I dont hate vulnerable people trev...I just hate the parasites who prey on the weak and vulnerable...Its a subtle difference some people seem to struggle with......
Purnell: more attacks on the unemployed, etc
- Thread starter treelover
- Start date
I dont hate vulnerable people trev...I just hate the parasites who prey on the weak and vulnerable...Its a subtle difference some people seem to struggle with......
_angel_
.
Who pray tell should decide who is well enough to work? Maybe the person themselves? Corroborated by a medical opinion? Or somebody who is paid practically as a bounty hunter to get people off benefit, regardless of whether a job exists for them or not.
Calling people 'conservative' because they don't support this draconian attack on single parents and the sick won't wash. I don't subscribe to any organisation or politics, but what labour and the tories are championing is nothing 'conservative' at all, but radical shift rightwards.
Do you really think this has been done to 'help' the sick, or save money?
People can be helped into work without huge sanctions being placed on them.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Yes, politicians, and those who think a job is the answer. Actually it is not, in more cases I know of complimentary therapies and things like yoga have a far more beneficial effect than a job.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Fuck NO! You are the conservative who is trying to increase profits for the capitalists. Marx (remember him - Das Kapital) would lay into fools who think pressing people into or encouraging people to take any job regardless of its effects (ok, perhaps this last bit isn't you, but do not join in with the workfare ideology which you are doing currently) has ANYTHING to do with socialism. It has not.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Read my post again - "Might be the best we have got at the minute, we don't need to all agree, now and today, what we want in its place. That can emerge through struggle". That clearly says the working class on a move will create its forms of welfare, there is NOTHING status quo in that. In reality, it is you who are arguing for the capitalist status quo by encouraging work and work discipline. Socialism IS other values, we went way beyond the work ethic in the 1980s if you remember the early CW's.
The Black Hand
Unclean
No I am not asking for a 'survey of everyone on IB' i was asking for evidence, this is basic Marxism. Tittle tattle is not enough, and you certainly cannot base politics upon it.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Well said, people who opposed Blair/Browns New Labour 'modernising' of the welfare state are called conservative. BUT making things worse for people is not modernising, it is encouraging neo liberal economics though. We are not allowed to argue for authentic socialism by them you see, all we can scrap over, and all we are allowed to fight over is the crumbs off the dining table, blame the poor/migrants, and rachet up security. This plays into their 'war on terror' ideology. Socialists oppose it all i think.
We do not just want the bakery, we want the dining room, kitchen and house
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
That depends entirely on what perspective you're looking at him from.
Some interesting questions.
I think Doctors by and large dont want to be involved in this shouldnt be involved in this. And are often worse than useless.
I think if people receive benefits then it makes sense the people paying out the benefit assess them and their is a proper appeals procedure.
Calling the present reforms draconian is just plain silly. People on IB will now go onto the Employment Support Allowance. Personally i think labelling 2.6million people incapable of work is really shit.
I call people conservative cos that is how they come across if they want to keep things the same even though they know there shit.
I think it has been done for a variety of reasons, like most decisions taken by more than one person.
I know it suits people to pretend either that its all about helping disabled people or saving money but the truth is usually a bit more complex.
Well said, people who opposed Blair/Browns New Labour 'modernising' of the welfare state are called conservative. BUT making things worse for people is not modernising, it is encouraging neo liberal economics though. We are not allowed to argue for authentic socialism by them you see, all we can scrap over, and all we are allowed to fight over is the crumbs off the dining table, blame the poor/migrants, and rachet up security. This plays into their 'war on terror' ideology. Socialists oppose it all i think.
We do not just want the bakery, we want the dining room, kitchen and house
You say you want the bakery. If thats true you need to think how.
Do you really think your on the way to taking over the bakery?
The Orthodox Left in all their hysteria and negativity are not in any position to demand anything.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
People without medical training who are also being paid for every person they get off the books should be assessing someone's medical condition rather than, say, people with medical training who are independent of the process, like for example doctors? Pardon?
The Black Hand
Unclean
_angel_
.
Apparently. I don't know what baldwin's beef with doctors assessing someone's medical capacity for various types of work is.
People who are getting paid to get people off their books (not necessarily into a job they can hold down), surely have some motivation other than finding the right job for their client (or even admitting that there isn't one in some cases)
He seems to be of the opinion there 'can't be' x million people incapable of working just because he says there can't be.
I'd like to know where all the employers prepared to be flexible over someone's chronic fluctuating health conditions are coming from (ie those struggling with mental health problems, back pain, ME, MS etc)
Well the DWP can't seem to tell the difference between vulnerable and parasites
The Black Hand
Unclean
They don't care either. People who take workfare/New Deal jobs ordering the unemployed around, I do not like. The ones I have met I have always thought of as sad people with no right to tell anybody what to do, but they get put in a position of power. They humiliate themselves too when they come up against those other than stereotypes, one guy i knew said he looked for education jobs in the papers and they didn't even know what papers or when did education jobs!
And they've got the cheek to be employed 'finding us' work FFS.
Pardon? Is that what i said?
You keep doffing your cap to the doctors like a good liberal.
Apparently. I don't know what baldwin's beef with doctors assessing someone's medical capacity for various types of work is.
People who are getting paid to get people off their books (not necessarily into a job they can hold down), surely have some motivation other than finding the right job for their client (or even admitting that there isn't one in some cases)
He seems to be of the opinion there 'can't be' x million people incapable of working just because he says there can't be.
I'd like to know where all the employers prepared to be flexible over someone's chronic fluctuating health conditions are coming from (ie those struggling with mental health problems, back pain, ME, MS etc)
A study mentioned in todays guardian says exactly the same thing.
You really think that having Doctors assess who is capable and incapable of work is a good thing? WHY ?
well it's more fair than having the dole's own doctor, paid for by the dole, to do it. Out of all the people i've met about 90percent failed the medical (had their money stopped), and most of those who appealed, won.
_angel_
.
Yes I do. And I don't necessarily trust the Guardian an inch on this matter. I'd rather have someone assessing someone's capacity for work, who is not getting paid for getting them taken off benefit. A slight conflict of interests you might think?
_angel_
.
I know someone whose incapacity claim was stopped by some muppet in the job centre, on the grounds they were carrying a handbag
(and therefore not sick). Expect more crap like this when people in job centres/ private firms get to decide who's sick and who isn't.
Yeah i do think there is a conflict of interest there. But still having GPs and consultants do it is an absulute shit idea.
I know someone whose incapacity claim was stopped by some muppet in the job centre, on the grounds they were carrying a handbag
As ive said the present system is inconsistent and sometimes cruel.
Dont know how any of you could be arguing for the status quo.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Well, er, yes, it is.
Where?
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
The bit I quoted. Here it is again:
"Doctors shouldn't be involved; the people paying out the benefit should do the assessment." The people paying out the benefit in the context of the proposal under discussion here being incentivised groups. It seems quite a straightforward sentence of yours, but if somehow I have misinterpreted it, I do apologise, and would request some form of clarification.
_angel_
.
The proposed system will allow people in job centres make more decisions about things they are not qualified.
The present system is shit, the proposed one shitter. Fuck off with your 'defending the status quo/ liberal/ conservative jibes'. David Cameron enthusiastically supports these measures, that means they are actual Tory approved policies.
Fair enough. I dont think that anybody should be incentivised as you put it to assess people off benefits.
I do think though that if people are paying out benefits they should be involved in the process but there needs to be a proper appeals procedure.
The thought that i would like some kind of bounty paid to people assesing people off benefits is utter shit FM.
What qualifications do Doctors have in assesing what work people can and cant do?
Similar threads
