Welfare Reform

FireWyrm

Depth_Charge wrote: »

Hi

Its been a good and perhaps a little heated at times debate but nothing wrong with that, its how open forums should be.

I asked for comments on this and got them so only fair to give you the last word in this particular joust between us.

Catch you again sometime maybe:)

DC

Nothing wrong with debate. I have to go to work tomorrow (today), so I'll bow out of this one.

BillJones

hohum wrote: »

'No-one is starving'

But admissions to hospital for malnutrition have tripled in last three years, whilst food bank use rises.

Why are you conflating malnutrition with under-nutrition?

hohum

BillJones wrote: »

Why are you conflating malnutrition with under-nutrition?

Read the article? Malnutrition also includes under nutrition and is indicative of food poverty.

Wikipedia explains malnutrition as:

Malnutrition is the condition that results from eating a diet in which certain nutrients are lacking, in excess (too high in intake), or in the wrong proportions.[1][2] The verb form is "malnourish"; "malnourishment" is sometimes used instead of "malnutrition". A number of different nutrition disorders may arise, depending on which nutrients are under- or over-abundant in the diet. In most of the world, malnutrition is present in the form of under-nutrition, which is caused by a diet lacking adequate calories and protein[3][4] —not enough food, and of poor quality. Extreme undernourishment is starvation, and its symptoms and effects are inanition. While malnutrition is more common in less-developed countries, it is also present in industrialized countries. In wealthier nations it is more likely to be caused by unhealthy diets with excess energy, fats, and refined carbohydrates. A growing trend of obesity is now a major public health concern in lower socio-economic levels and in developing countries as well.[5]
----

An unhealthy diet is quite likely to be a result of food insecurity. Poverty is a major factor in food insecurity.

A large part of the rise in admissions for malnutrition is to do with gaps in social care re provision for elderly. But I also think it is unwise to disregard the effects of benefit sanctions & bedroom tax, along with the evidence of organisations who deal with the repercussions of these ideologically motivated reforms on people's lives.

BillJones

hohum wrote: »

Read the article? Malnutrition also includes under nutrition and is indicative of food poverty.

But it includes other things as well, so you can't use malnutrition data as evidence of starvation.

It's the same as arguing that road deaths have increased but then pointing to the "deaths and serious injuries" number as proof.

Counting those who eat badly in the "starvation" data is simply dishonest.

hohum

BillJones wrote: »

But it includes other things as well, so you can't use malnutrition data as evidence of starvation.

It's the same as arguing that road deaths have increased but then pointing to the "deaths and serious injuries" number as proof.

Counting those who eat badly in the "starvation" data is simply dishonest.

I didn't say anyone was starving. I said that admissions to hospital from malnutrition have tripled in the past three years. I posted a link to an article where this was discussed further.

Malnutrition is an indication of food insecurity. It's not misleading or dishonest to state this. Malnutrition arises from inadequate nutrition. This is down to not getting enough nutritious food regularly. Malnutrition should be a public health concern, and personally I think it's pretty abhorrent to have people reliant on food donations in what is an extremely affluent society. There is no need for people not to be getting enough food regularly. To me, it's enough that people are malnourished for there to be concern.

OK I will repeat. There are people in this country who are not getting enough nutritious food to eat. There are people in this country who do not know where their next meal will come from. This is not starvation, it is also not acceptable. The number of people experiencing the effects of poor nutrition in the last three years has increased by at least three times, based on hospital admissions. Now either we have a pandemic of people who can't manage their own needs or we need to look at environmental and contextual causes. One thing that will affect people's access to adequate nutrition is money. The most vulnerable in society are affected by changes in welfare and social care. Of which there happens to have been a fair bit of change over the last three years.

I don't know why it's so hard to accept this. Pretending that this is not a problem - 'well they're not starving' - does not change reality of people going hungry as a result of political decisions.

BigMummaF

When the Benefits Agency tells you that housing costs--mortgage/rent, council tax & utilities in that order--have priority over anything else you have to pay, the only area left available to make "cut backs" to fund their rising costs, is Food.

When your cash is stretched that far you have no option but to go for the cheapest of cheap choices, so cases of Malnutrition will increase when you can have spuds OR veg with your tin of soopa-value mince & gravy, particularly if that is your only meal of the day.

I am not knocking value products here--I use plenty myself--but even they have to be bought. I don't think there is any allowance made for "intolerance" so if you're allergic to cheap toiletries & soap powders..you are well & truly stuffed

Much is made of claimants having mobiles, motors & broadband, but the Job$entre expects you to have them as a standard requirement to enable instant contact & a willingness to travel. OK satellite TV is obviously a luxury, along with the cigs, booze, etc but don't begrudge those who have worked hard while they had a job, & got nice things for their family.


Like they say, walk a mile in their shoes...or rather, live six months in their circumstances before painting all Benefit Claimants as leeching parasites not worthy of a second thought!

fatbelly

I saw an interesting comment on another forum about the role of the media in the 'divide and rule' tactic employed in Welfare Reform, which I would like to lodge here.

People are ill-informed and ignorant. They get their information from the various media, newspapers and TV news. Few dig any deeper to unearth the real facts and so are subject to the propaganda fed to the press by the DWP and other ministers.

We have politicians who have lied furiously in Parliament and to the public since May 2010. Thanks to the lazy, supine and vested interests of the media, this has gone unchallenged. Even journalists constantly get their benefits mixed up and can't tell their ESA from their DLA. We have a constant stream of negative media portrayals of those on any kind of benefit - except pensioners, of course. Yet some of the largest amount of fraud in the benefit system is carried out by pensioners claiming pension credits they are not entitled to. More than 3 times the fraud rate of DLA, for example.

We have a corrupt and mendacious government. But it is ably supported by a corrupt and mendacious media, serving the interests of its owners.

The BBC has been outstanding only in its refusal to even mention many of the disastrous policies and their outcomes on the sick and disabled.
The Daily Mail has contributed in large part to the rise in hate crimes against the disabled by consistently portraying everyone as a fraud. Its appalling reporting on changes to disability benefits was even mentioned in the Leveson report.

And Murdoch is still a willing mouthpiece for the demise of the welfare state. He is now pursuing exactly the same policy in Australia, having helped elect the Abbott government. Unsurprisingly, the same tactics are being used there as here, to discredit those on sickness benefits.

The world of divide and rule is the politician's tool. But it is the media that is its messenger.

Growurown

fatbelly wrote: »

I saw an interesting comment on another forum about the role of the media in the 'divide and rule' tactic employed in Welfare Reform, which I would like to lodge here.

Yes I think a lot of this general ill feeling towards benefit claimants is generated by the likes of the Daily Fail and programmes like Benefits Street etc. Working with benefits claimants every day I see the problems they face, the barriers that stop them from getting work, and the stress they are under trying to make their money last. I'm not surprised a lot of them smoke. It's a great stress reliever I find.

When they tell me about the things they have had to endure in their past, the difficulties they are currently facing it doesn't surprise me (again) that finding work is not their top priority. I'm sure there will be hard working tax payers out there who will say that these are just excuses to sponge off them and the state, but until the difficulties that claimants face are addressed the situation is not going to change.

Growurown

Zero hour contracts are in the news again.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27289148

'Jobseekers risk losing their benefits if they turn down certain zero-hours contracts without good reason, the government has said.'

Depth_Charge

Hi

Interesting recent articles from Inside Housing & The Guardian on delays to universal credit / Major Project Authorities (MPA) annual assessment.

Arguably a touch controversial subject with plenty of mileage still left in it

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/regulation/delays-to-universal-credit-lead-watchdog-to-rate-it-as-a-new-project/7003876.article

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/23/universal-credit-reset-iain-duncan-smith

My opinions

DC