FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Labour want to scrap universal credit.
Labour want to scrap universal credit.
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?"
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"Frank Field concluded the system was designed by middle-class people with middle-class people in mind. Fail.
"
It is not universal credit that is the problem,but the way it is being implimentad that is the problem. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Frank Field concluded the system was designed by middle-class people with middle-class people in mind. Fail.
It is not universal credit that is the problem,but the way it is being implimentad that is the problem."
And who is responsible for that ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"its a system designed by someone who has never been unemployed, waiting 6 weeks or getting into debt are the last things you need "
That is right and it is designed so that people will be worse of rather than better of.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don't think Labour have ever said that they will "scrap" UC, rather bring in wide ranging reforms to the system. "
I have seen the word scrap used few times but yes they want to improve it which is good.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
as someone else said... its not the concept of UC that is the problem (basically put all the benefits together and have them as seperate elements in the one benefit would in theory mean you would need less staff if they all know about all the different benefits and all the rules attached to them all)
the problem has been the implementation of it..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I do think benefits and housing benefit should be separated. But UC is not the problem it is all the sanctions that are the problem. Plus all the screw ups. If you have no or little money if you have'nt got money for the basics you will not have access to WiFi or phone top up x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe if not all the time of parliament and the civil service was not wasting so much time on Brexit things might get done"
100% agree.
What a massive waste of time and money Brexit is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It ought to be reason enough to keep the conservatives out of government. Their pretence to be for the good of all is clear, when they are still pursuing the policy of the most vulnerable in society paying the price for the very wealthy screwing over our financial services sector and the poor suffering until death. It is abhorrent to have people with nothing in our wealthy society being forced to have no income to feed young children for weeks on end, whilst the security of having a home is put at risk.
At its core must be respect for users, with a system designed around them - this one is not. The conservatives have wasted more £millions on this - they ought to be finished as a political entity for ever, just over this grossly inhumane enterprise. Any one of them supporting it must be rabidly sick and sub human, in theircompassion and empathy for others put needlessly at risk in our society.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"When the torys introduced it many got into debt over night, it is good that labour want to do a reform 
"
Yes, the old system was a bit tangled and unwieldy. It did need modernising, but tories used that as and excuse to reduce what people received, and make it harder to get.
My son was born with a condition. It's genetic, it will never change. He has to be reassessed! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This benefit was one of the main reasons I left my employment with the Civil Service. I didn't agree with how it was rolling out and I don't agree with how it has continued. I felt my job became less about helping people find work and more about being a benefit policeman.
How could I build trust and rapport when I was behind a system that was trying to catch people out? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"When the torys introduced it many got into debt over night, it is good that labour want to do a reform
Yes, the old system was a bit tangled and unwieldy. It did need modernising, but tories used that as and excuse to reduce what people received, and make it harder to get.
My son was born with a condition. It's genetic, it will never change. He has to be reassessed! "
That is right the old system was the best one they had by having the benefits separately instead of one for all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
"
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"as someone else said... its not the concept of UC that is the problem (basically put all the benefits together and have them as seperate elements in the one benefit would in theory mean you would need less staff if they all know about all the different benefits and all the rules attached to them all)
the problem has been the implementation of it..... "
Agree with this, should have been a long transition period to prevent issues with delays. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
People and their needs are not universal so cannot be labelled under the same umbrella the pip point based assessments are not fit for purpose. Should either be an impartial medical professionals or go on the data from individual's doctors or consultants or specialists x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Regardless of how good in theory the idea of UC was between its use as a weapon against the 'undeserving poor' (since when was reletive wealth a measure of worth for any but the most wealthy), and its implementation by private companies who made extra profit by rejecting applications that has resulted in dead and dying people being told they are fit for work, it has become a disgraced policy. The only reason it is still around is political dogma and the belief that a modern politician must be seen to be strong, and the greatest sign of strength is to plow on regardless of outcome. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction."
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach "
So no official figures then, thought not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach
So no official figures then, thought not."
The National Audit Office is asking for the full figures from the Department of Work and Pensions.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suicide-welfare-benefit-claimants-national-audit-office-nao-frank-field-a9164836.html
The attempted suicide rate amongst incapacity claimants apparently doubled since introduction
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefit-claimants-attempted-suicides-fit-to-work-assessment-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html
Other studies have concluded that more people are having suicidal thoughts which is a more subjective judgement but it does not imply a good state of mental health.
Perhaps it's best to just cull them as they are mostly probably lazy and just can't be bothered to be rich and successful? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?"
At the moment now they could just improve it to make it fairer, I don’t think anyone can scrap it because it will be a waste of money to scrap it. It’s too big to fail now.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If the Liebour party were to form a government, we'll all end up on whatever benefits they replace it with because they will kill our economy, and drive out businesses with their high tax policy, thus destroying jobs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach
So no official figures then, thought not.
The National Audit Office is asking for the full figures from the Department of Work and Pensions.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suicide-welfare-benefit-claimants-national-audit-office-nao-frank-field-a9164836.html
The attempted suicide rate amongst incapacity claimants apparently doubled since introduction
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefit-claimants-attempted-suicides-fit-to-work-assessment-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html
Other studies have concluded that more people are having suicidal thoughts which is a more subjective judgement but it does not imply a good state of mental health.
Perhaps it's best to just cull them as they are mostly probably lazy and just can't be bothered to be rich and successful?"
So no increase in suicides, just more left wing propoganda. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach
So no official figures then, thought not.
The National Audit Office is asking for the full figures from the Department of Work and Pensions.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suicide-welfare-benefit-claimants-national-audit-office-nao-frank-field-a9164836.html
The attempted suicide rate amongst incapacity claimants apparently doubled since introduction
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefit-claimants-attempted-suicides-fit-to-work-assessment-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html
Other studies have concluded that more people are having suicidal thoughts which is a more subjective judgement but it does not imply a good state of mental health.
Perhaps it's best to just cull them as they are mostly probably lazy and just can't be bothered to be rich and successful?
So no increase in suicides, just more left wing propoganda."
Yep, attempted suicides aren't worth considering.
It's just attention seeking and there are no consequences |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach
So no official figures then, thought not.
The National Audit Office is asking for the full figures from the Department of Work and Pensions.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suicide-welfare-benefit-claimants-national-audit-office-nao-frank-field-a9164836.html
The attempted suicide rate amongst incapacity claimants apparently doubled since introduction
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefit-claimants-attempted-suicides-fit-to-work-assessment-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html
Other studies have concluded that more people are having suicidal thoughts which is a more subjective judgement but it does not imply a good state of mental health.
Perhaps it's best to just cull them as they are mostly probably lazy and just can't be bothered to be rich and successful?
So no increase in suicides, just more left wing propoganda.
Yep, attempted suicides aren't worth considering.
It's just attention seeking and there are no consequences "
Fortunately I dont't share your views on suicide, having lost close friends to it I find your blase attitude quite disgusting.
However, as always, you fail to understand the point. There are no figures to back up the claim of increased suicides due to UC. People having thoughts and saying something 'apparently' doubled means nothing unless meadured against previous figures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach
So no official figures then, thought not.
The National Audit Office is asking for the full figures from the Department of Work and Pensions.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suicide-welfare-benefit-claimants-national-audit-office-nao-frank-field-a9164836.html
The attempted suicide rate amongst incapacity claimants apparently doubled since introduction
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefit-claimants-attempted-suicides-fit-to-work-assessment-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html
Other studies have concluded that more people are having suicidal thoughts which is a more subjective judgement but it does not imply a good state of mental health.
Perhaps it's best to just cull them as they are mostly probably lazy and just can't be bothered to be rich and successful?
So no increase in suicides, just more left wing propoganda.
Yep, attempted suicides aren't worth considering.
It's just attention seeking and there are no consequences
Fortunately I dont't share your views on suicide, having lost close friends to it I find your blase attitude quite disgusting.
However, as always, you fail to understand the point. There are no figures to back up the claim of increased suicides due to UC. People having thoughts and saying something 'apparently' doubled means nothing unless meadured against previous figures."
You are hilarious with your faux outrage considering your callousness on nearly every topic of discussion 
Did you read the article and the NHS report? Doubled attempted suicides since 2008 when universal credit was introduced and in those areas.
The existing data is on attempted suicides as the DWP are not sharing their data on actual suicides apparently. You can't ask a dead person why they made killed themselves and the NHS do not know their financial status. The DWP do though.
However, as attempted suicides are of no interest then you are correct. There is no data linking actual suicides. You "win" even though I never said that there was a link.
What an excellent and pertinent argument over the word "apparently" whilst ignoring the substance though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"If the Liebour party were to form a government, we'll all end up on whatever benefits they replace it with because they will kill our economy, and drive out businesses with their high tax policy, thus destroying jobs."
Oh, the irony of Brexiteers adopting Project Fear because they are worried about the economy of Britain being ruined.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If the Liebour party were to form a government, we'll all end up on whatever benefits they replace it with because they will kill our economy, and drive out businesses with their high tax policy, thus destroying jobs."
Really ?
Not according to Brexiteers who say we have the 5th higgest Economy in the world & those big buisnesses will still want our £ Notes.
The Story party & Chief Liar have not said Jobs will go under brexit , so why would they go under higher taxes ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People and their needs are not universal so cannot be labelled under the same umbrella the pip point based assessments are not fit for purpose. Should either be an impartial medical professionals or go on the data from individual's doctors or consultants or specialists x"
Pip and the ATOS assessments is a joke!
I know someone who was forced out of their job and retired by the company on health grounds when their employer sent them to ATOS for an assessment, they were declared unfit to work. Fast forward a few months and they are attempting to claim benefits as unfit for work. The very same ATOS assessor declared them fit for work!
ATOS and their assessments are not fit for purpose |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Its funny really that the driving force behind all this is supposed to be efficiency and streamlining whereas it is more about dismantling the welfare state by hiving complex decision making off to profiteering private business and thereby abdicating responsibility for any damage it causes to the people it is supposed to help. I guess it also has the advantages of reducing the civil service pension liability by getting rid of the more expensive (ie older and more experienced) employees and farming out decision making to call centres which use formats that will eventually lead to a computerised system where its quite possible the computer will say no as its default setting. The tories are set on a path of destroying the specialised knowledge required to regulate any areas of public life where complexity and caution are required and refuse to acknowledge that the free for all they desire is damaging to the less able in society, which would be fine if there were more philanthropists in their ranks but hey maybe that was victorian values And has no place in this selfish age? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People and their needs are not universal so cannot be labelled under the same umbrella the pip point based assessments are not fit for purpose. Should either be an impartial medical professionals or go on the data from individual's doctors or consultants or specialists x
Pip and the ATOS assessments is a joke!
I know someone who was forced out of their job and retired by the company on health grounds when their employer sent them to ATOS for an assessment, they were declared unfit to work. Fast forward a few months and they are attempting to claim benefits as unfit for work. The very same ATOS assessor declared them fit for work!
ATOS and their assessments are not fit for purpose "
Not just ATOS but CAPITA too why can't they go from the evidence of a medical expert x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Are there official figures to confirm an increase in suicides and prostitution as a direct result of universal credit? Ie, number of suicides before and after its introduction.
Just google Sean Doherty & Philip Herron .
Or read private Aron Shelton's story
Should be enough to sicken your stomach
So no official figures then, thought not.
The National Audit Office is asking for the full figures from the Department of Work and Pensions.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/suicide-welfare-benefit-claimants-national-audit-office-nao-frank-field-a9164836.html
The attempted suicide rate amongst incapacity claimants apparently doubled since introduction
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefit-claimants-attempted-suicides-fit-to-work-assessment-i-daniel-blake-job-centre-dwp-a8119286.html
Other studies have concluded that more people are having suicidal thoughts which is a more subjective judgement but it does not imply a good state of mental health.
Perhaps it's best to just cull them as they are mostly probably lazy and just can't be bothered to be rich and successful?
So no increase in suicides, just more left wing propoganda.
Yep, attempted suicides aren't worth considering.
It's just attention seeking and there are no consequences
Fortunately I dont't share your views on suicide, having lost close friends to it I find your blase attitude quite disgusting.
However, as always, you fail to understand the point. There are no figures to back up the claim of increased suicides due to UC. People having thoughts and saying something 'apparently' doubled means nothing unless meadured against previous figures.
You are hilarious with your faux outrage considering your callousness on nearly every topic of discussion
Did you read the article and the NHS report? Doubled attempted suicides since 2008 when universal credit was introduced and in those areas.
The existing data is on attempted suicides as the DWP are not sharing their data on actual suicides apparently. You can't ask a dead person why they made killed themselves and the NHS do not know their financial status. The DWP do though.
However, as attempted suicides are of no interest then you are correct. There is no data linking actual suicides. You "win" even though I never said that there was a link.
What an excellent and pertinent argument over the word "apparently" whilst ignoring the substance though "
You will have to highlight my callousness on other topics, because I can't be bothered as there isn't any. But feel free to try anyway.
Anyway, there is no faux outrage, mental health is a something I take very serious. Which is why I get annoyed when people, sorry morons, try to use it for political point scoring. It is far too important for that.
Thus concludes my involvement in this thread, my point is made. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
In theory the concept of 6 benefits rolled into one is a good one unfortunately it’s not a one cap fits all benefit.Whilst Labour say they would scrap it the reality is with what.The money spent on Universal Credit means if Labour get in perhaps they can tweak it but I doubt they will scrap it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"In theory the concept of 6 benefits rolled into one is a good one unfortunately it’s not a one cap fits all benefit.Whilst Labour say they would scrap it the reality is with what.The money spent on Universal Credit means if Labour get in perhaps they can tweak it but I doubt they will scrap it."
I think that you are correct. The reality has been a sh*t show.
It makes you wonder if it was just dressing up a reduction in benefits. I might look up the figures but it will be masked by all of the spending on reorganisation... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
"In theory the concept of 6 benefits rolled into one is a good one unfortunately it’s not a one cap fits all benefit.Whilst Labour say they would scrap it the reality is with what.The money spent on Universal Credit means if Labour get in perhaps they can tweak it but I doubt they will scrap it.
I think that you are correct. The reality has been a sh*t show.
It makes you wonder if it was just dressing up a reduction in benefits. I might look up the figures but it will be masked by all of the spending on reorganisation..."
. It is dressing up a reduction in benefits.With Universal Credit there are people on it who are working but don’t earn enough or are getting the housing element.The one thing I have noticed is more people on Universal Credit are requesting a food bank slip than before it rolled out in my London borough |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
ATOS and their assessments are not fit for purpose
Not just ATOS but CAPITA too why can't they go from the evidence of a medical expert x"
Because people don't believe experts anymore do they, unless they tell them what they want to hear then they do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *Man1263Man
over a year ago
Stockport |
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
"
Ian Duncan-Smith didn't design it.
Universal Credit started life in the Centre for Social Justice think tank, under the leadership of Dr Brien in 2009, under the Brown Government.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Who else think it is a good way to scrap this system? I do and I agree that they call it inhumane it is often talked of in terms of design flaws but this is inaccurate. “flaws” suggest an error, a shortcoming, is the old system best?
UC does what it is intended. Ian Duncan-Smith designed it to fail the people who claims it, yet like a typical tory shit, won't claim responsibility for the increase in suicides, or others forced into prostitution. Yes it should be scrapped.
Ian Duncan-Smith didn't design it.
Universal Credit started life in the Centre for Social Justice think tank, under the leadership of Dr Brien in 2009, under the Brown Government.
"
That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion "
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!"
. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system."
So just a little scenario here - the claimant has run out of credit on their phone, has no money to buy any more credit, no money to get to their nearest job centre, etc. Not only is it crappy to enforce this jumping through hoops method but it takes no account of the chaotic lives that many of these claimants have not to mention the shaming they are subject to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system.
So just a little scenario here - the claimant has run out of credit on their phone, has no money to buy any more credit, no money to get to their nearest job centre, etc. Not only is it crappy to enforce this jumping through hoops method but it takes no account of the chaotic lives that many of these claimants have not to mention the shaming they are subject to. "
. As I said earlier Universal Credit is not ideal nor am I defending because I can’t.The scenario you have described is the worst case scenario and could have happened if the claimant was on Jobseekers Allowance and less so on Employment and Support Allowance and Income Support.Yes it can feel like you are jumping through hoops but normally only at the start of a claim.As for the shaming I don’t believe that happens as much as has been portrayed by the press but I am sorry to say yes there are some arse holes who they know better than everyone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system.
So just a little scenario here - the claimant has run out of credit on their phone, has no money to buy any more credit, no money to get to their nearest job centre, etc. Not only is it crappy to enforce this jumping through hoops method but it takes no account of the chaotic lives that many of these claimants have not to mention the shaming they are subject to. . As I said earlier Universal Credit is not ideal nor am I defending because I can’t.The scenario you have described is the worst case scenario and could have happened if the claimant was on Jobseekers Allowance and less so on Employment and Support Allowance and Income Support.Yes it can feel like you are jumping through hoops but normally only at the start of a claim.As for the shaming I don’t believe that happens as much as has been portrayed by the press but I am sorry to say yes there are some arse holes who they know better than everyone."
Unfortunately I think my simplistic scenario is not quite the worst case and is actually more common than you would think. The bottom line about all this streamlining of benefits is that it is designed to remove the expertise of experienced and qualified professionals and replace this with a multiple choice call centre ideology which will eventually lead to AI choosing what you should get or not. It is already a fact that many people at the sharp end of society are becoming criminalised either through sex work, drug dealing or petty theft because of their inability to manage their lives and as far as I can see the cost benefits when compared to the increased cost of policing and imprisoning people does not add up. I guess you either believe in trying to stop people from falling off the edge of society or you actively push them. It’s ideology over common sense imho. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system.
So just a little scenario here - the claimant has run out of credit on their phone, has no money to buy any more credit, no money to get to their nearest job centre, etc. Not only is it crappy to enforce this jumping through hoops method but it takes no account of the chaotic lives that many of these claimants have not to mention the shaming they are subject to. . As I said earlier Universal Credit is not ideal nor am I defending because I can’t.The scenario you have described is the worst case scenario and could have happened if the claimant was on Jobseekers Allowance and less so on Employment and Support Allowance and Income Support.Yes it can feel like you are jumping through hoops but normally only at the start of a claim.As for the shaming I don’t believe that happens as much as has been portrayed by the press but I am sorry to say yes there are some arse holes who they know better than everyone.
Unfortunately I think my simplistic scenario is not quite the worst case and is actually more common than you would think. The bottom line about all this streamlining of benefits is that it is designed to remove the expertise of experienced and qualified professionals and replace this with a multiple choice call centre ideology which will eventually lead to AI choosing what you should get or not. It is already a fact that many people at the sharp end of society are becoming criminalised either through sex work, drug dealing or petty theft because of their inability to manage their lives and as far as I can see the cost benefits when compared to the increased cost of policing and imprisoning people does not add up. I guess you either believe in trying to stop people from falling off the edge of society or you actively push them. It’s ideology over common sense imho."
. The scenario you first described is as bad as it gets for someone who has some control of there life.If the person has alcohol , drugs , mental health issues , convictions for theft or soliciting then the scenario are worst.I have seen and experienced worst than the original scenario you have said.I would like to point out that I work in a job centre and have worked in some of the most deprived parts of North London so I have a understanding of the problems regrettable I don’t have a magic wand or the answer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system.
So just a little scenario here - the claimant has run out of credit on their phone, has no money to buy any more credit, no money to get to their nearest job centre, etc. Not only is it crappy to enforce this jumping through hoops method but it takes no account of the chaotic lives that many of these claimants have not to mention the shaming they are subject to. . As I said earlier Universal Credit is not ideal nor am I defending because I can’t.The scenario you have described is the worst case scenario and could have happened if the claimant was on Jobseekers Allowance and less so on Employment and Support Allowance and Income Support.Yes it can feel like you are jumping through hoops but normally only at the start of a claim.As for the shaming I don’t believe that happens as much as has been portrayed by the press but I am sorry to say yes there are some arse holes who they know better than everyone.
Unfortunately I think my simplistic scenario is not quite the worst case and is actually more common than you would think. The bottom line about all this streamlining of benefits is that it is designed to remove the expertise of experienced and qualified professionals and replace this with a multiple choice call centre ideology which will eventually lead to AI choosing what you should get or not. It is already a fact that many people at the sharp end of society are becoming criminalised either through sex work, drug dealing or petty theft because of their inability to manage their lives and as far as I can see the cost benefits when compared to the increased cost of policing and imprisoning people does not add up. I guess you either believe in trying to stop people from falling off the edge of society or you actively push them. It’s ideology over common sense imho.. The scenario you first described is as bad as it gets for someone who has some control of there life.If the person has alcohol , drugs , mental health issues , convictions for theft or soliciting then the scenario are worst.I have seen and experienced worst than the original scenario you have said.I would like to point out that I work in a job centre and have worked in some of the most deprived parts of North London so I have a understanding of the problems regrettable I don’t have a magic wand or the answer."
Well I hope you still feel valued and not undermined by UC as I think anyone working in your area deserves to be lauded given what a thankless task it is these days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *os19Man
over a year ago
Edmonton |
"That's where my question comes from. Not that Labour can do know wrong, but you can corrupt anything that was intended to be a good thing.
Look at religion
Well you can start by selling off the administration of the system to 'for profit' businesses and paying them bonuses for finding reasons to reject applications for benefits. Then you can increase the waiting time for benefits from a week to a month (nice little saving there) and bundle local and national benefits together thus removing a layer of safety nets. Finally you can move the whole benefit access system online because computer access and literacy are basic skills that every poorly educated semi-literate benefit applicant has.
As has been said a number of times UC was designed with a purpose by IDS, and may he rot in hell for it!. I agree with what you are saying however most people that don’t have Internet access to maintain their UC claim can do it on their smartphone or if not computer literate they could well have a member of the family or friends who can assist them.If they have no one to help or no online access they can go into the job centre and ask for assistance to access their UC account as on the account their is a to-do list which they must action by certain time scale the date of which will be on the to-do list and they can send a message via there journal to their advisor or service centre as well as receive messages.In the past when benefits claims closed the claimant always said the same thing I never received a letter or nobody told me at the job centre now the onus is on the claimant to check there account every couple of days for 10 - 20 minutes.I appreciate this is not ideal to some but it’s what we have got in terms of a benefit system.
So just a little scenario here - the claimant has run out of credit on their phone, has no money to buy any more credit, no money to get to their nearest job centre, etc. Not only is it crappy to enforce this jumping through hoops method but it takes no account of the chaotic lives that many of these claimants have not to mention the shaming they are subject to. . As I said earlier Universal Credit is not ideal nor am I defending because I can’t.The scenario you have described is the worst case scenario and could have happened if the claimant was on Jobseekers Allowance and less so on Employment and Support Allowance and Income Support.Yes it can feel like you are jumping through hoops but normally only at the start of a claim.As for the shaming I don’t believe that happens as much as has been portrayed by the press but I am sorry to say yes there are some arse holes who they know better than everyone.
Unfortunately I think my simplistic scenario is not quite the worst case and is actually more common than you would think. The bottom line about all this streamlining of benefits is that it is designed to remove the expertise of experienced and qualified professionals and replace this with a multiple choice call centre ideology which will eventually lead to AI choosing what you should get or not. It is already a fact that many people at the sharp end of society are becoming criminalised either through sex work, drug dealing or petty theft because of their inability to manage their lives and as far as I can see the cost benefits when compared to the increased cost of policing and imprisoning people does not add up. I guess you either believe in trying to stop people from falling off the edge of society or you actively push them. It’s ideology over common sense imho.. The scenario you first described is as bad as it gets for someone who has some control of there life.If the person has alcohol , drugs , mental health issues , convictions for theft or soliciting then the scenario are worst.I have seen and experienced worst than the original scenario you have said.I would like to point out that I work in a job centre and have worked in some of the most deprived parts of North London so I have a understanding of the problems regrettable I don’t have a magic wand or the answer.
Well I hope you still feel valued and not undermined by UC as I think anyone working in your area deserves to be lauded given what a thankless task it is these days. "
. Do I feel valued no I don’t but as far as I am concerned I do my best everyday helping people make their Universal Credit claims and helping those have have existing claims clear their to-do list and send journal messages to their work coach or service centres.I help where I can and where I can’t I direct to the person or department that can. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
ATOS and their assessments are not fit for purpose
Not just ATOS but CAPITA too why can't they go from the evidence of a medical expert x
Because people don't believe experts anymore do they, unless they tell them what they want to hear then they do. "
So medical history and facts mean nothing point system is all wrong x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
