To think there will be many more disabled adults in 20 years?

Can you define what you think is considered "mild ADHD" ?!

I scored 9/9 for inattentiveness and 6/9 for hyperactivity at my assessment. So personally I'd say that's more into the severe category......? 🤔

Alos on top of that I have severw depression and anxiety which I've experience since I was bullied from aged 11 Which led to my first suicide attempt and self harming at aged 12. With further multiple suicide attempts (the last of which left me with medical PTSD-not sure if you've ever experienced dying and being resuscitated (with a 17% of survival) but it's not a fun experience....oh and that last particular attempt also cost me my job and left me too unwell to work for the following 3 1/2 years (confirmed by and NHS psychiatrist/multi disciplinary community mental health team) oh...and the DWP who without needing an appeal automatically put me in the support group of ESA due to the literal risk to my life. 🤷🏻‍♀️ Somehow I have loved to almost 40, so that 29 years of being mentally ill. nd I've been medicated with every medication under the sun (quite literally as I was initially misdiagnosed and medicated for goddamn bipolar disorder for 12 of these years on the max dose of 2 different anti psychotics during that period)

I did thankfully after 3 1/2 year of actual treatment and support return to work, though sadly only part time (have tried multiple times to get back to fully own hours but everytime has led to a mental breakdown and sick leave and my last occ health assessment strongly recommended I can only work part time hours with adjustments).

But no. That's not in any way, shape or form disabling is
it? 🤔

Diet, environment, ivf and ever earlier intervention with premature births. I think all these are factors. Also biology teaches you that an egg is very selective in which sperm it allows in to fertilise it. Surely made up embryos are not in the resulting foetus' best interest?

Thank you.

No, no one knows what's around the corner & yes I'm sure they would.

🌷

Yes, I know, didn't think I'd implied that it wasn't?

Really sorry to hear this. This is the thing, sadly no one ever knows what's around the corner and I bet the benefit/disability bashers would soon change their tune if it happened to them.

People on here don't get to classify what being disabled is or isn't

Why you clapping that is the current system already

It's based on needs and not diagnosis

That's pretty much the system we've already got. You don't get anything for having mild ADHD in the current system or choosing not to leave your house. However, the system is already strict to the point that mobility issues due to arthritis wouldn't guarantee you help (and a small number of people with MND also do not get help). If you wanted the latter groups to be guaranteed help you'd have to make the system less rather than more strict.

👏👏👏👏👏

But how were you able to be a stay at home parent with young children but not able to ever hold down a job? Young kids are a lot of work.

A perfect storm of things mostly already mentioned on this thread:

1. better fertility treatment and neonatal care = more people born with genetic disability
2. more kids raised in poverty due to CoL and wealth inequality
3. Western UPF diet = poor nutrition, high inflammation leading to cognitive issues, poor mental health and chronic illness
4. faces glued to screens from a young age
5. dysfunctional parents or 'gentle parenting' taken too far = no tough decisions, no accountability, no resilience, no work ethic
6. labelling and medicalising personality traits, focussing on what a person can't do instead of what they can do, beefing up any slight concern because there are financial, educational etc. incentives to do so

Then these unwell, poorly raised and unsupported kids grow up and find online communities full of their peers, and a whole identity and lifestyle is born around being disabled.

Is that actually what you think people are talking about?

I became disabled overnight. Literally. I was 55, working, reasonably fit, very healthy low carb diet, been working & contributing for decades, never been out of work or claimed any benefits (well except those standard child benefit). I had a stroke & I'm unable to work (I'm barely able to look after myself & get through the day). I qualify for a little pip & a little esa.

I'm using the money I had planned to supplement my state pension with (personal & complicated reasons why I couldn't put it in a pension plan, which ironically would have meant I would qualify for other benefits now)

I'm terribly sorry that you begrudge me that, little but if help now, but do keep in mind this could be you tomorrow.

Probably for another thread but I'd amalgamate employee NI with income tax, increase the personal allowance, increase the basic rate to 25%, but reduce the top end back to 40% and get rid of most allowances.

That said, childcare for one child per person (so two per couple) and season tickets would be 100% tax deductible.

So the lowest earners wouldn't pay (income) tax. I'd get some clever economists to work out where the threshold should be to make sure that people didn't suffer a disproportionate cliff edge.

it won't happen though because the MSM would major on the increase to 25% and you'd never hear the end of it.

So a figure plucked out of thin air based on nothing but envy then!

This is not a one off 1% though, it is 1% every year.
This wealth may have been recently inherited and subject to 40% tax already.
it might be shares that rapidly increased in value the previous day but which are going to rapidly reduce in value the next day.

£10 million. For about the ninth time.

So at what wealth level do you deem that the State should have an entitlement to someone’s personal wealth?

Nobody has a “need” for wealth of £10 million+

The difference is that the estate is only taxed once someone dies and therefore has no need for it any more.

Of course I do. I also agree with extreme wealth being fairly taxed. If we can tax someone’s estate at 40% over £1 million taxing some else’s fortune of £10 million at 1% doesn’t seem extreme.

So basically you just don’t agree with people being able to own things?

I don't think Labour have put forward any plans for a wealth tax at all. That's why Gary is encouraging people to vote Green if they want to register their support for the idea of a wealth tax at least. But yes, my understanding is that it has to be on the super rich. That's the point at which wealth becomes toxic to society.

Are there really so many inefficiencies these days? I mean I know that HS2 was a disaster and there will undoubtedly be other mistakes but in so many areas we've seen cuts after cuts after cuts for years with no hope of improvement it would seem. Probably because of the growing levels of disability in society and no great increase in revenue to support it.

To be honest I have no idea as I don’t know anyone with that level of wealth but I can’t imagine they all have readily available cash.

most wealthy people probably do have investments and that would be what is being taxed with a wealth tax. Investments are not cash and would need to be sold in order to get cash.