Why is everyone so angry at Labour?

[18thday]

From what I understand they tried to cut (essential) benefits and put the money somewhere else. And what happened was labour MPs got angry, threat of resulting poverty in the population etc. So labour backtracked.

My questions are

1. they backtracked so doesnt that mean they get it?

B) weren't they trying to find money to fill a hole that must be filled?

C) How else could have they raised the money? High taxed- bad people get very annoyed NHS cant handle more cuts.

I'm guessing they thought that forcing people off benefits would stimulate the economy by forcing people 'back into work'.

You're avoiding my question

You're ignoring the fact that yours isn't the only experience people have. I would remove PIP completely from anyone who is a higher rate tax payer and then reduce it on a sliding scale. There is no need for the country to pay independence payments to people who already have access to the whatever they need in a self sufficient manner. I'd also reduce the range of people who qualified as I don't believe that 24% of the working age population is so disabled they would be unable to support themself without state funding - especially given is was only 12% who needed it 5 years ago. COVID has created a cohort of nannied in particular young people who just need a short sharp shock.

The Tories took years to thoroughly fuck up the NHS and bring it to its knees (Covid was just the final handful of nails in the coffin), and now everyone expects Labour to get a magic wand out and fix it all in five minutes.

There is no quick fix. Not a palatable one for the taxpayer, anyway.

Angry because they are shafting the disabled and vulnerable.

Labour are meant to protect the vulnerable and provide support to the less able. Their proposals were atrocious.

in a single blow a disabled person could lose their PIP, then LCW and the additional health benefits along with the reduced hours and protection from sanctions, in turn when this disabled person couldn’t then function in a full time job they would lose the roof over their head too due to sanctions. Just barbaric when many disabled people don’t score a (difficult to achieve) 4, but can still need PIP.

I think she should leave as soon as possible. Disgusting ill thought out proposals rushed through as a money saving method without a thought to the damage to disabled people’s lives.

Nobody wants to be disabled. Being disabled isn’t something that just goes away. Her notion was a double punishment. Just get her out!

You've completely failed to consider whether paying these benefits are affordable, sustainable or even possible.

Your only consideration is "are these payments good for the recipient". And of course you've come back with the answer "yes".

Defining a quarter of the population as disabled and compensating them for it is catastrophic.

100% this ^

Depression for example is not a disability. The whole concept has been totally abused. The Labour Party are finally waking up the sheer scale of those taking advantage of such schemes, most are not considered ‘disabled’ in the real sense of the word and it’s depriving those that are truly in need.

The whole benefits system needs a major overhaul, as well as the NHS and pensioners benefits. People need to start working if we are going to save this country.

Yes, getting pissed off, and finding ways to pay less tax and join the claimers.

A self fueling spiral of all us working less and claiming more.

I for one do not think for a second Labour have it in them to turn this around, sone very tough decisions need to be made before the bond markets do it for us.

Speak for yourself.

I am not working less, despite claiming

There are too many freeloaders in this country.

Yes, and its not just people taking the piss.

I have two friends who are totally genuine claimants (One early onset altzheimers, one blind.). But they're both affluent. They can cope without the money. It's just completely unsustainable to give people who have holiday cottages in France benefits, no matter how deserving they are.

On average we are, as a nation.

Maybe dont use the words 'all of us'

What they should be doing to disabled people is they should support them.

But depression can be a disability under the equality act 2010 you dont get to decide what a disability is mdd, pdd, bipolar, sad, perinatal depression, dmdd, pnd are all types of depression.

It was pretty obvious from the context, and a perfectly normal way to use language. I copied into chatgpt and it totally understood what was meant.

If you fail at simple English comprehension maybe your understanding of economics is also wildly wrong?

It really isn't.

You can see by the multiple threads the attitude people have towards anyone receiving PIP or other benefits. Why would your comment be any different?

This is categorically not true. Around one sixth are in work.

I'm not a conservative. I know where it started thanks.

Labour are in government now. So why are they so silent?

Why aren't the people of the UK actually taking to the streets to protest the energy companies?
Something literally affecting EVERY household?

I hope you're well and happy now @2dogsandabudgie Anxiety is a cruel thing to suffer.
My relation found time off was the break he needed to get some therapy, fresh air, exercise and sort his head of a lot of baggage. It did him good. Everyone's different aren't they.

Following a health scare I suffered from anxiety attacks. I would panic a lot randomly, but specifically on two roundabouts on the way to work. Every bloody day. (How does that work?)

I thought it would never end. The NHS website said to keep going, do normal things including work. It worked.

I'm damn sure that if I'd have take time of work I'd never have got back to normal.

But it doesn't matter what the right course of action is. If people need time off work for anxiety we still can't afford to provide it. They'll have to manage as they did in the past and as people in other countries still do.

We have all ready established some posters don't believe any view of the world exists other than their own.

But it doesn't matter what the right course of action is. If people need time off work for anxiety we still can't afford to provide it. They'll have to manage as they did in the past and as people in other countries still do.

My family member took time off work, he had sick pay as part of his package.

He could not have worked. On several occasions he was hospitalised as his panic attacks were so sever passers by thought he was having a heart attack and called an ambulance.

If someone has broken their legs you don't tell them they have to manage. I don't see why a mental health condition should be any different.

I was also taken to A and E twice because my panic attacks appeared to be a heart attack. I know how debilitating it is.

And yes, there are plenty of places in tbe world where you do have to "manage" with broken legs. If the people with broken legs stuff envelopes or have injury insurance that good for the economy. What doesn't work, and isn't working and can't work is defining 25% of your population as disabled and giving them money. Because what happens is you make work unprofitable for the 75% amd they try to join the 25% and you end up with a vicious circle of people failing to contribute. It doesn't matter how deserving they are.

At what point would you stop? So 25% is fine. 50%? 80%? Where is the point where you regard the welfare spend as counter productive and unaffordable?