Tests claim few benefit claimants 'unfit to work'

MacMickster

So you have done your patriotic duty and reported this scrounging scum?

To my mind, those who rob pensioners, those who fiddle benefits and those who underpay their taxes are all guilty of the same crime and should be jailed.

By the way - 98% scrounging spongers? Did you know that from research that I carried out in the pub last night it turns out that 78.23% of statistics quoted on internet forums are actually made up on the spot?

If I am a bleeding heart fool then you are an uneducated dolt. As I said, why not leave this country that you so obviously despise and move somewhere that is more accepting of your anti-British views - may I suggest Afghanistan?

StevieJ

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Whilst true, it merely replaced invalidity benefit.

It was pretty much de-facto policy in the 1980's to put people (particularly older men, in high unemployment areas) on IB.

I wasn't aware that people still disputed this - but you never know on this board.

The sad thing about Labour is that these were "their people" but they did little about it until 2008 (note that these tests started under Labour in 2008 and was not a new Tory idea).

Yes, one way of massaging the rapidly increasing dole numbers with newly available oil revenues

The_White_Horse

MacMickster wrote: »

So you have done your patriotic duty and reported this scrounging scum?

To my mind, those who rob pensioners, those who fiddle benefits and those who underpay their taxes are all guilty of the same crime and should be jailed.

By the way - 98% scrounging spongers? Did you know that from research that I carried out in the pub last night it turns out that 78.23% of statistics quoted on internet forums are actually made up on the spot?

If I am a bleeding heart fool then you are an uneducated dolt. As I said, why not leave this country that you so obviously despise and move somewhere that is more accepting of your anti-British views - may I suggest Afghanistan?

anti-british views????? laughable. typical hysterical lefty nonsense. if not wanting to pay for thousands of free loaders is anti-british - then i guess i must be anti-british.

when was it the british way to fund these peoples lives? I don't remember that.

it is just left wing sentiment that has crept in over the years.

there are a few genuine deservers. but most are just lazy. even the ones who have bad backs and depression. i don't care. get a job. if there was no benefits - THEY WOULD WORK.

erdd2

Sibley wrote: »

I think the UK should completely stop all benefits as from now.
Anyone sick should be taken care of by their family not the taxpayer.

So a legal national contributing Tax and NI for 30 years, has no family and lives alone who has the misfortune to be violently assaulted by someone who has contributed nothing should be left to survive on the £1750 (full stop, not per wk/mth/yr) compensation albeit 6 years on still receiving treatment to legs that were smashed in said assault?

Only one of many examples that the people such as horse are screaming all on benefits are scum....narrowminded mindsets with big gobs hinder progress.

MacMickster

The_White_Horse wrote: »

anti-british views????? laughable. typical hysterical lefty nonsense. if not wanting to pay for thousands of free loaders is anti-british - then i guess i must be anti-british.

when was it the british way to fund these peoples lives? I don't remember that.

it is just left wing sentiment that has crept in over the years.

there are a few genuine deservers. but most are just lazy. even the ones who have bad backs and depression. i don't care. get a job. if there was no benefits - THEY WOULD WORK.

Yes, your views are very anti-British. The British way is about looking after those in our society who are unable to look after themselves. The welfare state is one of our greatest achievments and has been in existence for over 65 years - it has not just crept in. You may be older than the welfare state, but I suspect not. You were probably either born into this society, or else you or your parents chose to move to this country that you so despise.

From an earlier post you suggest that the state should only be responsible for roads, police and a court system. As I said, try moving to Afghanistan where that is about all that the government pays for, and where your views of British society would be more welcome.

I am proud to be British and to live in a society that is more civilised than Afghanistan, where the weak are not left to fend for themselves. If you dislike Britain so much then you are welcome to leave.

heathcote123

MacMickster wrote: »

Yes, your views are very anti-British. The British way is about looking after those in our society who are unable to look after themselves. The welfare state is one of our greatest achievments and has been in existence for over 65 years - it has not just crept in. You may be older than the welfare state, but I suspect not. You were probably either born into this society, or else you or your parents chose to move to this country that you so despise.

From an earlier post you suggest that the state should only be responsible for roads, police and a court system. As I said, try moving to Afghanistan where that is about all that the government pays for, and where your views of British society would be more welcome.

I am proud to be British and to live in a society that is more civilised than Afghanistan, where the weak are not left to fend for themselves. If you dislike Britain so much then you are welcome to leave.

I don't think its really anti-british to hold this view. Self-reliance & pride are also a very british trait.

Most people have no problem whatsoever with people that are genuinly disabled receieveing benefits to a level which lets them have a reasonable lifestyle, but there is no doubting it has been abused massively. I know people 'on the sick' who would have no problem doing a job - and certainly would be doing so if the soft option was not there.

MacMickster

heathcote123 wrote: »

I don't think its really anti-british to hold this view. Self-reliance & pride are also a very british trait.

Most people have no problem whatsoever with people that are genuinly disabled receieveing benefits to a level which lets them have a reasonable lifestyle, but there is no doubting it has been abused massively. I know people 'on the sick' who would have no problem doing a job - and certainly would be doing so if the soft option was not there.

I agree with your balanced views. I have already stated that I believe that anyone who defrauds the welfare system (either by failing to pay their dues into it, or by claiming more than they are genuinely entitled to from it) should be jailed. The welfare state is there for the majority who are able to be self-reliant to support those in genuine need.

As I said to White Horse, if you know someone who is abusing the system then it is your patriotic duty (and duty to me as a taxpayer) to report them so that they can be properly investigated. Bear in mind, however, that not all disabilities are visible, so an investigation may find that some are genuine claimants.

When idiots like White Horse suggest that 98% of benefit claimants are fraudulent and should be made to work however, then they are going far beyond the ideals of self-reliance and pride, and espousing views which are altogether more extreme, and definitely not the British way, but something much nastier.

robpw2

The_White_Horse wrote: »

in the block of flats next door to his, there is this layabout scum (presumably on incapacity benefit) who has never worked in the 5 years i have lived in the area. he just wanders the streets drinking stella and walking his massive dog. why does my .

but could also be a millionaire and choose to live like that ..

milliebear00001

The figures quoted in the OP say far more about the new testing regime, the criteria for qualifying for benefit, and the people carrying out the tests, than they do about claimants.

Some 40% of people who go to appeal, after being found 'fit to work', win their appeal and are given back their benefit. This figure rises to around 70% if they take an advocate (like Shelter/CAB) with them.

Many of the people deemed 'fit to work' will still be unable to actually find/hold-down a job and will simply claim JSA instead.

Just as switching people from the dole to incap/sick/disability etc has always been about juggling figures for political ends, this too is about getting numbers down, rather than helping those who need help.

milliebear00001

The_White_Horse wrote: »

judging from this well thought out and decently written post - I reckon you could work.

work from home.

now you answer me a question - if they actually stopped your benefits and you genuinely had nothing - would you starve to death or would you find some kind of work to get by?

This last question is interesting as of course, we have had exactly that situation in this country, not all that long ago. I would suggest you look back at the past, before there was a welfare state, and look at what the lives of the 'non-working poor' were like then. Certainly, lots of people fought to work, but equally, many (those who were not able to work or could not find work) did starve or freeze on the streets - progress?