I was once wondered what it meant, and I thought it meant "spot on", i.e. that they agreed. Then I had problems, when I began replying, and then wanted to cancel. The only way to do that is by deleting what you have written, but you still have to press the "post reply" button to get out of reply mode. A kind person explained this to me.
It was Pickman's Model who explained the "." convention to me. He is basically a good egg.
I think that the point of people having an income is so that they can enjoy the arts, and other things.
Well, that's Pickman's model telt. I wonder if he'll like them apples?
Have you got a source for this?
Aplogies to everyone.
I did not tell you to butt out. I said I hadn't sought your opinion and explained why. You seem to look for reasons to be snarky and you might want to ask yourself why you do this. If I were you I'd have taken umbrage at your assumption you're better read etc than me. Before casting stones in this particular glasshouse examine yourself and consider how you come across.
You seem to have decided to make yourself disagreeable.
There's no need for a fucking dissertation, chief. You appeared to be claiming that all opinions should be treated equally. I'm telling you that isn't true. Many opinions are ill-informed and are arrant bollocks. You seem to have a problem with that.
UK immigration strategy increases risk of exploitation, say charities
Home secretary urged to to make it easier for undocumented migrants to regularise their immigration statuswww.theguardian.com
And this in the Guardian
New government would rather be seen to be coming down hard of migrants.
They want to show they are tougher than the Tories
Much better imo to regularise them.
yeh, in keeping with the practice of the last four years where his objections to the tories have been on grounds of efficiency rather than humanity
I remember reading many years ago that a lot of visa overstayers were from English speaking nations particularly Australia and New Zealand etc who probably wouldn’t have been considered immigrants due to their skin colour
handouts makes it sound like they're so easy to claim, whereas accessing benefits is often a long and arduous process. when i helped a friend of mine claim esa and pip it was such a painful and drawn-out process. it shouldn't be, the help people need and are entitled to ought to be available through an easier process which many people, particularly the infirm and unwell, are treated as genuine rather than as they are, as scammers until proved otherwise.There has been research into this and it's because unfortunately society has got sicker over the last 5-20 years.
Lots of reasons for this. Long term poor investment in health, Covid and long term affects - we are seeing long Covid and higher rates of ME that was chronically under funded already, waiting lists and poor general access to health care for both physical and mental health. Poor health outcomes overwhelming affects areas with high rates of poverty worse and these areas also tend to have worse access to services many of which were cut over the last 16 years.
Also I have no stats for this, but during the Osborne era and the introduction of UC and PIP many people lost benefits that they were entitled too and never challenged it - the high levels of appeal success backs this up. I suspect many people are now applying again and they are being accepted as it should likely have never been removed in the first place. Of course the usual suspects are all over this demanding that Britain gets back to work, without actually addressing the underlying issues for this.
Why are we so ill? The working-age health crisis
The number of under 65s struggling with poor health is rising - and it's a threat to the economy.www.bbc.co.uk
The hostile environment towards people who claim benefits I believe creates deep issues. The negative connotations of "state handouts" doesn't help with this. They are vital in the society that we live in as they either give people the time to get treatment for their condition and to recover without the pressure of finding paid work, or it enables someone who is not able to work, or requires additional income due to the costs of their disability to live as normal a life as possible.
Sanctions have a devastating affect on someone's health. I've watched someone close to me decline into very poor mental health to the point we thought he may have psychosis. It was only once we realised the extreme pressure he was under and difficulties with his housing that we realised what was happening. Amazingly once we managed to get him rehoused (the HA were genuinely great) and he had a regular income without decronian measures being put into place he fully recovered. He was even able to get a part time job that he maintained as he had the basics in place. It wasn't sanction that helped him, but the support of people around him and a secure income from his UC.
I have to deconstruct a lot of the stigma around benefits (please stop calling them state handouts) and taking time away from work if required so that people are actually able to make a better recovery. I believe that has much better outcomes than the stick and carrot approach long term.
I would absolutely love a world that was built more along mutual with less state interference, but unfortunately that is a long way off so it is important not to allow welfare to be hollowed out and demonised in the way that it has been.
I’m guessing most of the anti immigration rioters don’t have “Free movement of people is in Capitals interest” as one of their talking points….that would put them firmly in socialist/left wing circles?
It's a dehumanising process at the moment.
