Iain Duncan Smith resigns from Cabinet

[sutty27]

Ok, I'll keep going then. A man who claims £39 of tax payers money for breakfast then says that someone should be fine living off £53 a week of the same tax payers money...who has his credit card suspended due to dubious transactions and who put in an expenses claim for new underpants isn't going to get my sympathy.

 

I can keep this up for some time. IDS gave a lot of ammo.

 

Was the £53 a week just for food or everything including their accommodation.

 

Eating an expensive breakfast in a restaurant doesn't disqualify someone having an opinion on how much money is needed to live.

 

A few billion people would be over the moon if they had £53 a week.

 

I have no doubt that you can keep finding reasons to criticize someone.

[Mister M]

Was the £53 a week just for food or everything including their accommodation.

 

Eating an expensive breakfast in a restaurant doesn't disqualify someone having an opinion on how much money is needed to live.

 

A few billion people would be over the moon if they had £53 a week.

 

I have no doubt that you can keep finding reasons to criticize someone.

 

Though it doesn't really demonstrate that 'we're all in this together', as IDS complained Osborne's last budget failed to do. It also lays him open to the charge of 'do as I say, not as I do'

[poppet2]

Do you know what really gets me, it's the fact that he thinks we are stupid enough to seriously believe that he resigned on a matter of principle due to Osborne's disability cuts. Poppycock, he knew about them, he encouraged others to vote for them, then he suddenly had a road to Damascus moment.

 

He wants his legacy to be the man who resigned, as a matter of morals and principles. Pull the other one.

[Mister M]

Do you know what really gets me, it's the fact that he thinks we are stupid enough to seriously believe that he resigned on a matter of principle due to Osborne's disability cuts. Poppycock, he knew about them, he encouraged others to vote for them, then he suddenly had a road to Damascus moment.

 

He wants his legacy to be the man who resigned, as a matter of morals and principles. Pull the other one.

 

Andrew Pierce, who watches Tory Party politics said that Duncan Smith resented Osborne and Cameron 'looking down their noses at him'.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/cameron-and-osborne-have-problem-now---and-its-called-duncan-smith-127242

Quite a few other high profile Tories have made this accusation against Cameron and Osborne

[Bob Arctor]

Let me give an example just to see if I can stop banging my head against a wall.

 

One of my relatives with a mental health condition used to go to a work placement each day. He could not self travel unsupervised so his PIP budget had an element for taxi accounts, support worker and/or LD Service buses to take him to and from work. Last year he suffered some physical degenerative change and could no longer go to work every day. He now only does 2 days a week.

 

His PIP review reduced his monthly monies by around £150. That obviously created quite a drop in his bank balance.

 

Fair??

 

The problem with this example is that it is nothing to do with PIP. A person qualifies for the mobility component of PIP depending on the amount of support they need to make a journey, the amount of distress the journey causes them (usually relating to mental health) and the distance they can walk. Eligibility has nothing at all to do with the number of journeys you make or the distance travelled. Exactly the same for the daily living component - it's about the amount of help you need, not the frequency with which you have to do the tasks. Therefore, in the example you have given, deterioration in physical functioning would make no difference at all to PIP eligibility and the PIP award (unless they were previously getting the Standard rate and were now eligible for the Enhanced rate).

 

The two remaining possibilities are therefore that what you believe is PIP is in fact a Personal Budget payment from the local authority which can be made either has a cash payment or by the direct provision of services, and which would be reduced if the amount of activity someone needed assistance with reduced, or that you're lying.

[sutty27]

Though it doesn't really demonstrate that 'we're all in this together', as IDS complained Osborne's last budget failed to do. It also lays him open to the charge of 'do as I say, not as I do'

 

We are all in it together but doesn't change the fact that some will still be better off than others, workers and employers will pull us out of the mess, the unemployed won't, so we should look after the people that will get us out of the mess, not the people that make the mess worse than it needs to be.

[Mister M]

We are all in it together but doesn't change the fact that some will still be better off than others, workers and employers will pull us out of the mess, the unemployed won't, so we should look after the people that will get us out of the mess, not the people that make the mess worse than it needs to be.

 

I don't think we are all in it together.

With regards to not looking after those make the mess worse than it needs to be - in the context of this discussion / why Iain Duncan Smith resigned, the disabled should not have to shoulder the burden of 'the people that make the mess worse than it needs to be' tag. I think it's an incredibly insensitive way of viewing them.

I have worked with disabled people, many of whom make a positive contribution to life, and the lives of others. For them to do this, they just need some support.

Yes some will always be better off than others; however I don't think that enriching those who have, at the expense of those who haven't; or viewing those with disability as an inconvenience / or expense is right or even helpful.

 

---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 20:29 ----------

 

As this poster quite rightly said today:

 

I think if you were to undertake a quick check of the facts you would, in fact, discover that the "bankruptcy" was caused by property speculation and "derivatives" leading to massive state bailouts of the largest banks.

 

You appear to have fallen for the perpetual lie of the Conservative Party in general and Geo Osborne in particular- "it's all the fault of the last government".

 

Daily Mail/Express/Sun/Telegraph/Times reader I guess.

 

It wasn't the disabled that caused the mess in the first place - but those who are well able to look after themselves - and did, at the expense of everyone else.

Edited March 22, 2016 by Mister M

[sutty27]

I don't think we are all in it together.

With regards to not looking after those make the mess worse than it needs to be - in the context of this discussion / why Iain Duncan Smith resigned, the disabled should not have to shoulder the burden of 'the people that make the mess worse than it needs to be' tag. I think it's an incredibly insensitive way of viewing them.

I have worked with disabled people, many of whom make a positive contribution to life, and the lives of others. For them to do this, they just need some support.

Yes some will always be better off than others; however I don't think that enriching those who have, at the expense of those who haven't; or viewing those with disability as an inconvenience / or expense is right or even helpful.

 

PIP is given to the disable for specific reasons and when those specific reasons no longer exist it should rightly be withdrawn. This isn't taking money off, its just not giving them something that they are deemed to no longer need.

 

There are 9.4 million disabled people in England, accounting for 18 per cent of the population, it would be nice if we could afford to give them everything they want but it isn't affordable, it could be worse though they could live in one of the many countries that would give them nothing.

 

---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 20:42 ----------

 

It wasn't the disabled that caused the mess in the first place - but those who are well able to look after themselves - and did, at the expense of everyone else.

 

The people you are complaining about are the very people that create the wealth which enables the country to give the disabled something.

[banjodeano]

PIP is given to the disable for specific reasons and when those specific reasons no longer exist it should rightly be withdrawn. This isn't taking money off, its just not giving them something that they are deemed to no longer need.

 

There are 9.4 million disabled people in England, accounting for 18 per cent of the population, it would be nice if we could afford to give them everything they want but it isn't affordable, it could be worse though they could live in one of the many countries that would give them nothing.

 

---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 20:42 ----------

 

 

The people you are complaining about are the very people that create the wealth which enables the country to give the disabled something.

no....the workers create the wealth

[Mister M]

PIP is given to the disable for specific reasons and when those specific reasons no longer exist it should rightly be withdrawn. This isn't taking money off, its just not giving them something that they are deemed to no longer need.

 

There are 9.4 million disabled people in England, accounting for 18 per cent of the population, it would be nice if we could afford to give them everything they want but it isn't affordable, it could be worse though they could live in one of the many countries that would give them nothing.

 

They're not asking for everything they want, and as you said it's there for specific needs. But you're right, the disabled can always console themselves that they're not in Somalia. Even if they have to live with knowledge that they are the people 'that make the mess worse than it needs to be'.

 

---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 20:51 ----------

 

PIP is given to the disable for specific reasons and when those specific reasons no longer exist it should rightly be withdrawn. This isn't taking money off, its just not giving them something that they are deemed to no longer need.

 

There are 9.4 million disabled people in England, accounting for 18 per cent of the population, it would be nice if we could afford to give them everything they want but it isn't affordable, it could be worse though they could live in one of the many countries that would give them nothing.

 

---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 20:42 ----------

 

 

The people you are complaining about are the very people that create the wealth which enables the country to give the disabled something.

 

Lots of people are involved in the wealth creation process, including disabled people.