Lower benefits cap

[tzijlstra]

And that's all you have to say about my post? Rather a small point to make about a big issue.

 

A bit like you eternally dodging my comments about you voting for Brexit whilst you evangelise the rights and plights of workers on here.

[Anna B]

A bit like you eternally dodging my comments about you voting for Brexit whilst you evangelise the rights and plights of workers on here.

 

As far as I remember I answered all your questions about Brexit to the best of my ability, in as much as nobody really knows what will happen, only what they hope will happen.

[Cyclone]

i am sometimes accused of posting on here without backing it up with evidence. When I try it is also turned against me ,so damned if I do, damned if I don't.

 

I prefer to judge by my own experiences and what I hear from people I know, (I do volunteer work, and also know a lot of people who work in various benefit fields,) although of course this would be dismissed merely as anecdotal evidence and not worth a light. So what do you want?

 

That's the problem, when you looked up the evidence, and it didn't support your opinion, you should have changed your opinion.

The way it works isn't "blindly stick to opinion despite the evidence", let the evidence create your opinion.

 

---------- Post added 15-11-2016 at 07:23 ----------

 

Yes and in my opinion it isn't a small number, its a large numbers, it also doesn't say that most people get much less than the maximum. I'm still of the opinion that no one is going to change their opinion just because Cyclone chose to call them idiots.

 

I wasn't trying to change any opinion though, because nobody had actually expressed the view which I characterised as idiotic.

 

---------- Post added 15-11-2016 at 07:26 ----------

 

How can you know the range if no one knows the actual number?

 

If someone knew the number then there wouldn't be a range, there would be a number.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/01/extended-benefit-cap-hit-116000-families-housing-experts

 

The reports I've seen HAVE given a number though (perhaps it's just an estimate in the middle of a range though), and it's a small number in comparison to the number who claim benefits.

 

If only 5% are affected by the cap, then that's a small minority, right.

 

---------- Post added 15-11-2016 at 07:28 ----------

 

This benefit cap is designed to make it look as if those on benefits receive these sorts of amounts.

 

And if you cast your mind back, it was this assertion that I was countering.

 

There's no evidence for this, and this would only work on an uniformed idiot.

 

Did you take offence because you'd formed the opinion that Anna thought the cap was designed to create? Because I honestly thought that anyone posting on the forum would be smarter than that, including you.

 

Do you think that a large number of people claim £20k/annum in benefits?

[Petminder]

That's the problem, when you looked up the evidence, and it didn't support your opinion, you should have changed your opinion.

The way it works isn't "blindly stick to opinion despite the evidence", let the evidence create your opinion.

 

---------- Post added 15-11-2016 at 07:23 ----------

 

 

I wasn't trying to change any opinion though, because nobody had actually expressed the view which I characterised as idiotic.

 

---------- Post added 15-11-2016 at 07:26 ----------

 

 

If someone knew the number then there wouldn't be a range, there would be a number.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/01/extended-benefit-cap-hit-116000-families-housing-experts

 

The reports I've seen HAVE given a number though (perhaps it's just an estimate in the middle of a range though), and it's a small number in comparison to the number who claim benefits.

 

If only 5% are affected by the cap, then that's a small minority, right.

 

---------- Post added 15-11-2016 at 07:28 ----------

 

 

And if you cast your mind back, it was this assertion that I was countering.

 

There's no evidence for this, and this would only work on an uniformed idiot.

 

Did you take offence because you'd formed the opinion that Anna thought the cap was designed to create? Because I honestly thought that anyone posting on the forum would be smarter than that, including you.

 

Do you think that a large number of people claim £20k/annum in benefits?

 

So you preemptively called everyone that might hold an opposing opinion to you an idiot probably to shut them down before they contradicted you, and I'm not offended by rude people.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Petminder

[Anna B]

That's the problem, when you looked up the evidence, and it didn't support your opinion, you should have changed your opinion.

The way it works isn't "blindly stick to opinion despite the evidence", let the evidence create your opinion.

___________________________________________________________________

I posted evidence which supported my argument.

 

I also saw other evidence which didn't, which just goes to prove my point that 'evidence' or 'statistics' can be found and used to support anything you like.

 

Therefore I prefer to work on my own research, my own experience, and that of real people I talk to who are involved in the issues and know what they're talking about.

 

As for the 'uninformed idiots' I'm not saying people are, but a surprising lot have no time for politics, and are willing to believe what they are fed via the newspaper headlines without giving it too much thought.

 

The government depend on people like these, and are quite happy to feed them bull.....

Edited November 15, 2016 by Anna B

[unbeliever]

___________________________________________________________________

I posted evidence which supported my argument.

 

I also saw other evidence which didn't, which just goes to prove my point that 'evidence' or 'statistics' can be found and used to support anything you like.

 

Therefore I prefer to work on my own research, my own experience, and that of real people I talk to who are involved in the issues and know what they're talking about.

 

 

Rejecting hard data in favour of anecdotal evidence is a very good way to be wrong about things.

The trick is to evaluate data and look for spin.

[Anna B]

Rejecting hard data in favour of anecdotal evidence is a very good way to be wrong about things.

The trick is to evaluate data and look for spin.

 

Yes I do that too. And boy is there some spin....

[Santo]

Yes I do that too. And boy is there some spin....

 

Do you have anything in particular in mind and evidence of spin?

[Cyclone]

So you preemptively called everyone that might hold an opposing opinion to you an idiot probably to shut them down before they contradicted you, and I'm not offended by rude people.

 

No, I really didn't think that there would be many people that stupid.

You keep trying to cast it as an opinion btw when we've now established that it's actually fact. The (small) group of people I was categorising as idiots were those who would form an opinion without reference to the facts. You seem to be offended because you've decided you belong in that group.

Perhaps you could just leave that group, start checking facts before forming an opinions and not worrying that maybe I unintentionally think you're an idiot?

Edited November 16, 2016 by Cyclone

[Petminder]

No, I really didn't think that there would be many people that stupid.

You keep trying to cast it as an opinion btw when we've now established that it's actually fact. The (small) group of people I was categorising as idiots were those who would form an opinion without reference to the facts. You seem to be offended because you've decided you belong in that group.

Perhaps you could just leave that group, start checking facts before forming an opinions and not worrying that maybe I unintentionally think you're an idiot?

 

Its your opinion that its a fact, and that anyone with an opposing opinion is a stupid idiot, we will never know how many people think you are wrong because your abuse towards anyone with an opposing position stops them engaging with you. So we are back to people like you just shut debate down by being rude, rudeness doesn't encourage debate it discourages debate.