campaign against welfare cuts and poverty

[Smoking kills]

As I stated earlier, the DWP employs over 50,000 people. For only 815 - less than 2% - of them to have participated, is the kind of response rate most surveyors would be DEEPLY unsatisfied by, given that the average return rate for employee surveys is around 20%.

Quite. I was advised that just sticking survey forms through random letter boxs with an SAE and small prize would yield around 5%. The survey was for my local community centre, we got around 40%.
Given the opportunities for skiving off/thinking about the question, taking the piss, £25 Amazon voucher or being listened to, the level of engagement should ring alarm bells, not be used as evidence that the DWP is a good place to work.
On topic, Universal Credit is due to crash into a lot of people soon. Increased awareness of the premium 'phone line associated with this fuck up could force the govt to concede the few million quid they and their mates get out of it, and make life a little bit easier for some of those people.
Free the DWP helpline!

 

[Happy Larry]

As I stated earlier, the DWP employs over 50,000 people. For only 815 - less than 2% - of them to have participated, is the kind of response rate most surveyors would be DEEPLY unsatisfied

Just love that bit of clutching at straws. Lol! A classic "Wot I reckon".

 

[krtek a houby]

As usual, you couldn't be more wrong Panda. I have worked for myself since the age of 25.

We differ in that I don't believe a group of government employees should be insulted, as they have been here, just because the government that they work for doesn't hand money out right left and centre to anyone who wants some, but rather tries its best to ensure that assistance only goes to those in our population who are genuinely in need.

Who is genuinely in need, in your opinion?

 

[NoXion]

Just love that bit of clutching at straws. Lol! A classic "Wot I reckon".

No reckoning necessary. Even a total dunce can see that 815 is a tiny fraction of 50,000.

Apart from you, apparently.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Just love that bit of clutching at straws. Lol! A classic "Wot I reckon".

It's not "clutching at straws", you gurning halfwit, it's first-hand knowledge of what those who commission surveys are after, and what those companies who create surveys require in order to justify their services. A less than 2% response rate from staff, especially staff who have daily access to the DWP's intranet, is pathetic, rather like you.

 

[existentialist]

It's not "clutching at straws", you gurning halfwit, it's first-hand knowledge of what those who commission surveys are after, and what those companies who create surveys require in order to justify their services. A less than 2% response rate from staff, especially staff who have daily access to the DWP's intranet, is pathetic, rather like you.

Remember that this wasn't actually a proper survey, whatever Fappy Mary wants to believe, but unprompted feedback from self-selected people.

 

[Happy Larry]

it's first-hand knowledge of what those who commission surveys are after, and what those companies who create surveys require in order to justify their services.

As usual Panda, you're making a mighty fool of yourself.

As even poor old Existentialist knows, and points out in his post above, it wasn't a survey at all. The reviews were made on a job search website.

 

[existentialist]

As usual Panda, you're making a mighty fool of yourself.

As even poor old Existentialist knows, and points out in his post above, it wasn't a survey at all. The reviews were made on a job search website.

Except that you are presenting them as some kind of meaningful statement on the attitudes of DWP staff in general, which is the point that VP is making.

I'd tell you to stop being a cunt, but I don't think you can help yourself.

 

[doodlelogic]

Happy Larry is an IT contractor to the DWP aicm IR35 review.

 

[Happy Larry]

Except that you are presenting them as some kind of meaningful statement on the attitudes of DWP staff in general

Er no. As you know, the reason I presented them was to demonstrate that you are talking utter nonsense when you claim that DWP employees are working in a "toxic environment". Their mainly positive opinions regarding their work environment shows up your uninformed tripe.

 

[existentialist]

Er no. As you know, the reason I presented them was to demonstrate that you are talking utter nonsense when you claim that DWP employees are working in a "toxic environment". Their mainly positive opinions regarding their work environment shows up your uninformed tripe.

Well, since it demonstrated nothing beyond your total inability to understand anything about surveys, I'd say you failed.

 

[NoXion]

Er no. As you know, the reason I presented them was to demonstrate that you are talking utter nonsense when you claim that DWP employees are working in a "toxic environment". Their mainly positive opinions regarding their work environment shows up your uninformed tripe.

And we've already pointed out that those reviews are statistically insignificant and therefore don't prove shit. Even in the most awful workplaces you'll find some bumlicking greasy pole clamberer willing to trade their pride and dignity for the ghost of a chance of potential advancement.

Probably someone like you, who will make excuses for the rich and powerful.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

 

[existentialist]

Good cartoon. And this clusterfuck, lest we forget is what our village idiot correspondent is insisting is all peachy and wonderful.

 

[Happy Larry]

who will make excuses for the rich and powerful.

I don't know how you define power, but as for the rich, why would they need to make excuses? They already contribute a massive amount to our economy :

"the tax base is very reliant on rich people, with income tax becoming increasingly reliant on them.

The Resolution Foundation, which does a great deal of work on inequality, says that the income tax system is relying too much on the richest 10%, which is a problem because their earnings are volatile."

Reality Check: Are lower earners bearing the tax burden?

 

[B.I.G]

I don't know how you define power, but as for the rich, why would they need to make excuses? They already contribute a massive amount to our economy :

"the tax base is very reliant on rich people, with income tax becoming increasingly reliant on them.

The Resolution Foundation, which does a great deal of work on inequality, says that the income tax system is relying too much on the richest 10%, which is a problem because their earnings are volatile."

Reality Check: Are lower earners bearing the tax burden?

A "massive" amount. They can afford to pay more. The country needs more money. Let us tax them more.

And if increases in income tax do only produce marginal gains, let the country tax them in other ways.

Also you are a cunt. I wish poverty on you.

 

[NoXion]

I don't know how you define power, but as for the rich, why would they need to make excuses? They already contribute a massive amount to our economy :

"the tax base is very reliant on rich people, with income tax becoming increasingly reliant on them.

The Resolution Foundation, which does a great deal of work on inequality, says that the income tax system is relying too much on the richest 10%, which is a problem because their earnings are volatile."

Reality Check: Are lower earners bearing the tax burden?

If that really is the case, then that makes it all the more important to clamp down on tax-dodging corporations such as Google and Amazon.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The question needs to be asked: Who are The Resolution Foundation? They're a centrist "independent" think-tank whose policy and research staff - a bit of assiduous googling will turn up articles and papers by them - are pretty much dedicated to maintaining the current economic "consensus", while doing a bit of ameliorationism to keep the poor and the "squeezed middle" on-side. Their board is even more hilarious. That's not to say that they don't turn out interesting stuff, but one needs to be aware of where this stuff originates from - "free" market-based laissez faire economics.

I suspect that Happy Larry's googling is somewhat less assiduous, and is based on finding respectable-sounding stuff that supports his economic preconceptions.

 

[Happy Larry]

all the more important to clamp down on tax-dodging corporations such as Google and Amazon.

I would agree that we need to make sure everyone who makes use of a country's resources contributes to the taxman. But as taxes are reduced around the world, how do we define a tax haven? It is understandable why corporations choose to establish themselves in somewhere like Ireland (12,5% tax rate), Dubai or Hong Kong which are all great places to live and work.

Is the UK now a tax haven considering it has corporation tax rates approximately half that of the USA?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I would agree that we need to make sure everyone who makes use of a country's resources contributes to the taxman. But as taxes are reduced around the world, how do we define a tax haven? It is understandable why corporations choose to establish themselves in somewhere like Ireland (12,5% tax rate), Dubai or Hong Kong which are all great places to live and work.

Is the UK now a tax haven considering it has corporation tax rates approximately half that of the USA?

You're either disingenuous or stupid. This isn't about Corporation Tax, it's about UK banks facilitating the moving of monies around a net of tax havens in despite of legislation not to, effectively "laundering" hundreds of billions of pounds a year of dubiously-gained money.

 

[Happy Larry]

it's about UK banks facilitating the moving of monies around a net of tax havens

Absolute nonsense. By and large, most banks merely do what their clients instruct them too as long as it is legal. There are rogue bankers, just as there are those who act badly in all areas of society/business. I realise that many people want to blame the banks if they catch a cold....they are the Socialists whipping dogs for almost everything. The reasons vary but it's mostly about the 1) democratic right of owners of corporations to base themselves where they please. Obviously, those countries that can offer lower tax rates will be first in line. 2) Transfer pricing. Why shouldn't Google/Apple etc charge their overseas branches for research and development incurred by them at their country of origin?

I feel that tax should be charged in particular to those corporations that charge interest to a branch in the UK knowing that such interest will be tax free in the country that originates the charge. They are doing nothing illegal but it grates that they are getting it both ways. However, at least they are taxed indirectly when making a sale, which some people seem to forget.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Absolute nonsense. By and large, most banks merely do what their clients instruct them too as long as it is legal. There are rogue bankers, just as there are those who act badly in all areas of society/business. I realise that many people want to blame the banks if they catch a cold....they are the Socialists whipping dogs for almost everything. The reasons vary but it's mostly about the 1) democratic right of owners of corporations to base themselves where they please. Obviously, those countries that can offer lower tax rates will be first in line. 2) Transfer pricing. Why shouldn't Google/Apple etc charge their overseas branches for research and development incurred by them at their country of origin?

I feel that tax should be charged in particular to those corporations that charge interest to a branch in the UK knowing that such interest will be tax free in the country that originates the charge. They are doing nothing illegal but it grates that they are getting it both ways. However, at least they are taxed indirectly when making a sale, which some people seem to forget.

You know what's really amusing, Larry?

It's watching someone regurgitate stuff featured in The Economist, with a few bits of anti-socialism thrown in. Grow up, and/or expand your reading to include something that isn't chosen because it conforms to your preconceptions.

Alternately, you could do everyone a favour and stop shitting up threads with your anile "economics" rants.

 

[Happy Larry]

It's watching someone regurgitate stuff featured in The Economist,

....I don't read The Economist, toothless Panda.

If you can't understand simple economics, then simply ignore my posts.

 

[existentialist]

....I don't read The Economist, toothless Panda.

If you can't understand simple economics, then simply ignore my posts.

Oh look, it's Lairy's Daily Dump.

 

[ViolentPanda]

....I don't read The Economist, toothless Panda.

If you can't understand simple economics, then simply ignore my posts.

I understand simple and complex economics just fine - far better than your own one-dimensional understanding, it appears.

Now, please stop shitting up this thread with your right wing bollocks, there's a good slime mould.

 

[BigTom]

GAP property management /lettings group (I assume social housing) letter to tenants warning of problems with Universal Credit and starting eviction process in anticipation of people not being able to pay rent whilst they move over from HB to UC


Is there a UC rollout clusterfuck thread? This was always going to be bad but back when I was involved in trying to stop UC before it started I didn't think it would be this bad.

e2a: Grimsby Telegraph article about this: Grimsby tenants in eviction threat if Universal Credit delayed

 

[DotCommunist]

GAP property management /lettings group (I assume social housing) letter to tenants warning of problems with Universal Credit and starting eviction process in anticipation of people not being able to pay rent whilst they move over from HB to UC


Is there a UC rollout clusterfuck thread? This was always going to be bad but back when I was involved in trying to stop UC before it started I didn't think it would be this bad.

IDS having the cheek to carp about this now because 'hammond raided the pot' is something else

 

[teqniq]

A landmark study has linked Tory austerity to 120,000 deaths

 

[chainsawjob]

A landmark study has linked Tory austerity to 120,000 deaths

(can't 'like' that, but cheers for posting.) Balanced analysis I thought.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I don't know how you define power, but as for the rich, why would they need to make excuses? They already contribute a massive amount to our economy :

"the tax base is very reliant on rich people, with income tax becoming increasingly reliant on them.

The Resolution Foundation, which does a great deal of work on inequality, says that the income tax system is relying too much on the richest 10%, which is a problem because their earnings are volatile."

Reality Check: Are lower earners bearing the tax burden?

I'm sure most people earning below the income tax threshold would rather be earning above it. And most of them would actually pay their tax, not offshore their way round it like the rich all do.