prohibitively expensive housing market, Tories spluttered and said "she doesn't even get paid for this, why should we trust what she's saying?" You can't have it both ways. And it doesn't seem to occur to Tories that some people believe in things and care about helping people rather than the Tory way of not getting off their arses unless there's a few bob changing hands.

Why would you want to shield any sitting government from criticism, even if it was bankrolled by a large organisation? To say nothing of Murdoch and the Tories' big business/non-dom donors, of course.
If someone criticizes the Tory government, good for them, there is a lot to criticize, and that is a basic right. However, the alarming regularity and, dare I say, obsession, shown by OP suggests that he has gone one step beyond just criticism, and whilst I was joking slightly when suggesting he was being paid, I wouldn't be surprised if he was.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
My employer doesn't steal
My labour.

My employer pays for my labour.

I'm hazarding a guess your working experience consists of a a fee shift at Burger King and a paper round.
Yes he does. Every pound he earns in profits is something you earned for him thanks to the leverage he has over you in the market and the coercion inherent in needing a job to afford to live.

Unless you're in management, in which case your inflow from the owner would be countered by an outflow to the workers. But even though you are liable to the people under you, such is the concentration of wealth at the top that you would probably end up with more money from this redistribution.

And that's the tragedy, the middle classes actually believe the delusion that they're just a whisker away from breaking into the big leagues. They'd gain a lot more by standing with the working classes, whom they in fact most resemble. We are spiralling towards a two-tier society and the middle classes are going to have to wake up pretty soon.

Working in such exploitative low-skilled jobs as you just mentioned is the most common working experience of the people of this country, so don't you dare disparage it like it doesn't matter.

If basic living costs were covered by a citizen's income, as prescribed by such rabid left-wingers as Friedman and Hayek, the element of coercion would be removed, and employees would be paid the true value of their labour. The difference is what is currently being stolen from you.
4
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
If we didn't have so many people abusing the system, further cuts wouldn't be needed.

Shouldn't you be commenting on those capable of working sitting on benefits?
Oh your so right mature student. Those people who have real conditions. They have the audacity to claim benefits which they are entitled too! Disgusting!
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by nulli tertius)
I think more to the point is why do those ESA recipients who are not in receipt of PIP/DLA (which is designed to pay for the additional care and transport needs of the disabled) need 30% more income than the unemployed?
Because when you get something like Cancer you go though a period where your needs increase. For example when a Cancer patient has chemotherapy the immune system shuts down for a while and this makes the person prone to every virus and common cold upon contact. So things like bleach have to be used on all things in the home to kill bacteria on surfaces. Also when you have no immune system your prone to cold weather. So disability costs money. Its not cheap.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (356)
37.63%
No - but I will (74)
7.82%
No - I don't want to (66)
6.98%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (450)
47.57%

Watched Threads

View All