eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
Didn't Ms Raynor say that There are enough houses in the country apparently, just not the ones people want.
Didn't Ms Raynor say that There are enough houses in the country apparently, just not the ones people want.dont selloff council houses and build more
if so might be right seems you can get four bed detached all over the place whenever there built but where are the two bed terraces in villages to keep the kids there when they leave home so needs the state to takeoverDidn't Ms Raynor say that There are enough houses in the country apparently, just not the ones people want.
This stuff has been said for about 30 years if not longer. That long term unemployment rate isn't that high in the UK and is below the OECD average.The whole Idea of the welfare state was to help people through short term hard times. It wasn't set up as a lifestyle which for some (too many in my eyes) people it has clearly become.
Currently it promotes a dependance on the state and a care free attitude that someone will pay for their life choices from cradle to grave. Most of us know of at least one person or family who have never worked and have no intention of doing so.
That’s for people who have to look to work. Just under half of UC do not need to look for work? Therefore, their entitlement does get cut. IMO, this raise is disturbing, do you agree?Well they do because some people want to cut off all support as a punishment for not finding work quickly enough.
I’m all too aware of Elon’s favourite argument. My point is that if the stakes for you are as high as *civilisational collapse*, you should have a very very good reason for opposing policies that would incentivise people to have more children.
The alternative explanation is that you’re not so much interested in “building families” as you are filtering out certain kinds.
I’m glad you asked:Can you show the workings that show how somebody receiving UC can receive more than somebody working full time on minimum wage?
i no one they live in a shitole id lick better for myself dont envy himThis stuff has been said for about 30 years if not longer. That long term unemployment rate isn't that high in the UK and is below the OECD average.
I grew up on a council estate and genuinely don't recall anybody among my neighbours then who fitted that description. I certainly don't know of anybody now who does.
The unemployment rate doesn’t include people of sickness benefits so taking the unemployment rate at face value is deeply flawed. Bearing in mind that includes people with mild anxiety or depression, that’s a lot of people being under the radar.This stuff has been said for about 30 years if not longer. That long term unemployment rate isn't that high in the UK and is below the OECD average.
I grew up on a council estate and genuinely don't recall anybody among my neighbours then who fitted that description. I certainly don't know of anybody now who does.
I still live on the estate that I grew up on (I'm 54) and it was originally part council part self owned. I know of at least 2 families who have never worked and that includes their now adult kids as well as other single adults who have no inclination to work.This stuff has been said for about 30 years if not longer. That long term unemployment rate isn't that high in the UK and is below the OECD average.
I grew up on a council estate and genuinely don't recall anybody among my neighbours then who fitted that description. I certainly don't know of anybody now who does.
If this exists at all then it was permitted by Cameron and George, I can't remember if Bliar and his crew implemented it, quite likely.The unemployment rate doesn’t include people of sickness benefits so taking the unemployment rate at face value is deeply flawed. Bearing in mind that includes people with mild anxiety or depression, that’s a lot of people being under the radar.
In reality, unemployment is more like 15%. It’s a massive issue and we’re an outlier of comparative G7 or G20 countries.
Lay off the booze matei no one they live in a shitole id lick better for myself dont envy him
A lot of the ills we face today stem from New Labour and compounded by the Cameron years.If this exists at all then it was permitted by Cameron and George, I can't remember if Bliar and his crew implemented it, quite likely.
A lot of the ills we face today stem from New Labour and compounded by the Cameron years.
Both parties deserve to be consigned to the dustbin of history.
Her legacy on that front certainly has a lot to answer for. That does not absolve the Blair and Cameron years.Actually, it was Maggie Thatcher that decided that it was a price worth paying when she allowed entire industries to be closed down
They were merely continuing what she started.Her legacy on that front certainly has a lot to answer for. That does not absolve the Blair and Cameron years.
Not sure the outcomes for kids growing up in poverty are great. If you punish kids for the actions of their parents you're just doomed to repeat the cycle.Creating generational dependency on welfare does not lift people out of poverty.
To translate this to the real world how would you distinguish who is idle and who has a genuine need, bearing in mind not all genuine needs are short term and there are people who have many years of contributing in who now find themselves unable to work over the long term through no fault of their own?I have no qualms with people claiming for a short period of time when tough times fall but have a massive issue funding idle families. This is the big shift post-COVID, most people on UC were in work pre-COVID (like many of my friends and family) but now this is 35% of claimants.
IMO this is more of an issue with wages than benefits. We've got huge numbers of people in work needing benefits to try and survive. I don't believe anyone in full time employment should be struggling to cover the basics.Right now, with the UC rises, an unemployed person can earn more than someone on minimum wage.
After 15 years of decimating youth mental health services in the name of austerity we now have an increase in the number of young people struggling with mental health issues. Could there possibly be some link?Understand this too, the driver for these increases are on mental health, particularly 18-24 year olds. Most of these people are working age and able to work and GPs regularly encourage social interaction rather than isolation. There isn’t a massive cohort of people who are severely sick that cannot work.
Actually, it was Maggie Thatcher that decided that it was a price worth paying when she allowed entire industries to be closed down
So your answer is 'let the elderly suffer?"What’s ’logical’ here? I’d rather accept an aging population than importing hundreds of thousands or even millions of low income, low net worth individuals who will be a net-drain. So too would the electorate, no one voted for 900k immigration per year.
I think that's the reality of his tenet of his position,?So your answer is 'let the elderly suffer?"
You'd rather let our old people in need of care and support suffer and left to rot just so you don't have to see immigrants.
Is Rachel Reeves in serious trouble after being caught out in a lie about ‘the black hole’…?
Turns out there was no reason to raise taxes after all.
Not sure the outcomes for kids growing up in poverty are great. If you punish kids for the actions of their parents you're just doomed to repeat the cycle.
Now if you want to argue over the best ways to lift those kids out of poverty and improve outcomes that's a whole different argument.
To translate this to the real world how would you distinguish who is idle and who has a genuine need, bearing in mind not all genuine needs are short term and there are people who have many years of contributing in who now find themselves unable to work over the long term through no fault of their own?
As for an increase in sick people post-covid do you not think there could be a connection there? There's reports that 3% of the population have long covid, that can be totally debilitating. Friend of mine, who was very much contributing in as a lawyer, was fit as anything, running marathons for fun and that kind of thing. Got a mild case of covid and now, several years on, struggles to make it down the stairs unassisted. I'm sure they aren't the only one.
IMO this is more of an issue with wages than benefits. We've got huge numbers of people in work needing benefits to try and survive. I don't believe anyone in full time employment should be struggling to cover the basics.
After 15 years of decimating youth mental health services in the name of austerity we now have an increase in the number of young people struggling with mental health issues. Could there possibly be some link?
Think it's very easy to point at certain sectors of society and label them undeserving of support or an economic drain. It's far harder to put things in place that both don't have knock on effects, such as increase in crime, and don't end up including people who should be getting all the help they need.
This is a bad take Dave and the neither the stats nor the numerous anecdotal evidence support this. If people don’t think there are large numbers gaming/maximising the system they’re naive. here’s a couple of stats from DWP….
‘4.4 million people in England and Wales claimed an incapacity or disability benefit in February 2025, an increase of 9% from February 2024 (I think it was 2.8-3m 2019).
Between February 2013 and February 2020, the number of benefit claimants in Great Britain remained stable at around 20.0 to 21.0 million. The economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic led to a sharp rise, with the number of claimants peaking at 23.0 million in February 2021. Although this figure initially fell to 22.4 million by February 2022, it has gradually increased since reaching 24.0 million in February 2025, the highest level since the series began in 2013’ - pension age claimants between 2019 and 2025 broadly unchanged at around 13m
Today, fewer than 10% of Pip assessments take place in person. PIP isn’t means tested
There is loads more data to back this up and it’s meaning there’s ultimately less for people working their arses off who aren’t taking the piss and those genuinely in need.
Has there been an official explanation for the factors behind the increase?‘4.4 million people in England and Wales claimed an incapacity or disability benefit in February 2025, an increase of 9% from February 2024 (I think it was 2.8-3m 2019).
As with many things, I think the truth/the solution lies somewhere in the middle. No one wants to see genuinely incapacitated people struggling to make ends meet, but equally we don’t want people taking the piss. Means testing all benefits is an additional cost and would take a huge amount of time invested to understand someone’s personal circumstances, whether their incapacity prevents them from doing *any* work and whether it’s something that is permanent or temporary. I’d be in favour of the above personally but clearly there’s limitations, and I think Treasury brain thinking means they weigh up the cost of administering the means testing vs the cost of making it a blanket benefit, rather than thinking about the economic multiplier effect that comes about through work.
Equally, though, you’d then get the scare stories of a 60 year old with no legs having to go to a meeting to justify that they can’t work.
As said, I like MMB’s example of adjusting the PTA but wouldn’t want benefits removed altogether. Could you tier that so that, if you’re in work, you effectively get more of a benefit? I don’t know, and it is counterintuitive because someone with additional income shouldn’t get additional help (theoretically).
Just googledHas there been an official explanation for the factors behind the increase?
So no then?Just googled
AI Overview
In February 2025, 4.4 million people in England and Wales claimed an incapacity or disability benefit, marking a 9% increase from February 2024
. This rise is influenced by various factors, including the aftermath of the pandemic, a rise in mental health conditions among claimants, and the overall nature of the benefit system.
So no then?
It’s not a leading question, I am honestly wondering if there has been an official explanation for the rise. If all we have is Google Gemini and the IFS then it appears we don’t. I’m personally not sure why mental health claims would spike like that.As it states, mental health claims, left over issues from pandemic (although the dip and then increase in total claimants suggest there’s something else at play) and ‘the system’
Here’s some more but feel free to dig up some data/info that supports that the system is fine as it is
It’s not a leading question, I am honestly wondering if there has been an official explanation for the rise. If all we have is Google Gemini and the IFS then it appears we don’t. I’m personally not sure why mental health claims would spike like that.
Zack's magic money tree philosophy.Polanski massively out of his depth when questioned on fairly basic stuff
Do you think he’s wrong for wanting to change that status quo?Zack's magic money tree philosophy.
He doesn't realise the politicians are the tail and the money men are the dog. The tail does not wag the dog.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?