Protest against benefit changes

[js2012]

I'm trying to think what the **** word might be ?

 

Sh.........

You can guess the rest.

[Tradescanthia]

Too many people have been brainwashed by the media into thinking that all benefit claimants are lazy workshy scroungers.

 

The vast majority are actually people just like you and me who have been unfortunate enough to have lost their job and are finding it extremely difficult to find another one.

 

We should all stick together lest we find ourselves in this same predicament tomorrow.

 

Cameron, via the media, is playing the oldest trick in the book. It's called divide and conquer. If you buy into this propaganda then you really are laying the blame at the wrong door, and allowing the politicians to get away with murder.

 

This is one occasion when we (the plebs) really are all in this together.

 

Bang on target !!!!!!, but you are wasting your time trying to educate the load of media brainwashed 'know it alls' who frequent this forum.

Their motto is 'I'm alright Jack'.

[Conrod]

Bang on target !!!!!!, but you are wasting your time trying to educate the load of media brainwashed 'know it alls' who frequent this forum.

Their motto is 'I'm alright Jack'.

Or perhaps that motto might be "I have to work, why don't they?"

 

Whilever my taxes pay for the idle to have anything beyond basic food and shelter, they will have no sympathy from me.

[Cyclone]

The country can't be that broke if Cameron can give an extra £450 million a year to unelected EU bureaucrats whose accounts haven't been signed off for 16 years in a row. This is on top of the £billions we already give to the institutionally corrupt EU.

You're talking about the increase in the EU budget that we were already signed up for and couldn't legally stop?

 

Chancellor George Osborne has publicly stated that the budget of the Department for International Development would be increased by 37 per cent in real terms. Figures show that the UK spending on foreign aid - including the amount spent by departments other than DFID - will rise by 50 per cent, increasing from £8.4billion this year to £12.6billion in 2014.

This does seem rather perverse to me.

 

But then I never suggested that I support every policy or spending decision the government makes, just this one.

[mossdog]

The country is broke yet Cameron can afford to appoint his own cronies onto the public payroll.

 

I quote: 'Isabel Spearman, Special Advisor to Samantha Cameron, she will work 4 days a week on a salary of £60,000, helping the PM's wife co-ordinate her diary, and choose outfits for engagements at home and abroad.

 

'Anna-Maren Ashford, will work in the flagship behavioural insight team in the Cabinet office, on a salary of £50,000.'

 

'Risha Saha, ex Tory candidate, will control the PM's personal Web Cameron site, he earns around £50,000.'

 

'Andrew Parsons, is to become the PM's personal photographer on a salary of £35,000.'

 

And there are another 20 odd appointments (mainly old friends and associates) on 'team Cameron' on similar salaries.

Anna! Anna!........get real, the last Labour government has had an appalling record in jobs for the boys and girls.There's more daft people wearing ermine in the house of Lords than you can shake a stick at, appointed in the last reign!Lord Prescott..........indeed!All parties do it we know,but come on, you need to do much better than that!

[Ms Macbeth]

Or perhaps that motto might be "I have to work, why don't they?"

 

Whilever my taxes pay for the idle to have anything beyond basic food and shelter, they will have no sympathy from me.

 

But its not the 'idle' who we should be worrying about. Its those vulnerable people who have a variety of serious health problems. If someone is just managing to hold their life together, without getting the help they should get from support and health service providers, the last thing they need is the threat of the removal of their only source of income. My concern, as a long term taxpayer, is that these are the people who may be an easy target for the DWP assessors. I want my taxes to help the genuinely disabled, and those who are too fragile (physically or mentally) to be forced into an environment that will make their lives unmanageable.

 

When my OH was on Incapacity Benefit, he was not capable of work for several years. When he attempted, after heart surgery, to return to his previous self employment, he couldn't do it - either physically or mentally. The support that was supposed to materialise at the Jobcentre wasn't evident. He was fortunate, because I worked full time, and could afford to support both of us during the period when he had no income. Eventually he found part time work and at 65 is still employed.

 

But not everyone has a supportive partner or family - many people on disability benefits live alone. If they are genuinely incapable of holding down a regular job - what is going to happen to them if they are assessed by people who have no understanding of their condition? They are going to have to compete for jobs with people who have no health problems. If you were most employers - would you give someone with serious health issues a job?

[mossdog]

But its not the 'idle' who we should be worrying about. Its those vulnerable people who have a variety of serious health problems. If someone is just managing to hold their life together, without getting the help they should get from support and health service providers, the last thing they need is the threat of the removal of their only source of income. My concern, as a long term taxpayer, is that these are the people who may be an easy target for the DWP assessors. I want my taxes to help the genuinely disabled, and those who are too fragile (physically or mentally) to be forced into an environment that will make their lives unmanageable.

 

When my OH was on Incapacity Benefit, he was not capable of work for several years. When he attempted, after heart surgery, to return to his previous self employment, he couldn't do it - either physically or mentally. The support that was supposed to materialise at the Jobcentre wasn't evident. He was fortunate, because I worked full time, and could afford to support both of us during the period when he had no income. Eventually he found part time work and at 65 is still employed.

 

But not everyone has a supportive partner or family - many people on disability benefits live alone. If they are genuinely incapable of holding down a regular job - what is going to happen to them if they are assessed by people who have no understanding of their condition? They are going to have to compete for jobs with people who have no health problems. If you were most employers - would you give someone with serious health issues a job?

I would not think that the assessors are all heartless people! I think like you and I they will soon know who is swinging the lead and who isn't!

[CorkerSWFC]

There is going to be so many people without money its untrue.

[purdyamos]

I would not think that the assessors are all heartless people! I think like you and I they will soon know who is swinging the lead and who isn't!

 

 

They don't! Open your eyes and look at what is going on, it's been reported on here enough times and people continue to ignore it and spout the propaganda line about 'genuine' claimants not being affected. People with extreme and complex illnesses are being taking off ESA in line with tick boxes and quotas rather than the true nature of their conditions, and assessors are not capable of assessing the ugly and unpredictable reality of myriad types of ill health. A few minutes' chat with a stranger is overriding the evidence of people's own doctors and consultants. What's actually going on in the ATOS system is wicked and almost no-one is bothered that the most vulnerable people of all are being deliberately targeted.

[INTERVIEWER]

According to Iain Duncan Smith there will be no right to an appeal if you are sanctioned for refusing a job offer. The Job Centre never offers customers jobs, it is up to the customer to work hard for any job offers by applying and attending interviews. Perhaps Cameron and IDS mistakenly believe that Job Centre's up and down the country offer jobs to the unemployed on a regular basis?

 

I think that the unemployed will be forced to sign up to casual, very temporary work with employment agencies - or be sanctioned for having refused a job opportunity.