Channel 4 9pm

dori2o

Dunroamin wrote: »

My comments were in response to another poster's who was talking about the difficulty disabled people using wheelchairs and scooters have in accessing public transport.

Far too many people seem to think that only those in wheelchairs are disabled.

Apoligies. Fair point, well made!!

liam8282

schrodie wrote: »

The problem with all of that is not everyone lives in cities(there are I think 50 in the UK) and given that disability is not confined to those who live in cities this fact could be a problem when it comes to accessible public transport for the disabled. Also not all taxis are wheelchair accessible as they are more expensive for the cabbie to buy also not everywhere in the country is served by a train service.

I think I am missing the point you are trying to get at here.

The scenario which you are describing, where there is no disabled public transport must be a very specific place and must only effect a limited number of people, who cannot use any public transport at all.

Fair enough, if you live in the Scottish Highlands you may struggle with Public Transport, but that would be the same for everybody, disabled or not.

Again, it just sounds like making excuses and arguing for the sake of it to me.

dori2o

liam8282 wrote: »

I think I am missing the point you are trying to get at here.

The scenario which you are describing, where there is no disabled public transport must be a very specific place and must only effect a limited number of people, who cannot use any public transport at all.

Fair enough, if you live in the Scottish Highlands you may struggle with Public Transport, but that would be the same for everybody, disabled or not.

Again, it just sounds like making excuses and arguing for the sake of it to me.

Thats not the point though.

Despite the fact there is accessible PT in our area I still can't use it for travelling if the journey is going to take more than 20/25 minutes, or if I need to transfer from one bus/tram to another, and not at all if there is no place to sit.

PT is too cramped. I have to sit with my leg outstretched so automatically that impedes everyone no matter which seat I sit in. To sit with my leg bent for any significant amount of time means my leg swells up like a baloon and the already severe pain I am in increases.

This reduces mobility, causes severe pain, and could (and has) led to the need to take time off work due to it.

It's the same with trams, and until the rules regarding the use of mobility scooters on trams in Manchester changes then they are also not a suitable method of transport for everyday use.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has these issues, and many more will have other conditions which have their own problems when it comes to PT.

schrodie

liam8282 wrote: »

I think I am missing the point you are trying to get at here.

The scenario which you are describing, where there is no disabled public transport must be a very specific place and must only effect a limited number of people, who cannot use any public transport at all.

Fair enough, if you live in the Scottish Highlands you may struggle with Public Transport, but that would be the same for everybody, disabled or not.

Again, it just sounds like making excuses and arguing for the sake of it to me.

I'm not arguing for that sake of arguing and certainly not making excuses (I don't need to) I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies in what your saying that's all.

For example you said:-

I would say with some confidence that most cities have disabled access buses, trains, taxis.

Which maybe up to a point is true although you're assuming that all cities have the same standard of disabled friendly public transport. Incidentally you don't need to live in the Highlands of Scotland to experience poor standards of public transport as far as disabled access is concerned. I live in a reasonably large [English] town and assure you the majority of buses are not disabled friendly and I think we have two wheelchair accessible [Black Cab] taxis and I'm fairly sure this town is by no means unique in these matters.

So yes I think you are missing the point!!

abudabi

Dunroamin wrote: »

And now we have many people working in call centres where they sit (and can stand occasionally) all day and speak on the telephone., something most physically disabled people can do.

yea great self-esteem? also most are now farmed out to india or wherever, they get a couple of rupees, good for disabled??? i don't think so

schrodie

Dunroamin wrote: »

And now we have many people working in call centres where they sit (and can stand occasionally) all day and speak on the telephone., something most physically disabled people can do.

Assuming that there's a call centre in your locale and that the employer is willing to take on a disabled person with perhaps their associated needs in terms of adaptations to the workplace.

Such as:-

rogerblack

abudabi wrote: »

yea great self-esteem? also most are now farmed out to india or wherever, they get a couple of rupees, good for disabled??? i don't think so

This is also one place where the minimum wage kicks in.
If you must pay a worker £6/hr, disabled or not - and that disabled worker can work at 1/2 the rate of a non-disabled one - which one will you make the effort to employ?

The above mentioned robot cleaners are the tip of a very, very, very scary iceberg.

Will skilled fit healthy intelligent people be able to find work - certainly.
Those with any disability - up to and including being a bit thick - are going to face an extremely challenging future when warehouse jobs get reduced by increasing automation, retail falls off with the increasing use of the internet, automatic driving cars come in, automatic delivery rises.

A laid-off cleaner is not going to get a new job programming robots.

SandraScarlett

I thought that the last 5 minutes were the most revealing. The widower (Bill?) was asked if only one person out of the 3 of them featured could get benefits, who did he think that should be.

Straight away he said "the young feller here", and immediately Karen, who had every nail painted a different colour, piped up, shrilly, "but what about me?" as she obviously felt she was the most deserving!

Perhaps more people with a "Bill" in their family, will decide to contact him more frequently. Perhaps more employers will offer jobs to people like "the young feller". But I suspect Karen's attitude will do more to irritate people and fuel the benefits debate than a million words.

xx

JS477

SandraScarlett wrote: »

I thought that the last 5 minutes were the most revealing. The widower (Bill?) was asked if only one person out of the 3 of them featured could get benefits, who did he think that should be.

Straight away he said "the young feller here", and immediately Karen, who had every nail painted a different colour, piped up, shrilly, "but what about me?" as she obviously felt she was the most deserving!

This may have been due to the mindset some people have that because they've worked for X years they're therefore entitled to Y. You see this a lot on benefits forums where the overriding query when someone e.g. finds out they they're pregnant is "what am I entitled to".

You can't really blame some people for having this mindset when they've been told that your NICs will protect you in later life should you fall too sick to work. However the tories have began to dismantle that principle.

nannytone_2

dori2o wrote: »

So if you don't use one of these methods of mobilising you have no excuse for not being able to commute to work or be able to maintain employment despite your disability?

so only wheelchair users find public transport difficult to access?

what about those with learning disabilities?
those with mental health conditions?
those who are visually impaired or blind?

to get anywhere from where i live, i would have to use a busy interchange.
trying that during peak times would be almost impossible.