The 2011 Census, good or bad?

[butchersapron]

Thanks for all the research moon. Very useful.

 

[frogwoman]

Sorry this is absolute bollocks, the party has principles which is why we have pushed consistently for things like equal marriages, civil liberties, opposition to the Iraq war etc.

Don't be fucking stupid. You supported the Iraq war once it had started. And Alex Jones-esque whining about "civil liberties" while taking them away from benefit claimants etc (and didn't Nick Clegg want to make immigrants havve pass books btw?) doesn't prove that you have principles, just that you will say and do anything that you think will get you elected

 

[_angel_]

Again, I said those who fake these injuries. I know people with geniune bad backs and it can be utterly debilitating. I also know of people who generally fake such illnesses. To such an extent to which they complain that it's getting worse before their assesment is up to play the system. They then just chuck their expensive pain killers they get for free from the NHS into the bin. This isn't right kabbes.

All I'm saying is that we need to create a benefit system that helps those who are actually in need, rather than one that allows cheats and scum to drain public funds so there is less for those in actual need.

oh fuck off, unless you are all these "cheats and scums" doctor. On another board I go on there are posters with loads of health problems who've had their money cut off because some shithead has rung the DWP and told them they must be faking because they "look ok".

 

[kabbes]

It's quite a claim that there are significant numbers of people faking bad backs and depression. I've no doubt that in a population of 60,000,000 people there must be some, just like there are some who write hack novels and are caught lying in court. But enough in significant numbers to create a material impact on the economy? Have you any evidence for this whatsoever?

 

[nino_savatte]

Out of all the people I have known on the dole I'd say at least 20% of them were on the fiddle faking some illness.

"20%" you say. How do you know that they were "faking it". What symptoms did they display? Furthermore, have you actually had any clinical experience of depressive disorders?

 

[nino_savatte]

Labour introduced the bloody things, but the NUS didn't give a flying shit then because their senior officials where all trying to be the next Stephen Twigg. Lib Dems have made the proposals fairer so you now only have to pay back tuition fees when you can afford too.

Yes and Clem Atlee must be spinning in his grave. His grandson, on the other hand...

 

[moon23]

It's quite a claim that there are significant numbers of people faking bad backs and depression. I've no doubt that in a population of 60,000,000 people there must be some, just like there are some who write hack novels and are caught lying in court. But enough in significant numbers to create a material impact on the economy? Have you any evidence for this whatsoever?

Kabbes it's like fraud, you only know about what is detected.

 

[Streathamite]

Yes but I referred to those that fake it of which there are many.

substantiate this with hard evidence, please

 

[moon23]

"20%" you say. How do you know that they were "faking it". What symptoms did they display? Furthermore, have you actually had any clinical experience of depressive disorders?

Because I knew them and they told me they were.

 

[kabbes]

Out of all the people I have known on the dole I'd say at least 20% of them were on the fiddle faking some illness.

How many people have you known on the dole?
How many of these have you known well enough to be able to form any kind of meaningful judgement on their behaviour and decisions?
How did you know they were "fiddling"?
What form did their "fiddling" take?

I mean, really. This kind of vague anecdotal claim is pathetic even for one who is happy to prop up the dismantling of the welfare state.

 

[moon23]

This thread had gone way off topic.

 

[kabbes]

Kabbes it's like fraud, you only know about what is detected.

You know more about fraud that what has been detected. You're not an auditor, I take it?

 

[butchersapron]

Kabbes it's like fraud, you only know about what is detected.

So you can claim anything you like then? What are the estimates of people who have knowing about this this as their profession?

 

[kabbes]

This thread had gone way off topic.

You ARE the topic. You and your impassioned support of an utterly immoral government.

 

[butchersapron]

This thread had gone way off topic.

I would slit your throat if i could.

 

[kabbes]

I claim that I know 0.5 million people on the dole. I further claim that 7 of them are making unsubstantiated claims of ill-health. That means that 0.0014% of people on the dole are making fraudulent claims.

0.0014% is not so bad. It's well, well within a reasonable margin. I don't know what you're making a fuss about.

 

[_angel_]

I'd quite like to know the numbers of ill people who've been grassed on by some lovely ray of sunlight, because from reading other forums, it seems to be quite high. Never met anyone faking an illness as it happens, astonishingly, since everybody else seems to know reams of them.

 

[nino_savatte]

Because I knew them and they told me they were.

So, on the basis of knowing one or two people who were supposedly "faking" depression, this constitutes evidence of widespread fraud? How do I know you're not making this up?

 

[kabbes]

Even ignoring all the other problems with your claims, how do you know that those people weren't lying to you, moon? Maybe they found it easier to tell you that they didn't have depression really rather than suffer your judgement for it.

 

[moon23]

Even ignoring all the other problems with your claims, how do you know that those people weren't lying to you, moon? Maybe they found it easier to tell you that they didn't have depression really rather than suffer your judgement for it.

That is possible Kabbes, and I accept that the vast majority of people who need help are not faking it. I also think far more should be done to clamp down on tax avoidance that never seems to get as much attention.

 

[butchersapron]

80% you mean. Or, take back your attempt to use your severely limited anecdotal evidence. Do that right now.

 

[kabbes]

That is possible Kabbes, and I accept that the vast majority of people who need help are not faking it.

So you're going to cause misery and place barriers in the path of the vast majority in an attempt to curtail some unspecificed, uncorroborated and immaterial amount from an insignificant few?

How much are you going to spend to achieve this reduction in payments?

 

[frogwoman]

That is possible Kabbes, and I accept that the vast majority of people who need help are not faking it. I also think far more should be done to clamp down on tax avoidance that never seems to get as much attention.

Then why are you slavishly supporting a party that says that they are and that tax avoiders should not be given any more attention. Like I said - you have no principles

 

[Streathamite]

Labour introduced the bloody things, but the NUS didn't give a flying shit then because their senior officials where all trying to be the next Stephen Twigg. Lib Dems have made the proposals fairer so you now only have to pay back tuition fees when you can afford too.

Oh FFS! YOUR PARTY made a complete,unequivocal pledge. got 80% of the student vote off the back of that pledge-then broke it. Just as completely.Disgraceful dishonesty.

 

[butchersapron]

Who are the 'scum' moon?

 

[moon23]

Oh FFS! YOUR PARTY made a complete,unequivocal pledge. got 80% of the student vote off the back of that pledge-then broke it. Just as completely.Disgraceful dishonesty.

Every part of a parties manifesto is a promise to the electorate, in a coalition the smaller partner can't expect to implement it all. I do think the coalition agreement was badly negotiated, and should have taken into special account the tution fees problem.

I also think it's hugely unfair to blame Lib Dems for tuition fees, when they were introduced by Labour, the Browne report was commissioned by Labour, and the Conservatives wanted to raise them. The Lib Dems have opposed tuition fees, but in going into coalition had to compromise. In making that compromise I believe the party has ensured that the system we now have is fairer then it would have been. .

 

[butchersapron]

Every part of a parties manifesto is a promise to the electorate, in a coalition the smaller partner can't expect to implement it all.

What about doing the opposite. Think about that. Decide if you have principles or no. Does your get-out cover doing the exact opposite of what your manifesto declares or not?

 

[butchersapron]

Every part of a parties manifesto is a promise to the electorate, in a coalition the smaller partner can't expect to implement it all. I do think the coalition agreement was badly negotiated, and should have taken into special account the tution fees problem.

I also think it's hugely unfair to blame Lib Dems for tuition fees, when they were introduced by Labour, the Browne report was commissioned by Labour, and the Conservatives wanted to raise them. The Lib Dems have opposed tuition fees, but in going into coalition had to compromise. In making that compromise I believe the party has ensured that the system we now have is fairer then it would have been. .

Think what you fucking want mate.

 

[nino_savatte]

Every part of a parties manifesto is a promise to the electorate, in a coalition the smaller partner can't expect to implement it all. I do think the coalition agreement was badly negotiated, and should have taken into special account the tution fees problem.

I also think it's hugely unfair to blame Lib Dems for tuition fees, when they were introduced by Labour, the Browne report was commissioned by Labour, and the Conservatives wanted to raise them. The Lib Dems have opposed tuition fees, but in going into coalition had to compromise. In making that compromise I believe the party has ensured that the system we now have is fairer then it would have been. .

That said, neither party has a mandate to do the things they're doing to this country.

 

[frogwoman]

Every part of a parties manifesto is a promise to the electorate, in a coalition the smaller partner can't expect to implement it all. I do think the coalition agreement was badly negotiated, and should have taken into special account the tution fees problem.

I also think it's hugely unfair to blame Lib Dems for tuition fees, when they were introduced by Labour, the Browne report was commissioned by Labour, and the Conservatives wanted to raise them. The Lib Dems have opposed tuition fees, but in going into coalition had to compromise. In making that compromise I believe the party has ensured that the system we now have is fairer then it would have been. .

The fuck?