MSE News: George Osborne to make £10bn welfare cuts

mazza111

krisskross wrote: »

No idea, but then I am not well educated enough to understand all this grown up stuff:rotfl: Higher Diploma is the most I can manage, bit pathetic for the erudite company I find myself in here.

I do however believe that those who have paid in the most should receive the most if they need to claim support payments. We used to have a system like this many years ago I seem to remember. It cannot be just that someone can work and pay all the dues expected of them for decades but still only get the same amount as a career claimant who has never worked or has worked just token amounts.

How can it be an Insurance system if loads of people never pay any premiums but get the same benefits as those who do?

How about the disabled people who can't work and can't pay in. Shall we just shoot them?

Everyone knows there are people out there milking the system, unfortunately it's the sick and disabled who are being targeted by ATOS and the government. By all means find the shirkers among them, but the WCA is a sham from start to finish. By all means bring in medicals for people on sickness/disability benefits, but let's make them them fair assessments. Not something like an episode from Little Britain - Computer says no! Common sense should be applied to these assessments. When it was the old IB they done occasional medicals. There didn't seem to be the same uproar when these were done as there is now that ATOS are doing them. I have to ask myself why. Is it because they are more often or is it because the WCA test isn't fit for purpose? I believe the latter. I'm all for the sick and disabled receiving assessments, but we must make them fair and honest assessments. There have been so many accusations of ATOS lying on the assessments there has to be some truth in it. I had my doubts until it happened to my dd, then the lies and the twisting of the truth left me astounded!


I thanked mum's post simply because I did agree with certain parts of it.

But to say you have to pay in before you can take out is stupidity of the greatest degree. There are many disabled people who can and will never hold down a job. These are the people as a society we should be looking after. Or shall we go back to the old days and throw them in asylums and forget they exist?

It really is staggering that someone who's husband is disabled/infirm enough to qualify for AA can have no compassion for other disabled people or is it simply because he paid in that you feel he's entitled to it? I look at a kid down the street when I see posts like this, he'll never work due to severe learning disabilities and a physical disability and thank the system that we've got here in this country, that he will never be thrown in an asylum or hidden away, he's a lovely kid, but will never contribute to the pot, but he brings a smile to the faces of so many, he's a charming young man.

I doubt my dd will ever work again. She's still rapidly deteriorating despite all the physio she's going through daily. I still hope, but have serious doubts. Maybe I should just shoot her now to save the likes of the bigots on here some cash.

princessdon

But why should people who never worked (or worked for a short time and got more out than in by a huge multiplier) get the same as someone who put in loads?

I understand what Mazz11 says - but as your DD hasn't contributed I don't think they should get as much as someone who gives £1000,s a month.

End of the day £107 pw is enough (plus other benefits) - to give them MORE than those who worked is ridiculous and will lead to pensions being a benefit rather than their intention of looking after those to old to work.

I believe there should be at least 4 gradings.

Never worked (but able)
Worked but claimed more than worked or unable to work
Worked and paid some
Worked and paid a lot

I am not saying the difference needs to be huge. Even if it was £10 a month - the message is that to work will give a better return.

At the moment you have this

Pensioner A - never worked gets Pension Credit and HB, CT etc with £1000,s in savings
Pensioner B - Worked all their life and due to getting say £1 a month over the limit (ie £1 a month LESS than Pensioner A), pays their own rent and their own CT (so hundereds a month worse off), all because they saved into a pension as opposed to saving in a bank.


I am sure everyone thinks this needs addressing.


I also think I won't get a Pension - Can't see it being around for me at all, it will become a benefit - not an Insurance Scheme.

I think this will happen within 10 years and seeing that I have 28 years before I retire feel fairly sure it will be a case of - sort yourself out when you retire!

mazza111

Small correction PD hon. She worked when she was able. From the age of 16-20....

She's not a never worked. She's a has been to work, albeit for a short time. And she's still hoping to get back to it. Whereas the wee disabled lad down the street will be a never has, never will. I just don't think people should be punished for being unable to work.

I do understand where you're coming from with this, but it would cost a lot to implement imo.

Where do you get the figure of £107 from? Is that the pension rate? It's ample IMO. I have no experience of benefits hon, I only see what my dd has had to go through to get them. She's still fighting to get ESA. And my own XP in the last 18 months since I was retired from work. As I've said, I've worked all my life, it's just recently that I can't. Even when I was retired I tried to find work, it's since the latest accident that I have been totally unable. About 8 months.....


Let's sort out the shirkers from work. I mean the job centre aren't even checking if jobs have been applied for unless it's one they've suggested. One lass I know has put down that she applied for Sky every time she's signed on for the last year.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like nothing better than the shirkers to get caught out. But the way that this is being implemented at the moment, it's putting people off claiming benefits for fear of being labelled a scrounger. My dd didn't even want to claim DLA for the same reason. Or use the mobility scooter in the local supermarket for fear of people laughing at her or taking the proverbial. After months of persuading, she applied, she started using the scooter at the supermarket, only to have one of my son's friends laugh at her, well to say I could have wrapped her crutches round his neck is a mega understatement!

I'd really love to stop this hatred towards the disabled. It's shocking that they are treated this way in this day and age. It's saddening that there is still this bigotry.

Mara69

Problem with the whole disability thing is that there a LOT of claimants that aren't quite as poorly as they'd have us believe.

Dunroamin

mazza111 wrote: »

How about the disabled people who can't work and can't pay in. Shall we just shoot them?

Everyone knows there are people out there milking the system, unfortunately it's the sick and disabled who are being targeted by ATOS and the government. By all means find the shirkers among them, but the WCA is a sham from start to finish. By all means bring in medicals for people on sickness/disability benefits, but let's make them them fair assessments. Not something like an episode from Little Britain - Computer says no! Common sense should be applied to these assessments. When it was the old IB they done occasional medicals. There didn't seem to be the same uproar when these were done as there is now that ATOS are doing them. I have to ask myself why. Is it because they are more often or is it because the WCA test isn't fit for purpose? I believe the latter. I'm all for the sick and disabled receiving assessments, but we must make them fair and honest assessments. There have been so many accusations of ATOS lying on the assessments there has to be some truth in it. I had my doubts until it happened to my dd, then the lies and the twisting of the truth left me astounded!


I thanked mum's post simply because I did agree with certain parts of it.

But to say you have to pay in before you can take out is stupidity of the greatest degree. There are many disabled people who can and will never hold down a job. These are the people as a society we should be looking after. Or shall we go back to the old days and throw them in asylums and forget they exist?

It really is staggering that someone who's husband is disabled/infirm enough to qualify for AA can have no compassion for other disabled people or is it simply because he paid in that you feel he's entitled to it? I look at a kid down the street when I see posts like this, he'll never work due to severe learning disabilities and a physical disability and thank the system that we've got here in this country, that he will never be thrown in an asylum or hidden away, he's a lovely kid, but will never contribute to the pot, but he brings a smile to the faces of so many, he's a charming young man.

I doubt my dd will ever work again. She's still rapidly deteriorating despite all the physio she's going through daily. I still hope, but have serious doubts. Maybe I should just shoot her now to save the likes of the bigots on here some cash.

It seems obvious to me that there's a middle ground between not looking after those who've been unable to work and contribute and putting them in a better position then those who have. People may disagree about where this point should be but it must be between the two extremes.

mazza111

krisskross wrote: »

Why do you take all comments so personally and drag up my husband's circumstances every chance you get?

At least I don't mention him in every post I make. I don't go on until everyone is totally glassy eyed and thinking 'Oh god not this again'. And why is she a dd? What on earth is wrong with the word daughter? You literally spam every thread you can about her. You sound like someone with Munchausens by proxy except you just write about it.

You have posted many times that you were dealt with fairly and given the correct result from the WCA you have personal experience of. So explain why and how you are convinced atos are unfairly targetting the sick and disabled.

Most of our income is from pensions we paid into of our own volition. In fact my private pension is 4 times greater than my SRP.

I use your husbands circumstances as you are so keen to see everyone as a scrounger, when you as you've said are on benefits yourself. Pot and kettle springs to mind. You come across as a bitter and twisted person.


Munchausens by proxy:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: Hilarious. Are you going to pick up on every abbreviation used on forums now? DD is the norm on these forums in case you haven't noticed. Why do I use my DD as an example? Because it's happened to her, it's where we've seen the underhand twisting of ATOS.

I have seen the evidence first hand of ATOS twisting EVERYTHING that's been said during a WCA. Would you like me to go through her medical here and pick up all the lies in it? I'm sure you could go through my posts and you will see them.

I have no trouble stating they dealt with me fairly when I had dealings with them both within RM and with DWP. But I did see a doctor who fully examined me. My dd wasn't examined at all and her condition wasn't mentioned at all. I have seen the report. You haven't. It's full of lies and inconsistencies.

And no you won't shut me up about it, because I see it as very unfair the way she's been treated by them and currently being treated by society.

I really don't care where you get your money from. You're stating you've got private pensions, does that mean you're of the belief you don't need the AA or are you just claiming because you're entitled to it?

Double edged sword there, hypocrite.

Mara, I do agree with you on that one. There are also a lot who are worse than they let on, because they don't want interference from authorities.

mazza111

Dunroamin wrote: »

It seems obvious to me that there's a middle ground between not looking after those who've been unable to work and contribute and putting them in a better position then those who have. People may disagree about where this point should be but it must be between the two extremes.

I agree with you Dunroamin. No they shouldn't be in a better financial position than someone who's working. But they need to be looked after.

krisskross

mazza111 wrote: »

I use your husbands circumstances as you are so keen to see everyone as a scrounger, when you as you've said are on benefits yourself. Pot and kettle springs to mind. You come across as a bitter and twisted person.

I am fully in favour of state support for those who are truly disabled and unable to work. My stance on the matter has never changed.

However 'disabled' is not synonymous with 'unable to work' is it? The very word 'disabled' has been so abused that it doesn't mean a great deal anymore.

As for my husband you can call him a scrounger all you like, if I could be bothered to tell him he would laugh his head off.

I still think you have Munchausens....you appear to live your life, on these boards anyway, solely about your daughter's ailments.

ETA: I have decided you must be a reincarnation of cit-k with your rantings about Atos.

mazza111

krisskross wrote: »

I am fully in favour of state support for those who are truly disabled and unable to work. My stance on the matter has never changed.

However 'disabled' is not synonymous with 'unable to work' is it? The very word 'disabled' has been so abused that it doesn't mean a great deal anymore.

As for my husband you can call him a scrounger all you like, if I could be bothered to tell him he would laugh his head off.

I still think you have Munchausens....you appear to live your life, on these boards anyway, solely about your daughter's ailments.

ETA: I have decided you must be a reincarnation of cit-k with your rantings about Atos.

Excuse me, I have never called anyone a scrounger, it's a word you seem to use a lot when talking of others though. I have no objection to anyone who has a disability/illness getting the help they need. I just find it hypocritical of YOU, who likes to try and run everyone else down for claiming benefits when you claim them yourself.


I have already posted on why I post about my dd. It's where my experiences lie with ATOS. As for munchausens :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: My dd is a big part of my life, obviously, because she's disabled and can't do for herself. I have backed ATOS on when they get it right, I have no qualms about doing that. But for you to deny then get it wrong. You are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Would it help you if I told you my mother is also disabled with the same condition (among others) but doesn't need a medical with ATOS as she's over the age of receiving ESA. I have other friends and family who have had dealings with them too, and I'd say about 70% of the time they do get the decision right, yes even those who have been found fit for work, but the ones they get wrong, and they do get them wrong, which is something you don't seem to want to accept, they are getting wrong due to lying and twisting what the applicant says. And all the friends (former colleagues mainly) who've seen ATOS agree in saying the deal with RM much differently than they do with benefit claimants.

I have no idea who cit-k is, but should you care to check, you will find that I have this nick in most forums I use. No AE here, I am who I am

Again you should read what is written, I have no objections whatsoever of an assessment/medical being done for those who are on ESA or DLA or AA. What I would like is fair and honest assessments throughout the board. And for bigots to stop treating the disabled with the disdain that they do, especially on these forums.

MUMZ2BEE

Mara69 wrote: »

Clemmatis - I think we will have to agree to disagree.

Glad we both agree, however, that Mumz has demonstrated her racism, xenophobia and ignorance.

For your information I am NOT racist, but this country DOES have too many immigrants that takes away jobs for British people.

Secondly I do have qualifications, thank you very much!!

David Cameron doesnt know what every day life consist of; he doesnt have to worry about paying the bills or having debt.

And David Cameron doesnt know how hard life is on benefits!!

And YOU seem to have a bad attitude!!