I Daniel Blake

[look out piano]

So if you could have the exact same amount coming in but only work 15 hours then you wouldn't? I'd work as few hours as possible given the chance.

Nah I'd just stay where I am, I'm used to my routine and I plan on upping my hours as the bairn gets older.

 

[Tadger]

In 2015-16, total spending on benefits was £172.3bn, of which £1.9bn (1.1%) was fraudulently claimed.

The latest figures I could find for tax evasion and avoidance are from 2013-14; they show that tax evasion and tax avoidance costs the government £34 billion a year.

To be fair, you can differentiate between fraudulent claims and people who are legitimate claimants that are workshy.

That said, it won’t be anywhere near the ratio of one to twenty. That’s just daft.

 

[Mr Vertigo]

It would seem as if the whole world is full of people who feel entitled to pick on other people who they don't feel are entitled, despite the fact that those who feel entitled do not, and are very unlikely to ever need help.


This is total bollocks. Of course there are some who are, but nothing like in the ratio that you describe. Of course those numbers could reach near those proportions if you take into account those who fiddle their taxes instead of being on other benefits.


I think you'll find that he certainly has. Trying to write off his arguments with insults is the sign of someone with no cogent argument to supply.

Are you serious? That's exactly what he did to me when I gave a reasoned analysis of the film. My response was my subjective observation - he appears to have a limited intellect and is incredibly arrogant and dismissive towards anyone who disagrees with him. Cheers for the input, however unnecessary.

 

[sidneyeric]

That’s fine mate, but too many don’t condem benefit fraud and just defend it with the tax argument

For me they two entirely diffrent things which are both wrong.



Well what I cannot understand is people failing to attend apppointments, I read recently that 70% of sanctions is for people under 30 failing to attend their apppointment.

If you knew they was a possibility of a sanction you would turn up surely?

I know there has been some unfair sanctions but also loads where people just don’t turn up!

There's more than enough evidence out there including someone from this board that you lot make an appointment or change one then do not send the letter out and then sanction the claimant, you're attempts at moving the "blame" for the UC fuck up from IDS to Osbourne are embarrassing.

 

[Voice of fair play]

There's more than enough evidence out there including someone from this board that you lot make an appointment or change one then do not send the letter out and then sanction the claimant, you're attempts at moving the "blame" for the UC fuck up from IDS to Osbourne are embarrassing.

Once again I have no alligence to IDS or Osbourne why would I? both tories who both live in a world that could not give a toss about my own deprived area.

However that does not mean that I should deny the facts, the facts are in the budget of 2015, millions were taken out of the budget for UC by Osbourne that reduced the work allowance (meaning more earnings were taken off somebody's UC) and made low earning hard working people worse off, it's in disputable fact, that everybody knows so I have no idea why you keep disputing that as its not opinion but fact!

As for you first point there is no letters sent out full stop on UC as all appointments are uploaded to a claimants on-line account and text or e-mail sent in a automated process linked to the current appointment, and is changed automatically if appointment is changed, so that information you mention is well out of date irrespective whether true or not.

So under UC your first point is simply impossible.

The simple fact is many many young people just can't be bothered to turn up for appointments.

Again that's not say soo or opinion but fact.

 

[AndrewP]

Nah I'd just stay where I am, I'm used to my routine and I plan on upping my hours as the bairn gets older.

I'd work zero if I could tbh.

Fair play though, it'll make a huge difference once he's able to get to and from school himself. I know that would make a huge difference for me.

 

[The Muffin Man]

The old system works just fine for me, weekly payments to match with my weekly wages (think housing benefit is paid fortnightly directly to Gentoo). I read this morning that Amber Rudd has delayed the vote on the next stage of the UC rollout, they're going to vote instead on transferring 10,000 claimants in some kind of pilot scheme (where it's impact / findings can be monitored more closely).

Its like some sick experiment, lets pick 10,000 random people and fuck their lives up completely so we can monitor the impact.

We know what damage it does, 100s of MPs in parliament seeing thousands of people in their surgeries telling us what it f***ing does. Why do more people have to suffer.

 

[look out piano]

Its like some sick experiment, lets pick 10,000 random people and fuck their lives up completely so we can monitor the impact.

I'm keeping everything crossed that one of those won't be me.

 

[AndrewP]

Its like some sick experiment, lets pick 10,000 random people and fuck their lives up completely so we can monitor the impact.

Any indication of who it'll be. Poorest first?

 

[The Muffin Man]

Any indication of who it'll be. Poorest first?

Post code lottery like the rest of it I believe.

 

[AndrewP]

I'm keeping everything crossed that one of those won't be me.

I reckon people without kids will be dusty. Less sad faces in local newspapers.

Post code lottery like the rest of it I believe.

That's how they did it originally. But I reckon this time they'll do it based on demographic.

 

[The Muffin Man]

I reckon people without kids will be dusty. Less sad faces in local newspapers.



That's how they did it originally. But I reckon this time they'll do it based on demographic.

Hopefully she wont even get this 10,000 through parliament.....They should be repealing the entire f***ing thing, not pushing more people into it.

"Oh look, this system is shit, hasnt worked since day 1, is years late, is billions over target, is getting worse the longer we try to impliment it, shows no sign of improvements sooooo fuck it, crack on anyway!"

Here's the thing, had they simply put a system in place that simplified the old system then Im not sure there would have been a problem. The problem has been caused because their dirty ideology at Tory HQ meant that they had to try and use it as a vehicle to stealthily impoverish the already poor and low paid still further, while trying to pretend to the world it was actually making everyone better off. Of all the tory failures since 2010, this is surely the biggest of the lot.

 

[Purrfect South]

Once again I have no alligence to IDS or Osbourne why would I? both tories who both live in a world that could not give a toss about my own deprived area.

However that does not mean that I should deny the facts, the facts are in the budget of 2015, millions were taken out of the budget for UC by Osbourne that reduced the work allowance (meaning more earnings were taken off somebody's UC) and made low earning hard working people worse off, it's in disputable fact, that everybody knows so I have no idea why you keep disputing that as its not opinion but fact!

As for you first point there is no letters sent out full stop on UC as all appointments are uploaded to a claimants on-line account and text or e-mail sent in a automated process linked to the current appointment, and is changed automatically if appointment is changed, so that information you mention is well out of date irrespective whether true or not.

So under UC your first point is simply impossible.

The simple fact is many many young people just can't be bothered to turn up for appointments.

Again that's not say soo or opinion but fact.

I don’t think you can lay everything at the claimants door. Having worked fo years on Govt systems, I’m well aware of their weaknesses, as well as their strengths. Systems are only as efficient as the staff that use them. Just as there are lazy, and feckless claimants, there are also lazy, and feckless Govt employees. Staff turnover, sickness, and staff cuts exacerbate this situation. In my own brief time working for DHSS many moons ago, I was fascinated by the disdain with which most claimants were held. There was a distinct attitude of guilty until proven otherwise.
For a very brief period in the 80’s I found myself on the wrong side of the counter, and 3 small children to feed. It was a dreadful experience, and I’ve always seen the system in a different light.

 

[Voice of fair play]

I don’t think you can lay everything at the claimants door. Having worked fo years on Govt systems, I’m well aware of their weaknesses, as well as their strengths. Systems are only as efficient as the staff that use them. Just as there are lazy, and feckless claimants, there are also lazy, and feckless Govt employees. Staff turnover, sickness, and staff cuts exacerbate this situation. In my own brief time working for DHSS many moons ago, I was fascinated by the disdain with which most claimants were held. There was a distinct attitude of guilty until proven otherwise.
For a very brief period in the 80’s I found myself on the wrong side of the counter, and 3 small children to feed. It was a dreadful experience, and I’ve always seen the system in a different light.

Of course in every walk of life and every industry they are good workers and bad workers.

And of course there is genuine claimants who need and get support as well as workshy claimants.

It would be very wrong to pigeon hole either.

This is why support and help should be given to those who want and need support, but equally there should be penalties for people who are fit and able who don't want and avoid work.

Hopefully she wont even get this 10,000 through parliament.....They should be repealing the entire f***ing thing, not pushing more people into it.

"Oh look, this system is shit, hasnt worked since day 1, is years late, is billions over target, is getting worse the longer we try to impliment it, shows no sign of improvements sooooo fuck it, crack on anyway!"

Here's the thing, had they simply put a system in place that simplified the old system then Im not sure there would have been a problem. The problem has been caused because their dirty ideology at Tory HQ meant that they had to try and use it as a vehicle to stealthily impoverish the already poor and low paid still further, while trying to pretend to the world it was actually making everyone better off. Of all the tory failures since 2010, this is surely the biggest of the lot.

Yes that is exactly where they have gone wrong, while trying to simplify a system they have used the oppporunity to make cuts within that, which has totally gone against the principle of making work pay in some instances which means the whole principle loses its core purpose.

 

[Purrfect South]

Of course in every walk of life and every industry they are good workers and bad workers.

And of course there is genuine claimants who need and get support as well as workshy claimants.

It would be very wrong to pigeon hole either.

This is why support and help should be given to those who want and need support, but equally there should be penalties for people who are fit and able who don't want and avoid work.



Yes that is exactly where they have gone wrong, while trying to simplify a system they have used the oppporunity to make cuts within that, which has totally gone against the principle of making work pay in some instances which means the whole principle loses its core purpose.

My reasons for arguing about this is that it's the numbers of bad claimants that appear to be exaggerated when it suits. I totally agree that they exist, but I feel that the press loses sight of this, and end up demonising the good ones. I also don't think that the changes made to the system by the Tories were done mistakenly as @The Muffin Man suggested. I'm sure that it's a pernicious, and deliberate ploy to destabilise the poor even more than they already are, thus making them easier to control, and manipulate.

 

[Voice of fair play]

My reasons for arguing about this is that it's the numbers of bad claimants that appear to be exaggerated when it suits. I totally agree that they exist, but I feel that the press loses sight of this, and end up demonising the good ones. I also don't think that the changes made to the system by the Tories were done mistakenly as @The Muffin Man suggested. I'm sure that it's a pernicious, and deliberate ploy to destabilise the poor even more than they already are, thus making them easier to control, and manipulate.

The problem I think is too many people have a political agenda and only see things through the eyes that suit that political agenda.

Rather than looking at the actual issues objectively.

Me personally I could not care less about politics.

You are right some of the press demonise genuine claimants which is very wrong.

The reality is there is some benefit claimants, quite a lot who need support and if they don’t receive that help, that is very wrong

But also on the other side people don’t realise and accept that some people especially some young people not all, have a terrible attitude to work.

Like I said earlier 70% of sanctions is for people under 30 just failing to attend appointments.

It confuses me why that happens if I can’t attend anything I let people know but maybe that is just me

 

[Deleted member 559]

Listening to some daft arse talking about the film today. The way he was going on he believes it was a documentary.

 

[lurker]

Once again I have no alligence to IDS or Osbourne why would I? both tories who both live in a world that could not give a toss about my own deprived area.

However that does not mean that I should deny the facts, the facts are in the budget of 2015, millions were taken out of the budget for UC by Osbourne that reduced the work allowance (meaning more earnings were taken off somebody's UC) and made low earning hard working people worse off, it's in disputable fact, that everybody knows so I have no idea why you keep disputing that as its not opinion but fact!

As for you first point there is no letters sent out full stop on UC as all appointments are uploaded to a claimants on-line account and text or e-mail sent in a automated process linked to the current appointment, and is changed automatically if appointment is changed, so that information you mention is well out of date irrespective whether true or not.

So under UC your first point is simply impossible.

The simple fact is many many young people just can't be bothered to turn up for appointments.

Again that's not say soo or opinion but fact.

I bet you’re a right tight bastard.

f***ing pure selfish

Listening to some daft arse talking about the film today. The way he was going on he believes it was a documentary.

It’s based on true stories mate sorry to break it to you. The usage of food banks is far too common an occurrence now in Britain.

 

[The Fitter]

Radio, radio.? f***ing wireless !!

BT love it when I refer to my broadband connection as wireless.

 

[Voice of fair play]

I bet you’re a right tight bastard.

f***ing pure selfish


It’s based on true stories mate sorry to break it to you. The usage of food banks is far too common an occurrence now in Britain.

You have no idea about me mate, to be frank I am trying to put across a fair debate based off facts and observations

You actually replied to a point where I am saying it’s very wrong low income families are getting less money, yet call me selfish?

Surely you think low earning working families should be better off? hard working families should be rewarded don’t you think?