When will indyref2 happen?

[Fide]

6 hours ago, oaksoft said:

No. You get one chance to make your point.

Mm hmm girlfriend!

[pandarilla]

I have lost count of the number of times I have said BOTH sides need sorting out and yet here you are once again accusing me of suggesting that disabled people have caused this. It isn't going to help if you are going to deliberately misrepresent my views.

But only one side is being attacked by right wing politicians and our current government?

I didn't accuse you of saying anything. You claimed I was obsessed, and only focusing on one side. I was defending myself.

There is a right wing media narrative that blames welfare dependency for the economic situation we find ourselves in. It is utterly wrong but it is wholly ideological. I wasn't accusing you of that view - but you are doing a good impression of it.

[pandarilla]

It is clearly nonsense to suggest in any way that happiness is related to voting intentions.
Plenty of people who voted for other parties are happy with their lot. I am one of them and I am not alone by any stretch.
You really have to just get out there and ask people. As much as statistics are pish, there is no other method of evaluating this sort of thing.
Take this with a pinch of salt but in this Ipso-Mori poll, only 8% of respondents appear to have said they were unhappy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/15/british-people-nearly-twice-happy-think/

Again, a warped view of the argument.

You said people must be quite happy as they've voted in a Tory government. The post in question pointed out that this was less than 40% of the voting public - a perfectly legitimate response.

Absolutely no-one was claiming that voting for certain parties equals happiness.

[pandarilla]

Do you accept that there is an ideologically driven attack on those receiving benefits? And that the current economic situation is being used for that purpose?

[EvilScotsman]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Good post. It allows me to demonstrate exactly why you can never trust statistics.

Someone can always distort them to try and win an argument.

https://fullfact.org/economy/government-borrowing/

Have you allowed for the fact that the Tories and Labour have spent different amounts of time in power in the last 100 years?

You obviously understand that it is important that this is corrected for right?

Have you also corrected for the fact that when the Tories come into power they are generally walking into a financial shitstorm when the economy has crashed and that when Labour comes in things are usually stabilised? That has certainly been true since the 70's. It should also be quite obvious why this needs correcting for as well. I shouldn't need to spell out why.

Because you believe that the Tories are the party of fiscal responsibility, and that Labour are the party of reckless government spending.

Both points you make are corrected for.

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/12/28/the-conservatives-have-out-borrowed-labour-for-a-century/

 

 

[git-intae-thum]

After Thatcher spunked all the oil money, and Goggsy Broon flogged the gold and left us trillions in debt, I dont think either red or blue tories can hold any claim to fiscal responsibility.

[pandarilla]

After Thatcher spunked all the oil money, and Goggsy Broon flogged the gold and left us trillions in debt, I dont think either red or blue tories can hold any claim to fiscal responsibility.

Self-serving, short-termist p***ks the lot of them.

[Fide]

Is anyone else getting truly bored of Oaksoft's embittered, twisted mewlings?

[Antlion]

4 minutes ago, Fide said:

Is anyone else getting truly bored of Oaksoft's embittered, twisted mewlings?

Is he still taking a long, painful, drawn-out decrepit old man shite all over the thread then?

[Fide]

3 minutes ago, Antlion said:

Is he still taking a long, painful, drawn-out decrepit old man shite all over the thread then?

Tbf, I've started skimming his threads.

He hates this forum.

He hates the poor.

That's about it.

[Shades75]

13 minutes ago, Fide said:

Tbf, I've started skimming his threads.

He hates this forum.

He hates the poor.

That's about it.

I think he uses words, but I'm not entirely sure.  Whenever I read his posts all I can make out is "Ggrrrrrr...".

I think he's got PTSD.

[Boo Khaki]

5 hours ago, oaksoft said:

It absolutely isn't welfare which got us into this but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that it is bloated with people both abusing the system and people receiving money they really don't need which has bred a particularly aggressive form of dependency. We should never have a situation where a fit and healthy person can attract benefits to the tune of a very good working wage. Remember we have people protesting that a welfare cap of £25k is too low. What kind of person thinks that is an acceptable amount of money to hand over to a fit and healthy person who is out of work? It is crazy and indefensible.

No single out of work individual who is otherwise fit and healthy is going to attract anything like £25k in benefits. Those figures apply to families with complex needs, usually involve dependants with complex needs, or apply to large families who require large houses. 

To imply that someone can just give up work, hop on the dole, then whine that they're not able to claim more than £25k is utterly bizarre.

For arguments sake, a person living in a social housing one bedroom flat in Edinburgh, unable to work due to illness and being paid the top rate of ESA will receive approximately 10-12k in total benefit annually. That includes cash in hand, housing benefit, and council tax relief. Precious few people would qualify for anything above and beyond that, such as DLA/PIP, and certainly nothing remotely close to £25k. Someone on Jobseekers would receive substantially less, as would anyone claiming housing benefit in areas were social rents are far cheaper than Edinburgh.

It's complete and utter urban myth that the UK is full of lazy, workshy scroungers sitting getting fat on overly generous benefits. There are issues with people being disincentivsed to work due to the associated costs versus not working, but I don't see how anyone can argue that total benefits of 10k can be an 'incentive' to go on the dole, especially when barely half of that is money you actually receive in your hand.

As for 'benefits they don't really need', you'll find the people complaining about the cap are those who have lost things like mobility components, i.e., the severely disabled and dependent who, if you're going to insist have no 'need' of these things, would otherwise end up completely housebound, unable to attend school/hospital/treatment/therapy, unable to participate in life in general as a matter of fact. Families who require rooms for complex equipment to treat or enable profoundly disabled kids are now being 'punished' for having that extra room etc. Is this seriously the sort of thing you're arguing for?

There might not be 'any doubt in your mind', but your mind is quite clearly misinformed.

If you really want to talk about the serious 'drain' on the economy of the Welfare State, and in particular, payments to people whereby a whole tranche of them are receiving money they don't really need, then you'd look at state pensions. No politician would dare suggest such a thing though. It's imperative to keep the grey vote onside due to their propensity for turning out at 7am at polling stations in droves, reading the Daily Mail etc, but you can vilify and demonise the disableds and scroungers all you like, the direct effect on your electability is negligible due to 1. the fact they themselves are far less likely to vote and there are fewer of them to begin with, and 2. people who do vote buy the bullshit propaganda and endorse your continued demonisation.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Boo Khaki

[strichener]

52 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

No single out of work individual who is otherwise fit and healthy is going to attract anything like £25k in benefits. Those figures apply to families with complex needs, usually involve dependants with complex needs, or apply to large families who require large houses.

That isn't true at all.  A couple where both are unemployed and they have two children in Edinburgh can be entitled to over the £25k.  This is without any complex needs.

 

Tax Credits			£6,110.10
Jobseeker's Allowance		£7,623.29
Council Tax Reduction		£1,070.28
Housing Benefit			£9,696.44
Child Benefit			£1,788.80
Total Entitlements		£26,288.91

 

Edited April 21, 2017 by strichener

[Boo Khaki]

A family of two adults and two children is a 'large family' by comparison with Oaksoft's example a single, out of work, but fit for work individual.

That was the point of my post, to demonstrate to him that the people he's implying are whining about the cap don't even come close to being affected by the cap. i.e. his assertions and beliefs are completely incorrect.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

I think he uses words, but I'm not entirely sure.  Whenever I read his posts all I can make out is "Ggrrrrrr...".
I think he's got PMT.

FTFY.

[Silas Stingy]

The Scottish Politics forum page on Facebook is filled with the most delusional p***ks I have ever encountered. I will die a happy man if I don't come across these people who are glued to the past.

[pandarilla]

I have no idea whether it is idealogically driven or not.
It is necessary in my opinion. 

But you admitted that the current state was not caused by welfare spending?

Surely trying to fix the actual problem would be the sensible play for any government?

Or are you just happy to throw your hands up and say 'banks will be banks'?

[Fide]

5 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I have no idea whether it is idealogically driven or not.

It is necessary in my opinion. 

Yeah you're right, it's necessary.

0.7% of all benefits claimed are fraudulently so.

People are actually dying whilst being sanctioned and having their benefits stopped, or being driven to depression or the brink of suicide while they go through the trauma of an DWP assessment and potential tribunal all so the Government can appease Tory voters who despise "benefits scroungers".

And that's not lefty hand wringing, it's actual fact.  People are suffering.

I hope one day you wake up and look in the mirror and wake the f**k up.  Not holding out much hope though.

[Shades75]

18 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Or you could simply accept you are wrong as Strichener clearly showed.

Have you ever admitted to being wrong on this forum Oaksoft?

[Pearbuyerbell]

£7.5k per annum on council tax?    

Please.