The Miracle of St George

globalds

Does anyone think we will ever get away from a large portion of the working population being unemployed ?....For whatever reason ?

grizzly1911

globalds wrote: »

Does anyone think we will ever get away from a large portion of the working population being unemployed ?....For whatever reason ?

IMO not for the foreseeable future. There will remain some high skill niche businesses but they will not employ high numbers.

I also believe the rich poor divide will grow and those in the middle will see their disposable income and expectations erode.

At some point (measured in decades unless something radical is done) we will be able to offer competitive wage acceptance, corporate taxes, working practices but we will have lost our skill base which will take a long time to rebuild.

zagubov

globalds wrote: »

Does anyone think we will ever get away from a large portion of the working population being unemployed ?....For whatever reason ?

As the world gets more mechanised, automated and computerised? We've got to accept that production needs fewer hours of labour input at whatever level to achieve the same ends as before. I amost think work needs to be rationed instead of concentrated into as few hands as it's currently converging.

After all if the economic system doesn't lead to food etc flowing into every household by some means or other, it needs to go under the microscope and be reworked into better shape until it's fit for purpose.

I almost got the impression some were actually arguing whether the people were fit for purpose.:rotfl:

MS1950

Generali wrote: »

900,000 people have decided that they are well enough to work after all now they face being properly tested to see whether or not they can work.

Included in the 900,000 were 30 people with blisters and 60 with acne apparently!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9963012/900000-choose-to-come-off-sickness-benefit-ahead-of-tests.html

It's a miracle I tell you, a miracle. Almost a million people are suddenly well. Beatification and canonization are surely not far away. You normally only need 1 miracle to be beatified, 2 to be a saint.

Over the weekend Conservative Chairman Grant Schapps was busy giving interviews claiming that almost 900,000 claimants had withdrawn their claims rather than undergo the DWP’s ‘Work Capability Assessment’

One link was posted on here as the ‘The Miracle of St George’ thread with the headline “900,000 choose to come off sickness benefit ahead of tests”:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=4525577

while this other link makes it clear that Schapps was the source of what even the Telegraph describes as “a startlingly high number - more than one third of all such claimants”:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...m-the-pub.html

Common sense said it was improbable (whatever one’s views on welfare) but now the source of this “a startlingly high number” seems clear.

Table 1a in the excel spreadsheet on this DWP link gives figures for the overall caseload and status of Employment Support Allowance (the Incapacity Benefit replacement) claims annually, quarterly and monthly from October 2008 to May 2012:

http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/worki...p?page=esa_wca

A column called ‘Closed before assessment’ shows that since October 2008 (out of an overall caseload of around 2.5 million) roughly 20 thousand claims each month are closed before they reach the stage of full assessment.

What Schapps has done is to take the cumulative total of these monthly figures from October 2008 to May 2012 (878,300) to arrive at his claim - peddled to a receptive media - that 900,000 choose to come off sickness benefit ahead of tests.

However, what anyone with any experience of the labour market or an iota of honesty would realize (I’m not sure if Schapps has either), is that these monthly figures for claims that ended before they were called to assessment are part of the normal ‘churn’ of such claims.

If someone has a serious accident or develops a illness – if they are in work they will receive ‘Statutory Sick Pay’ for 6 months after which they would need to claim ESA – and if they were unemployed they would need to claim ESA immediately as they could no longer sign on as ‘available for work’ to get JSA.

But people recover from such things (or die) and so their claim ends before the bureaucratic machinery of the DWP call them in for an assessment (there is a big backlog).

And the only research into ‘Closed or withdrawn ESA claims’ (conducted by DWP) concluded:

“Customers reported a number of reasons why their ESA claims had ended before being assessed: for some this was a conscious decision, for others it was less so. Many people taking part in the research reported that their health condition had improved and their claim for ESA was no longer relevant: they either pro-actively told Jobcentre Plus they wanted to withdraw their ESA claim, or stopped sending in medical certificates or did not return the ESA50 form in the knowledge that Jobcentre Plus would close their claim”

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd...12/rrep762.pdf (page 41)

None of which supports Schapps deliberate deceit that this cumulative 878,300 were long term claimants who suddenly decided they were ‘better’ when they were called in for a test (or justifies the sneering comments about ‘miraculous' recoveries that some posted on this site).

We are (sadly) used to politicians ‘spinning’ statistics to suit their purposes but I would suggest that this goes beyond ‘spin’ and is such a misrepresentation and distortion of the truth that it is better described as a deliberate lie.

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

So I think we have some agreement. The figures rose quickly under the Tories to try to reduce the unemployment figures. The Blair Government did nothing to address the situation as it also suited their needs.

So this is a long overdue change.

I think I can agree with that, it is a pity about Grant's rant

Grant Shapps, the Conservative Party chairman, said the old system was “evil” and accused Labour of using sickness benefits to “hide the unemployed” when the party was in power.

grizzly1911

StevieJ wrote: »

I think I can agree with that, it is a pity about Grant's rant

I find it disturbing how someone like him is allowed out on his own.

MS1950

grizzly1911 wrote: »

I find it disturbing how someone like him is allowed out on his own.

Like many conmen Schapps might get away with it for a while - but I think the Tories might come to regret putting this lightweight spiv in charge of their 're-election' strategy.....

globalds

zagubov wrote: »

As the world gets more mechanised, automated and computerised? We've got to accept that production needs fewer hours of labour input at whatever level to achieve the same ends as before. I amost think work needs to be rationed instead of concentrated into as few hands as it's currently converging.

After all if the economic system doesn't lead to food etc flowing into every household by some means or other, it needs to go under the microscope and be reworked into better shape until it's fit for purpose.

I almost got the impression some were actually arguing whether the
people were fit for purpose.:rotfl:

I have to admit it was probably me straying away from the original post with my question ?
I can see how having 2 doctors sharing the same wage would probably be better for everyone ..just the doctor would have to do a few more years work before being able to spend all his afternoons on the golf course.
But jobs are funny ..most are not really that easy to split ..Sharing power and glory sucks.
It is becoming a case of how you distribute wealth rather than how you delegate labour ..Trickle down was never really going to work ..It is always going to be a buyers market with rich being able to squeeze ever more out of the low paid persons tasked to do the stuff.
On a positive note ..I think there is a direct link between recycling and lack of welfare ..All those homeless cherry picking the rubbish for bottles and cans will be good for our European directives on reducing land fill ..

MS1950

Generali wrote: »

So I think we have some agreement. The figures rose quickly under the Tories to try to reduce the unemployment figures. The Blair Government did nothing to address the situation as it also suited their needs.

So this is a long overdue change.

Again not true - this paper from one of the main researchers in this field summaries the welfare reforms under Labour from 1997 - 2010 - including introducing the 'Work Capability Assessment' (and contracting ATOS to carry it out) - it's a fairly balanced summary of their 'successes' and 'failures'....:

http://extra.shu.ac.uk/ppp-online/issue_1_260410/documents/welfare_work_time_rethink.pdf

BobQ

globalds wrote: »

Does anyone think we will ever get away from a large portion of the working population being unemployed ?....For whatever reason ?

No unemployment is one of the methods government uses to ensure a ready supply of cheap labour. It deters wage demands and makes it easier for employers to keep the staff they want and recruit better people.