Benefits in Britain. fact and fiction

[MrSmith]

As I stated earlier the incapacity gravy train grew rapidly under the Tories in the 90s. Maybe them using Atos was just trying to clear up their mess from the last time they were in power.

 

And we will never know if they were genuine or not.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2013 at 22:33 ----------

 

Look up GDP on Google.

 

I don't need to thanks, I know what it is and how it is Calculated.

 

 

Calculating a GDP estimate for all three measures is a huge undertaking every three months.

 

The output measure alone - which is considered the most accurate in the short term - involves surveying tens of thousands of UK firms.

 

The main sources used for this are ONS surveys of manufacturing and service industries.

 

Information on sales is collected from 6,000 companies in manufacturing, 25,000 service sector firms, 5,000 retailers and 10,000 companies in the construction sector.

[I1L2T3]

And we will never know if they were genuine or not.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2013 at 22:33 ----------

 

 

I don't need to thanks, I know what it is and how it is meassured.

 

How is it measured.

[andygardener]

In all likelihood there were not 900,000 fraudsters. Sorry.

 

Certainly not 900,000 fraudsters. But 900,000 people claiming benefits far in excess of what we pay jobseekers who faced with a request for a chat about if this was deserved just closed their claims rather than attend. So nearly a million people capable of work and previous paid handsomely not to work made to work can only be a good thing surely?

[I1L2T3]

Certainly not 900,000 fraudsters. But 900,000 people claiming benefits far in excess of what we pay jobseekers who faced with a request for a chat about if this was deserved just closed their claims rather than attend. So nearly a million people capable of work and previous paid handsomely not to work made to work can only be a good thing surely?

 

Hmmm. It doesn't mean they are capable for work. It just means they will most likely settle for some other form of benefit.

[MrSmith]

How is it measured.

 

One of my sons responsibilities is to fill in the ONS surveys, there are more important things his company wants him to do so filling it in a bit of a rush and very much an estimate.

 

And the ONS have never asked me to fill one.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2013 at 22:48 ----------

 

Hmmm. It doesn't mean they are capable for work. It just means they will most likely settle for some other form of benefit.

Or they already work and won't claim anything, Incapacity Benefit is also not means-tested, so it’s likely some of them will have to much in saving to qualify for other benefits.

 

Incapacity benefit has cost the taxpayer £135 billion in the past decade and is paid to 2.1 million people. The latest move is part of the Government’s plan to save at least £16 billion from the £195 billion welfare budget by 2014-15.

[Jessica23]

That 900,000 figure is misleading.

 

Have a read here.

 

And another interesting post by the same author here, which has a truly magnificent opening paragraph:

 

This week's outbreak of irrationality over welfare has brought home to me just how far political debate on this issue in the UK has broken loose from any mooring in reality. It's obvious that what people refer to as 'welfare' has little to do with the realities of expenditure levels, eligibility conditions, employment impacts, deduction rates or any of the other things that those of us whose job involves trying to understand social security systems worry about. Very little that has been said over the last week has really been about welfare in this sense. Rather, 'welfare' in the UK political imagination is a prism through which issues of class, social cohesion and purported national decline are refracted, magnified and distorted with little reference to the functions of social security or how well it fulfills them.

[andygardener]

Hmmm. It doesn't mean they are capable for work. It just means they will most likely settle for some other form of benefit.

 

Yes, the lower paid form of benefit that says they have to look for work. So we're no longer paying huge premium for nearly a million people to not even pretend to look for work and we now pay them the same as everyone else looking for a job to look for a job. Can you say with a straight face that is a bad thing?

[I1L2T3]

One of my sons responsibilities is to fill in the ONS surveys, there are more important things his company wants him to do so filling it in a bit of a rush and very much an estimate.

 

And the ONS have never asked me to fill one.

 

OK, sorry I thought you would mention the black economy which of course isn't easily measured using GDP. There is a suggestion that people are not claiming and just dropping into the black economy instead. Going off radar. Losing the Treasury billions of pounds.

 

---------- Post added 07-04-2013 at 22:53 ----------

 

Yes, the lower paid form of benefit that says they have to look for work. So we're no longer paying huge premium for nearly a million people to not even pretend to look for work and we now pay them the same as everyone else looking for a job to look for a job. Can you say with a straight face that is a bad thing?

 

It's not a good thing if they drop off the radar altogether.

[MrSmith]

OK, sorry I thought you would mention the black economy which of course isn't easily measured using GDP. There is a suggestion that people are not claiming and just dropping into the black economy instead. Going off radar. Losing the Treasury billions of pounds.

 

 

I didn't mention the black economy but surely it’s better for someone to work in the black economy and not claim benefits, than work in the black economy whilst claiming benefits.

[I1L2T3]

I didn't mention the black economy but surely it’s better for someone to work in the black economy and not claim benefits, than work in the black economy whilst claiming benefits.

 

Not if the loss in income to the Treasury is greater than the amount saved in benefits payments. In that case it's a net loss to the government and possibly damaging to other businesses too that are operating above board, paying taxes and adhering to regulations.