DWP Says Almost One Million Sick Found Fit For Work

Sassy wrote:
BTW, if Drinky thinks very high blood pressure would mean that he could get a benefit, he is living in cloud cuckoo land, there are people who have had strokes with brain damage and have lost the use of their arms etc who are being told they can go back to work.

  

A THREE POINT Plan to get Drinky's "high blood pressure" back down near to normal :

* Stop screaming at the forums on his computer ~ they can't hear you, Drinky !
* Cut the salt out of your diet, and cut back on those fats and sucrose too..
* AND reduce your grog intake back to ONLY one bottle a day, Drinky !

THAT silly ol' sod can't say we don't have his best interests at heart on here now, can he !    

Warren Moon wrote:American modesty at its best.  

Is that all you got, wally?   

It is what it is. We're (the U.S.) doing better than Britain right now. So, correlate: We've got a liberal/progressive government in power, and you've got essentially a Conservative government in power. Economies always do better under progressive policies, poorer under conservative regimes.

That is because progressive political parties represent the well being of the people. Their policies reflect a caretaker attitude toward the general economy: a well cultivated garden will produce more fruits and vegetables. Conservatives care only for the wealthy. To them, government is only a pig trough...a source of wealth for the special interests to raid. Their policies are short-sighted and rapacious. It's no surprise when the logic is as plain as the nose on your face.

Beekeeper wrote:

Sassy wrote:
BTW, if Drinky thinks very high blood pressure would mean that he could get a benefit, he is living in cloud cuckoo land, there are people who have had strokes with brain damage and have lost the use of their arms etc who are being told they can go back to work.

  

A THREE POINT Plan to get Drinky's "high blood pressure" back down near to normal :

* Stop screaming at the forums on his computer ~ they can't hear you, Drinky !
* Cut the salt out of your diet, and cut back on those fats and sucrose too..
* AND reduce your grog intake back to ONLY one bottle a day, Drinky !

THAT silly ol' sod can't say we don't have his best interests at heart on here now, can he !    

Drinky at the computer.   

Original Quill wrote:

Warren Moon wrote:American modesty at its best.  

Is that all you got, wally?    

It is what it is.  We're (the U.S.) doing better than Britain right now.  So, correlate: We've got a liberal/progressive government in power, and you've got essentially a Conservative government in power.  Economies always do better under progressive policies, poorer under conservative regimes.  

That is because progressive political parties represent the well being of the people.  Their policies reflect a caretaker attitude toward the general economy: a well cultivated garden will produce more fruits and vegetables.  Conservatives care only for the wealthy.  To them, government is only a pig trough...a source of wealth for the special interests to raid.  Their policies are short-sighted and rapacious.  It's no surprise when the logic is as plain as the nose on your face.

So perhaps you could give us some examples of how your liberal progressive policies differ from our conservative policies.

Then you could explain how the conservative policies you rejected are similar to our conservative policies.

Forget the names of the parties a second and just concentrate on the actual policies.

Catman wrote:

Sassy wrote:

People who work in ATOS have leaked that they have a target for reducing benefits, even when people meet the criteria.   Then they hope that the fact you don't get anything while you appeal will stop you appealing.   There have been so many deaths because of this, its disgusting.

Exactly!

Doug would definitely win an appeal, where ATOS isn't involved.

They have to back date the money, when an appeal is won...They hope that people will die before they get to appeal.

That's disgusting, sorry to hear your news Phil  

sphinx wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Is that all you got, wally?    

It is what it is.  We're (the U.S.) doing better than Britain right now.  So, correlate: We've got a liberal/progressive government in power, and you've got essentially a Conservative government in power.  Economies always do better under progressive policies, poorer under conservative regimes.  

That is because progressive political parties represent the well being of the people.  Their policies reflect a caretaker attitude toward the general economy: a well cultivated garden will produce more fruits and vegetables.  Conservatives care only for the wealthy.  To them, government is only a pig trough...a source of wealth for the special interests to raid.  Their policies are short-sighted and rapacious.  It's no surprise when the logic is as plain as the nose on your face.

So perhaps you could give us some examples of how your liberal progressive policies differ from our conservative policies.

Then you could explain how the conservative policies you rejected are similar to our conservative policies.

Forget the names of the parties a second and just concentrate on the actual policies.

Watch President Obama's State of the Union address, tonight.  (It will be late in your area.)  Of course, you know that the Republican House of Representatives have refused to produce anything.  That's par for the course, as RWers are rarely creative.  But at least it means that they haven't started anything like austerity, going on in your country.  Whereas Republicans (and Conservatives) love to destroy, we have enjoyed a limited, but wholly Democratic government.  A lot of positive things have gone on even in the absence of a House of Representatives.

As you will see tonight, there is such a thing as executive order--the president does everything through direct order to his departments.  The President has been managing the economy primarily through directive to the appropriate departments--treasury, commerce, labour, etc.--and now he expects to expand that by taking up initiatives that were formerly seen as legislative matters.  I believe you saw this happen once with the Dream Act.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act  Now you will see it happening in a variety of other areas.

But your question is retrospective, so I'll refer you to the Affordable Care Act, and other careful economic maneuvers through the economy to keep it healthy. The result is positive new jobs reports each quarter through the first term, and as we discussed, a steadily declining unemployment rate.

By comparison, I believe this austerity thing has disaster written all over it. They are shutting down the machine of the economy, not merely cutting debt. Don't be surprised if you see a miini-depression descending upon Europe.

Original Quill wrote:

sphinx wrote:

So perhaps you could give us some examples of how your liberal progressive policies differ from our conservative policies.

Then you could explain how the conservative policies you rejected are similar to our conservative policies.

Forget the names of the parties a second and just concentrate on the actual policies.

Watch President Obama's State of the Union address, tonight.  (It will be late in your area.)  Of course, you know that the Republican House of Representatives have refused to produce anything.  That's par for the course, as RWers are rarely creative.  But at least it means that they haven't started anything like austerity, going on in your country.  Whereas Republicans (and Conservatives) love to destroy, we have enjoyed a limited, but wholly Democratic government.  A lot of positive things have gone on even in the absence of a House of Representatives.

As you will see tonight, there is such a thing as executive order--the president does everything through direct order to his departments.  The President has been managing the economy primarily through directive to the appropriate departments--treasury, commerce, labour, etc.--and now he expects to expand that by taking up initiatives that were formerly seen as legislative matters.  I believe you saw this happen once with the Dream Act.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act  Now you will see it happening in a variety of other areas.

Right now I struggling to manage 12 hours a day awake and wondering who turned the bloody gravity up again - there is absolutely zero chance of me watching anything on television and even less chance of understanding it.

So what are the tax rates that are successful there?
What are the welfare rules?
How is the government powering the creation of new jobs?
What is your environment policy?
What is your border policy?
What is your law and order policy?
What is your education policy?

I knew a lady with a disability who discriminated somebody with a disability when it came to choose elders.

feelthelove wrote:

Catman wrote:


Exactly!

Doug would definitely win an appeal, where ATOS isn't involved.

They have to back date the money, when an appeal is won...They hope that people will die before they get to appeal.

That's disgusting, sorry to hear your news Phil  

If there were not so many receiving benefits they shouldn't there would be more left for those that do.

If it were not for those receiving benefits who cold work and pay taxes there would be more for those that do.

The fact you draw benefits when you could work yourself speaks volumes.

Clarkson wrote:

feelthelove wrote:

That's disgusting, sorry to hear your news Phil  

If there were not so many receiving benefits they shouldn't there would be more left for those that do.

If it were not for those receiving benefits who cold work and pay taxes there would be more for those that do.

The fact you draw benefits when you could work yourself speaks volumes.

So how would you assess sickness?

sphinx wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Watch President Obama's State of the Union address, tonight.  (It will be late in your area.)  Of course, you know that the Republican House of Representatives have refused to produce anything.  That's par for the course, as RWers are rarely creative.  But at least it means that they haven't started anything like austerity, going on in your country.  Whereas Republicans (and Conservatives) love to destroy, we have enjoyed a limited, but wholly Democratic government.  A lot of positive things have gone on even in the absence of a House of Representatives.

As you will see tonight, there is such a thing as executive order--the president does everything through direct order to his departments.  The President has been managing the economy primarily through directive to the appropriate departments--treasury, commerce, labour, etc.--and now he expects to expand that by taking up initiatives that were formerly seen as legislative matters.  I believe you saw this happen once with the Dream Act.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act  Now you will see it happening in a variety of other areas.

Right now I struggling to manage 12 hours a day awake and wondering who turned the bloody gravity up again - there is absolutely zero chance of me watching anything on television and even less chance of understanding it.

So what are the tax rates that are successful there?
What are the welfare rules?
How is the government powering the creation of new jobs?
What is your environment policy?
What is your border policy?
What is your law and order policy?
What is your education policy?

It was such an exciting speech...what a great President. He hit a goal--Hell, a home run--once more. He is strong, yet caring. Bold, yet careful. Humourous, yet serious. Visionary, yet down to earth.

I will have the speech in less than 5-minutes.

sphinx wrote:

Clarkson wrote:
If there were not so many receiving benefits they shouldn't there would be more left for those that do.

If it were not for those receiving benefits who cold work and pay taxes there would be more for those that do.

The fact you draw benefits when you could work yourself speaks volumes.

So how would you assess sickness?

  

IF it were left to Drinky and his fascist cohorts to assess people for welfare in general, and disability pensions in particular, it would have nothing to do with the individuals involved ~ not on such issues as their physical condition, health problems, their ability to work, the availability of jobs that they are ABLE to do, social disadvantages, housing costs or the availability of transport...

NOPE.  Leave it up to Drinky and his "friends" to make assessments, and they would prefer to go on what people look like, what party they vote for, which church, if any, they attend, the schools they went to, how they speak and dress..

STARTING with their own families first, of course !     

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:

So how would you assess sickness?

  

IF it were left to Drinky and his fascist cohorts to assess people for welfare in general, and disability pensions in particular, it would have nothing to do with the individuals involved ~ not on such issues as their physical condition, health problems, their ability to work, the availability of jobs that they are ABLE to do, social disadvantages, housing costs or the availability of transport...

NOPE.  Leave it up to Drinky and his "friends" to make assessments, and they would prefer to go on what people look like, what party they vote for, which church, if any, they attend, the schools they went to, how they speak and dress..

STARTING with their own families first, of course !     

Yeah thanks for that bee - now any chance of letting drinky speak for himself?

What benefits are we talking about here?

 :\\:[: 

Beekeeper wrote:

sphinx wrote:

So how would you assess sickness?

  

IF it were left to Drinky and his fascist cohorts to assess people for welfare in general, and disability pensions in particular, it would have nothing to do with the individuals involved ~ not on such issues as their physical condition, health problems, their ability to work, the availability of jobs that they are ABLE to do, social disadvantages, housing costs or the availability of transport...

NOPE.  Leave it up to Drinky and his "friends" to make assessments, and they would prefer to go on what people look like, what party they vote for, which church, if any, they attend, the schools they went to, how they speak and dress..

STARTING with their own families first, of course !     

On point, Bee.  That's why I think it's a joke to suggest WCA standards for judging people's eligibility.  To follow and implement those standards would be to build a bureaucracy costing more than the benefits themselves.

Proof, that they are not meant to be taken seriously.

Warren Moon wrote:What benefits are we talking about here?

 :\\:[: 

I'll ask again, people never heard me.

Warren Moon wrote:

Warren Moon wrote:What benefits are we talking about here?

 :\\:[: 

I'll ask again, people never heard me.

Second paragraph of the original post:

Didge wrote:
A third (32%) of all new claimants for employment and support allowance (ESA) were assessed as being fit to work and capable of employment between October 2008 and March 2013 - totalling 980,400 people, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said.

Thanks Quill.

Two thirds win their appeals against it, and a very large percentage of the other third can't afford to appeal because their money gets stopped, so relatives have to help them out, making trouble for them as well.

Sassy wrote:Two thirds win their appeals against it, and a very large percentage of the other third can't afford to appeal because their money gets stopped, so relatives have to help them out, making trouble for them as well.

Exactly.

Doug will win his appeal, with both his consultant and GP, saying that in now way is he fit for work, he's just going to have to put up with being harassed for a year, then they will have to refund all the money that they've stolen when he wins his appeal.

With so many people winning their appeals, this proves that ATOS is a crock of shit, they should be removed and i hope that Labour has the guts to send them packing, back to France, when they come to office.