MSE News: 'I'm on benefits but I'm no scrounger'

Dunroamin

dktreesea wrote: »

The worst thing about Britain is the way the government limits peoples access to a decent higher education. Not enough college places or university places, most people priced out of the market for a university degree, not because of the fees, (which are deferred and may never get paid back if the person never earns sufficiently to trigger a repayment) but because no one can afford to live on the miserly stipend students of limited means get these days. They freely acknowledge that having someone on the dole for a protracted length of time is quite an expensive exercise, yet they refuse to invest in that person for a limited period of time to enable them to get the skills they need to be a productive member of society. .

Actually, many lone parents and disabled people who are benefits are better off living on student finance, which is quite generous these days. There are many opportunities for part time study for those working on a low wage.

We've already expanded HE so that almost 40% of the population can go - how much lower do you think standards should fall to allow more people access?

gadgetmind

Here is a learned discourse on this particular subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Red_Hen

Discuss.

john539

gadgetmind wrote: »

Here is a learned discourse on this particular subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Red_Hen

Discuss.

Is it relevant to this thread ?

Maybe start another thread.

gadgetmind

john539 wrote: »

Is it relevant to this thread ?

Yes, yes, and thrice yes!

poppy10_2

gadgetmind wrote: »

Yes, yes, and thrice yes!

Not really.

lanza

gadgetmind wrote: »

Here is a learned discourse on this particular subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Red_Hen

Discuss.

Over simplified

Those types of moral scenarios only work for the simple situations in which they are framed. Try throwing in reality and things are somewhat different.

i.e. The hen is seen as good here, in reality large production is often the result of greed and selfishness by those who develop better mindsets for taking control of resources. i.e. Tax evasion, our current banking crisis is not criticized too heavily as we understand its a side effect of this mindset.

Likewise with wars of stupidity from leaders, then indebt the nations and populations further, traditionally asking members to die for these missions, while those who start them are expected not to fight or to send their offspring to do so.

At the other end the chaos that starvation causes also leads to war social upheaval at some stage.

SO no food production does not transfer to a nations economics. If anything the food producers themselves are not of a similar mindset to those who now run production. Food producers are prey to them and have problems surviving. i.e. the reality of control of resources is somewhat different from your example.

Humans have a genetic propensity to want to enslave each other. Its just part of how our brain works. Future technology in the next 50 years is predicted to automate production of almost all we require, arising from quantum computing, robotics and nano technology. That can make most product we require as free as the air we breathe. In theory anyway. Perhaps some of you are familiar with these ideas. They are very popular in academia just now and are based on hard science.

Do you think that will really work ? i.e. WE will not be trying to enslave each other in some other manner for almost every waking hour the sun shines ? Impossible, it does not matter how much we have or what we can produce humans have a desire to form an ingroup to enslave another group of people to work for us. Entire areas of the brain are dedicated just to that purpose.

What did you think war, racism, religion, slavery and the conservative and liberal politics which marks out the struggle of this process, just appears like magic from nowhere generation after generation, century after century, millennium after millennium in almost every population in the world by just random co-incidence ?

To prevent that tendency to enslave each other, we would have to have re-design our brain, although that is also predicted as possible but probably not in our lifetime.

lanza

However having said all that which is perhaps a little too off track for most to handle, i am not trying to avoid denial that there are the workshy who are really just at it. However they are the ones who would be easiest to put into action than the real disabled but only over the long term after every game has been stripped away from them.

In the short term it is easier to put the genuinely incapable to work, thrash them into poorer health, and harder to deal with those who are intractable mindset. So this is why we see this in action right now where the employment workfare follow the path of least resistance and pressure the weakest members more. Tell them they are well when clearly they are not.

"A society is ultimately judged by how it treats its weakest and most vulnerable members".

Do you like the idea of regressing to an india or china ?

Politicians who have any ethics and of a finer mind know that they have slavemasters lining up at their doors who will thrash the weakest into an early grave, and let the stronger work resistant slip by (as they require too much resources). THAT is why this matter is such a hot debate in the house of Lords, but less so in the house of commons. Not that elected MP's do not have ethics, but they are under such pressure it is a harder job to afford them.

dktreesea

Dunroamin wrote: »

Actually, many lone parents and disabled people who are benefits are better off living on student finance, which is quite generous these days. There are many opportunities for part time study for those working on a low wage.

We've already expanded HE so that almost 40% of the population can go - how much lower do you think standards should fall to allow more people access?

Perhaps we should recruit better primary and secondary school teachers - the ones I have encountered to date seem to be half quite good and well up to the challenge and the other half doing as little as possible - no homework, can't engage the class so resorts to sarcasm and/or shouting, described by the students as boring. Then maybe we could improve the quality of the education the students are receiving at primary and high school, thus ensuring they will be able to cope with a higher education.

Is only allowing 40% of the population access to higher education something we should aspire to?

dktreesea

krisskross wrote: »

I don't think people are necessarily 'snippy' about people with BB badges. There is however undoubtedly a lot of abuse in the scheme.

What I dislike is posters insisting that they have to face a barrage of abuse everytime they use theirs. I simply do not believe it.

I suspect the people who are snippy about it are people who consider they are sufficiently disabled to get one but haven't, so far, convinced a doctor to support their case for getting one.

There does seem to be some inconsistency when it comes to deciding who gets a disabled parking badge, and maybe this is what makes a few people see red when they see someone they consider sufficiently able bodied not to need one using it. the lady across the road from us has had hers for 20 years. What happens to people who gradually improve/get better over time? Do you have to go for a new physical every year or so, to see if you can keep your badge, or is it a case of once you have it , it's yours for life?

dktreesea

triplefire wrote: »

Honestly, didn't you read the guy's story? He has repeatedly tried to get work but employers won't consider him because of his tumour. That's the reality.

Anger at fraudsters is logical, but how on earth can a human being say they are tired of people with genuine disabilities complaining about the (far from generous) benefits in the UK?

Are you unable to play with your children because of pain?

Are you afraid to say what you do (or, more accurately, can't do) because people might misunderstand?

Do you face many more expenses than others because of your disability? I am employed part-time, get the DLA and disabled tax credits, but I pay far more than able-bodied people in taxis, special equipment etc. I also have a more restricted life and, since my rare bone conditions worsened, have had to take a job that pays much less and is far more junior than previous employment.

The many people in this country who seem to be against all disabled folks now disgust me. What do you propose to do with us? No wonder Martin says he was "surprised" by the comments. Is he in fact disgusted too?

Think about it. I'm sure you're puffed up with "British fairness" and other national delusions. This is far from fair.

It's not a matter of being against disabled people. Benefits are meant to provide a basic standard of living. Why should having a disability mean that an unemployed disabled person gets £19 a week more than an able bodied unemployed person? We have created a system whereby it's financially rewarding to be assessed disabled. That is madness. Look at the incredibly expensive assessment monster (ATOS) it has spawned.

The benefits system is meant to provide an income to meet basic needs. Surely both the able bodied and the disabled have the same needs for food, a warm home, suitable clothing, sufficient money to buy a bus ticket now and then, a telephone? I would even go so far as to say internet and TV are essential nowadays. They are both capable of having a positive effect on people's mental health. Why should being able bodied mean you get at least a third less to meet your basic needs than a disabled person would get?

Regarding taxis, plenty of disabled people use the public transport system. If there are people who have needs beyond what the benefit stretches to, then special arrangements could be made for them. As it is, even if the person is sufficiently disabled to get the add on benefits, there is then a huge incentive thereafter to not heal/get well/improve one's condition, because people don't want to lose the disability benefit. And no wonder. The basic benefit really isn't enough for anyone to live on.