Demolition of the stats behind the anti-disability claimant propaganda

[ymu]

This article presents some really useful stuff for campaigners, demolishing the three main planks of the Tory (Blue, Yellow and Red) case for attacking disability claimants.

I'm just picking out the headlines and graphs here - detailed explanations in the full text.

1. "For too long in this country we have left people on welfare"

(graph shows that the regional disparity created by shunting the regional unemployed onto IB has pretty much disappeared already)

2. "We have left people on welfare for year after year"

(claim based on a simple error in interpretation of a snapshot)

3. "Those people, with help and with assistance, could work"

(simply stating that people with severe impairment can work does not create employers willing to offer them work)

This might be a useful thread to build up some more anti-propaganda resources. I'll go through my bookmarks at some point and add what I have gathered from here and elsewhere.

 

[Mungy]

i think BT are blocking the website the images come from. Cos i can only get it to work through a proxy.

I've checked as best I can and yep, I can't get on left foot forward at all unless i go via a proxy.

 

[salem]

Could you perhaps link to better quality graphs as the text on those is quite distorted.

 

[ymu]

You can view larger versions by clicking them in the article I linked to. I can't magic up better versions than that.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Graph One.

Graph two

Graph Three

 

[BigTom]

http://www.latentexistence.me.uk/go...even-as-select-committee-condemns-propaganda/

This is also a good blogpost taking apart the statistical claims they are making - more of a kind of surface assessment of how they are twisting the statistics than the above which looks at underlying factors which affect the stats.

 

[Mungy]

can anyone who's isp is bt see the pics cos i can't.

 

[ymu]

can anyone who's isp is bt see the pics cos i can't.

Do they disappear if you look at the Guardian article? Urban often disappears pictures for me, but if you copy the urls into a new window they're fine.

 

[Mungy]

i can't view the left foot forward site at all, unless i use a proxy server to get to it

 

[ymu]

BT are censoring mainstream political sites?

 

[ymu]

I put them on my backup service. Here they are:

 

[Mungy]

it's working now but it wasn't. i could only access it via a proxy.

 

[treelover]

Good stuff, but millions read the misinformation and smears in Wednesdays Mail and Express

 

[ymu]

I know, tl. The only thing to do is berate people for not doing more and blame immigrants for all your woes. Why the fuck does anyone bother, eh?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I blame the fucking Hugenots, personally, fleeing from persecution and sticking the idea of "refugees" in the minds of our bureaucracy. Like they fucking deserved to be allowed to stay here, the Frog bastards!

 

[8115]

Don't know if anyone has pointed this out, but DLA doesn't mean you can't work, it's for care and mobility needs (I think). IB has gone down, DLA has gone up, I think that's maybe a preference for benefit type, not necessarily anything else. I don't know.

 

[8115]

Don't get me wrong though, I hate the Mail as much as anyone else.

Something like, "Only 3 in 14 claimants assessed as unfit to work", yeah most of the others win on appeal though.

 

[two sheds]

Don't get me wrong though, I hate the Mail as much as anyone else.

Something like, "Only 3 in 14 claimants assessed as unfit to work", yeah most of the others win on appeal though.

And if you have a physical problem then very often you have good days and bad days. If you say to the assessors that you can walk some days and some days you can't then they'll put you down as able to walk.

Then try applying for a job if you can't walk two days out of five and see what they say.

 

[Streathamite]

All those stats go right over the head of a thickie like me, but well done ymu for this thread

 

[ymu]

Don't know if anyone has pointed this out, but DLA doesn't mean you can't work, it's for care and mobility needs (I think). IB has gone down, DLA has gone up, I think that's maybe a preference for benefit type, not necessarily anything else. I don't know.

It's not an either or, as you point out. The graph shows the numbers claiming IB or IB+DLA over time. No DLA only in there.

The significance of the third graph is related to the first. In the '80s and '90s people were shunted onto IB when the govt cared about unemployment. Graph 1 shows that the massive regional disparities (ie high IB in areas where industry had been devastated) have reduced to the levels you'd expect due to differences in life expectancy and disability rates between those regions. Graph 3 reinforces this point by showing a steady reduction in the proportion on IB but not requiring DLA for care and mobility. ie more evidence that the abuse of IB which started under Thatcher has already disappeared from the figures. Cameron is making an argument that is 15 years out of date.

 

[ymu]

All those stats go right over the head of a thickie like me, but well done ymu for this thread

The brief explanations in the article are OK but brief. I'll happily explain anything that's not clear, if you'd like me to. I just didn't want to overwhelm the thread with detail, and it's probably less confusing if you say what isn't clear or I'll end up explaining the wrong thing and confusing you more.

 

[xenon]

They want to put disabled peple on JSA rather than have them continue to receive incapacity bennefit or move on to ESA. It's simple, brutal, shortsighted market driven, cost cutting. Many disabled peple can work, with the right support. That "right support." Where is that? I'm relatively OK myself, but I'm very pissed off ATM over the circumstances of my more disabled sister's dealings with the Jobcentre.

I'd like to take an axe to something TBH And I don't mean a guitar.

</argh>
Sorry. Good work Ymu.

 

[ymu]

Hand me the spare axe xenon, I'm hopping mad about this.

 

[Streathamite]

The brief explanations in the article are OK but brief. I'll happily explain anything that's not clear, if you'd like me to. I just didn't want to overwhelm the thread with detail, and it's probably less confusing if you say what isn't clear or I'll end up explaining the wrong thing and confusing you more.

yes thanks that'd be great!
i guess it's more that I'm scared of stats than anything else

 

[ymu]

yes thanks that'd be great!
i guess it's more that I'm scared of stats than anything else

Well, that's lucky cos nearly all my students are terrified of it, and they do OK. And I'm switching to teaching online more to suit the sleep pattern, so I could do with some free practice.

I can post up some more detailed explanations (possibly tomorrow because I'm being told to go to bed ), or would you rather say what it is about the (very brief) explanations in the article that aren't terribly clear to you first? Either is fine - depends which you'd find most helpful.

 

[Streathamite]

Well, that's lucky cos nearly all my students are terrified of it, and they do OK. And I'm switching to teaching online more to suit the sleep pattern, so I could do with some free practice.

I can post up some more detailed explanations (possibly tomorrow because I'm being told to go to bed ), or would you rather say what it is about the (very brief) explanations in the article that aren't terribly clear to you first? Either is fine - depends which you'd find most helpful.

I'll come back to you later on this, once I've read the article again. sweet dreams...

 

[ymu]

Nice one. And they should be, it's 14 hours past my bedtime.

 

[Streathamite]

Right, i'm a tad proud of meself cos I've now had the time and I've mastered those stats completely. And yes, they show the govt is talking, vicious, unprincipled cobblers on this one