The thing about a nuclear deterrent, a bomb dropped in Russia, China, USA India or Pakistan will devestate a small part of their country. But we are a small island. Manchester Birmingham and London would take out most of our population.
My understanding is that devastation is not controlled, and will cause damage that lasts possibly thousands of Earth years. The notion that there is any kind of controlled Nuclear War is rubbish in my view, nuclear arsenal's exist that can wipe out the planet several times over.
It's that old canard - the deserving and the undeserving poor. People are happy for welfare and other safety net provisions by the state to go to those who "deserve" it. Benefit cheats fall into the "undeserving" category. But there is no definition of who is deserving and who is not with all of the welfare systems being based on need and eligibility. Someone who is minded to cheat the system still has to be determined to be in need and eligible. Agencies that administer such things are working to ensure this is the case.
It's not about the deserving and the undeserving poor at all; and if it were then I would suggest that deserving is merely a synonym for eligible.
Most of my points have been about disability benefits, ESA and DLA respectively. In which case there's a very clear definition of who is eligible and the reasons why.
Although it is similar with JSA - someone is unemployed, and thus they should be eligible - given that they remember the S in the acronym and actually seek work. As you quite rightly point out, adherence is ensured via agencies that partner with the DWP - they are supposed to prevent cheating by overseeing and monitoring the applications an individual make; in reality they were (or are) very poor at it.
And one man's "deserving" is another man's "undeserving". When it happened to me and my mum, we were deserving. But when it happened to the guy down the street, well, he was undeserving.
I was going to ignore your post, but this is the bit that jumped out - as it's clearly a dig at either James or myself; I can't speak for James, but I feel quite happy that I gave examples of the behaviour I mentioned, and underlined the amount of genuine cases that I lived with.
The trouble is, the Dailies Mail, Express and their ilk fan the flames of prejudice which are then swallowed hook line and sinker by some. Whereas the real evidence is that the cost of benefit fraud is minimal. And could probably be reduced if the government invested in those services that carry out the fact checking.
Agreed wholeheartedly; with the caveat that those services are provided "in house" and not contracted out to the lowest bidder, as was the case with the DWP during the timeframe I mentioned.
I'll reiterate that the Atos money should've gone towards the NHS, and the DWP should've developed their own capabilities for doing the medical assessments, (a) using health records directly, and (b) without requiring manual input from clinicians and claimants. Technically speaking this solution is very much possible and also inexpensive compared to their chosen one, whilst it also would've had a better success rate and improved the quality of life for most claimants.
It's a similar story with taxation and evasion. The tax regulations are there to be abided by all. Some people and companies think it is fair game to "dodge" their tax burdens, either through legitimate schemes - Gary Barlow, Jimmy Carr - or from pretending you make no money, or running your business operation from the Channel Islands. And once again, more could be done about this if there was the political will, and if the government of the day invested in sufficient resources to beef up the tax evasion operation.
I'll give HMRC some credit here - for once, and only once! - they do appear to be taking some steps against contractors who are sole directors of their own limited company; their inability to go after the bigger guys who really are shafting the economy is frustrating though.
It doesn't help when accountancy/consultancy firms go after senior HMRC officials when they're recruiting, offering them attractive salaries for their expertise and network.
Apologies if I've misunderstood, but that seemed like quite a pointed dig at me - when in this case there's a lot of common ground, in spite of our respective political stances.
No dig intended. I'm just a bit baffled as to why beneficiaries of these types of support would vote for a party that appears to be keen to eradicate welfare and social safety nets for others.
I hope we can all agree that in the event of nuclear weapons being deployed nobody wins.
Whether Corbyn gets to make that decision is a moot point as he's almost certainly not going to be PM anyway. Despite the spin being put on it by the Tories and press, a nuclear deterrent still remains the policy of the Labour party and I don't see that changing, under Corbyn or any other leader. The nuclear argument is a red herring for me and more relevant is the approach taken to supporting our conventional forces.
On the subject of Labour promoting a "benefits as lifestyle" culture that has been suggested by a couple of posters. Nobody, but nobody disputes that there are peetakers out there who are criminally exploiting the system.
If this abuse of the system due to Labour's failings or policies were as widespread as claimed then, logically, it follows that the data would show a greater uptake in the numbers of the long term unemployed under them. But it does not and in fact unemployment levels were at their lowest for decades under Blair.
Purely anecdotally, my mate runs a benefits fraud team. Of all those his team have caught and pursued only a tiny % seem reliant exclusively on falsely claiming benefits to support their lifestyle. The vast majority are involved in other criminality alongside benefits fraud. He laughs at the suggestion you can live anything approaching the luxurious lifestyle highlighted as being available on benefits alone that is often portrayed in the media.
A few do make a business out of it. Here's an example: https://stv.tv/news/tayside/1381482-man-faked-26-baby-births-to-claim-34-000-in-benefits/ The point, I suppose, is that if there were less onerous checks and balances on those that play the system, this type of event would instantly become much more common because the chances of getting caught would be slim. In the same way that hardly anybody would obey the speed limits if there were no traffic cops and no cameras. While benefit fraud can be presented as a significant problem in cash terms - £1bn , it can also be said to be a small problem in percentage terms (less than 1%).
I was initially interested in the article because many years ago I was doing an investigation in Campbeltown, one of the places mentioned in the article. The hotel I was staying in was chock-a-block full of DHSS (as it then was) investigators. Being nosey, I asked them what they were up to. It seems that Cambeltown was a bit of a hotbed of young unmarried mothers who were living with their boyfriends but telling the Social they were alone and claiming as such. It was this that was being investigated. Now, when I was there this town, maybe it still is, was a bit of a dump with serious unemployment issues and little opportunity of getting a job. For those that don't know, it's stuck out on the Kintyre Peninsula and is many miles on poor roads from anywhere that is likely to have work. It's three hours by car and four by bus to the nearest "civilisation" - Glasgow. Job opportunities there were (are?) few and far between. According to the investigators, the only way for young women to get somewhere to live and some money was to get pregnant. I got the impression that the investigators felt a bit sorry for them and wondered what actual choice they had but they got on with their work. Of course, if the underlying problem of lack of employment opportunities is not fixed, Campbeltown is bringing up yet another generation of people with no prospects whatsoever.
We haven't really talked about the housing crisis on here, but take a look at the below. The numbers of rough sleepers on our streets are a very obvious indicator of things going wrong in the housing market:
The thing about a nuclear deterrent, a bomb dropped in Russia, China, USA India or Pakistan will devestate a small part of their country. But we are a small island. Manchester Birmingham and London would take out most of our population.
My understanding is that devastation is not controlled, and will cause damage that lasts possibly thousands of Earth years. The notion that there is any kind of controlled Nuclear War is rubbish in my view, nuclear arsenal's exist that can wipe out the planet several times over.
The rough sleepers is a good guide. many years ago I used to volunteer for St Mungo and do a soup run, I thought it was rough times then, but whenever I go up town these days I get the feeling it is a whole lot worse. perhaps rough sleepers are the 'undeserving poor' as mentioned above. Of course the Tories would probably ask why rough sleepers simply don't score a mortgage as a starting point, after all they have started a help to buy scheme after all.
The rough sleepers is a good guide. many years ago I used to volunteer for St Mungo and do a soup run, I thought it was rough times then, but whenever I go up town these days I get the feeling it is a whole lot worse. perhaps rough sleepers are the 'undeserving poor' as mentioned above. Of course the Tories would probably ask why rough sleepers simply don't score a mortgage as a starting point, after all they have started a help to buy scheme after all.
You jest, but in the housing and planning bill in 2016 the government added starter homes for purchase to the definition of affordable housing, which meant that developers could meet their requirement to develop affordable housing by excluding rented homes completely if they included starter homes.
Anyone know who is standing for the Lib Dems in Greenwich, and know anything about them?
We've got Dr Chris Adams, who did not write Scouting for Boys, despite his declared hobbies.
Biog Dr Chris Adams is a lifelong pro-European and campaigned hard for a Remain vote during the Referendum last year. A committed Liberal Democrat, he joined the party in February 2013. As an academic historian, Chris worked as a tutor at the History Department at Aberystwyth University, before moving to work in Parliament with the MP for Ceredigon, Mark Williams. Working in Westminster, Chris championed the rights of neglected children, helping to draft legislation to make psychological abuse of children a criminal offence. In his spare time Chris enjoys going for walks in Greenwich Park and along the Thames Path, reading historical fiction and swimming.
Taken from a motorcycle journo on Twitter: UK: We want Brexit! Brexit means Brexit! EU: Here is Brexit. Brexit means Brexit. UK: You are ganging up on us, so unfair!
Add a mafia reference at the end if you read the Sun, Express or Mail.
May either hasn't got a clue or she's doing a great impression of it.
In 5 years time it will be clear, even to the 'expert' haters and the poorly educated idiots who voted for it, what a complete disaster Brexit has been for the U.K. so I think a Frexit is highly unlikely.
In 5 years time it will be clear, even to the 'expert' haters and the poorly educated idiots who voted for it, what a complete disaster Brexit has been for the U.K. so I think a Frexit is highly unlikely.
I wonder why the original Brexit thread was largely left to a few rabid remainers and was eventually closed down?
In 5 years time it will be clear, even to the 'expert' haters and the poorly educated idiots who voted for it, what a complete disaster Brexit has been for the U.K. so I think a Frexit is highly unlikely.
Expats can vote if they have been out of the country for less than 15 years. At which point, their right to vote ends.
Which is disgraceful, and I haven't found another European country where that happens. My mate as a dual citizen has a permanent national vote in both Germany and Sweden
In 5 years time it will be clear, even to the 'expert' haters and the poorly educated idiots who voted for it, what a complete disaster Brexit has been for the U.K. so I think a Frexit is highly unlikely.
I wonder why the original Brexit thread was largely left to a few rabid remainers and was eventually closed down?
Now let me think.
Because you treat Brexit not as a democratic issue, like say the NHS, butas a football match where "you" won and "we" lost, get over it, move on, etc.
Why it was closed down is an issue for @AFKABartram . It was one of a very few decisions of his (perhaps the only one) that I disagree with.
In 5 years time it will be clear, even to the 'expert' haters and the poorly educated idiots who voted for it, what a complete disaster Brexit has been for the U.K. so I think a Frexit is highly unlikely.
I wonder why the original Brexit thread was largely left to a few rabid remainers and was eventually closed down?
Now let me think.
Because you treat Brexit not as a democratic issue, like say the NHS, butas a football match where "you" won and "we" lost, get over it, move on, etc.
It's a matter of perspective I spose, I see as the opposite way round, with a "You voted for it, you get on with it while we highlight every negative news report on it, even though there's no foundation for 99% of em and we'll also call you idiots along the way", to be honest mate
Expats can vote if they have been out of the country for less than 15 years. At which point, their right to vote ends.
Which is disgraceful, and I haven't found another European country where that happens. My mate as a dual citizen has a permanent national vote in both Germany and Sweden
I don't think it disgraceful at all. Just because other countries have different rules, it doesn't make ours wrong.
I know that you feel strongly about this but others feel just as strongly that if you don't reside in a country, you relinquish the right to influence it's politics.
I know that you will come back to me and point out that you contribute financially into the U.K. but I assume that you do this for long term financial security/gain? Forgive me if I have misunderstood as I do not accuse you of anything, just looking to get the facts right.
Assuming that I am correct then how would you differentiate your financial input to that of a foreign investor in a business or property in the U.K.?
Clearly you have family and emotional attachment that people born in another country may not but I can't see a practical difference.
Not looking for a fight, just my view. Happy to debate.
Comments
I was initially interested in the article because many years ago I was doing an investigation in Campbeltown, one of the places mentioned in the article. The hotel I was staying in was chock-a-block full of DHSS (as it then was) investigators. Being nosey, I asked them what they were up to. It seems that Cambeltown was a bit of a hotbed of young unmarried mothers who were living with their boyfriends but telling the Social they were alone and claiming as such. It was this that was being investigated. Now, when I was there this town, maybe it still is, was a bit of a dump with serious unemployment issues and little opportunity of getting a job. For those that don't know, it's stuck out on the Kintyre Peninsula and is many miles on poor roads from anywhere that is likely to have work. It's three hours by car and four by bus to the nearest "civilisation" - Glasgow.
Job opportunities there were (are?) few and far between. According to the investigators, the only way for young women to get somewhere to live and some money was to get pregnant. I got the impression that the investigators felt a bit sorry for them and wondered what actual choice they had but they got on with their work.
Of course, if the underlying problem of lack of employment opportunities is not fixed, Campbeltown is bringing up yet another generation of people with no prospects whatsoever.
Of course the Tories would probably ask why rough sleepers simply don't score a mortgage as a starting point, after all they have started a help to buy scheme after all.
https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/jan/05/expert-views-housing-bill-end-affordable-housing
Expats can vote if they have been out of the country for less than 15 years. At which point, their right to vote ends.
http://www.mungos.org/press_office/2669_nowhere-safe-to-stay-homeless-people-told-to-sleep-rough-despite-extreme-dangers
Biog
Dr Chris Adams is a lifelong pro-European and campaigned hard for a Remain vote during the Referendum last year. A committed Liberal Democrat, he joined the party in February 2013. As an academic historian, Chris worked as a tutor at the History Department at Aberystwyth University, before moving to work in Parliament with the MP for Ceredigon, Mark Williams. Working in Westminster, Chris championed the rights of neglected children, helping to draft legislation to make psychological abuse of children a criminal offence. In his spare time Chris enjoys going for walks in Greenwich Park and along the Thames Path, reading historical fiction and swimming.
Fairly jawdropping stuff
UK: We want Brexit! Brexit means Brexit!
EU: Here is Brexit. Brexit means Brexit.
UK: You are ganging up on us, so unfair!
Add a mafia reference at the end if you read the Sun, Express or Mail.
May either hasn't got a clue or she's doing a great impression of it.
Now let me think.
Why it was closed down is an issue for @AFKABartram . It was one of a very few decisions of his (perhaps the only one) that I disagree with.
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-gain-tory-victory-theresa-may-general-election-8-june-yougov-opinium-polls-a7709961.html
I know that you feel strongly about this but others feel just as strongly that if you don't reside in a country, you relinquish the right to influence it's politics.
I know that you will come back to me and point out that you contribute financially into the U.K. but I assume that you do this for long term financial security/gain? Forgive me if I have misunderstood as I do not accuse you of anything, just looking to get the facts right.
Assuming that I am correct then how would you differentiate your financial input to that of a foreign investor in a business or property in the U.K.?
Clearly you have family and emotional attachment that people born in another country may not but I can't see a practical difference.
Not looking for a fight, just my view. Happy to debate.