To Think the Tories Are Actually At War With Disabled People?

[JoffreyBaratheon]

I've been mired in the grim process of my son's DLA being changed to the new benefit, PIP. During this time, I have heard the stories of other disabled people and their loved ones. This may make me biased. Or human.

On every forum I have been on for help, can see that thousand of other disabled people, their carers, appointees and loved ones are being pretty well tortured by the vicious cuts and the new, brutal system being forced into place.

Benefits advisers and people at charities in the front line trying to support people like us also seem to report they feel like the disabled are under attack.

Now I will never understand why the most disadvantaged people in society are being forced to pay for the mistakes of bankers and rich people. Losing DLA will be a blow to our family - most of all my son but all of us - we won't recover from. To multi millionaires like Campbell, no doubt it's back pocket change so they are incapable of understanding what they are doing to ordinary people.

The past few months going through this hell, I've often felt like we might as well cut to the chase, sew the lack triangle on our clothes, and wait for the work camp to open. And I don't say that lightly, as someone whose grandad was present during the liberation of Belsen. (Wasn't it another tory - Gove - who said historians got it wrong and the British were donkeys led by lions, or words to that effect - so we know the contempt in which we are held by these chinless wonders already).

AIBU to think that people like Cameron and IDS are targeting disabled people and their carers, specifically?

In a civilised society everyone is entitled to their opinions, how do you know other peoples experience? Examples tend to be anecdotal, dismissing people's opinions views as worthless does not justify an argument

caughtUp yes, you are expressing a different view. And yes I don't like it. And yes I am telling you I don't like it.
So you've flounced because I don't like your view. I'm still here though.
In my posting history there will be many examples of me being open minded and the sling both points of view into account.
However, I don't like your views andbinstate so very strongly, because your views are problematic.
And I have to stand up for disabled people because the government certainly isn't.
If I posted a blow by blow account of my dealings with the DWP, people would be astounded. Their ineptness and unfairness is breathtaking.
I am keeping my every communication with them so I can consider legal action against them. That's how poor it is.

You've been given plenty of first hand evidence on this thread. You've been given government figures. Facts provided. Descriptions about how stringent these claims are. What more is needed? Nobody said your opinion was worthless, it merely seems unfounded.

ponty you have been given facts.

What's with the civilised rhetoric? I don't understand what your point is.

The examples are anecdotal until they become your life. Then they are the brutal reality.

or that the people claiming dla were granted a far too generous amount. You can look at it both ways.

Wow this makes ne so angry. You seriously think it is generous?

Without it I would be completely bedridden.

I guess people like you caughtup would like me to spend what time I have left on this planet in bed, whilst more tax breaks are given to higher earners.

Words fail me they really do.

Examples tend to be anecdotal, dismissing people's opinions views as worthless does not justify an argument

All opinions are not equal. Uninformed opinions clung to in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary hold little weight with me.

I could hold the opinion the earth was flat until I was blue in the face, but it wouldn't make me right or mean that people needed to give my opinion the time of day.

In the case of how the government should distribute or collect its taxes all opinions are valid.

In your opinion is it fair to cut these benefits and collect less tax for higher rate tax payers?

I don't believe that less tax should be collected from higher rate tax payers but I do think that some benefits should be cut - not all but some, and I do belive that their needs to be strong regulation of benefits.

The nation voted in the Tories to ensure things were fairer and we live within our means. The nation didn't vote in the Tories. A small margin of voters did and it wasn't to ensure that things were fairer, it was to ensure, as with all Tory governments, that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

We want tighter control of state spending however which these measures might well achieve. As would re-jigging the tax cut that is coming on Wednesday and taxing the likes of Starbucks, Google and Amazon properly.

if you're managing your family's money you don't spend more than you have even if it means you don't have all you want immediately.
In some cases, in particular, those families with a disabled member, this can mean going without food and heating. Is that what you voted for? Are you happy with the £120 per month cut to disability benefits?

In a civilised society everyone is entitled to their opinions, how do you know other peoples experience? Examples tend to be anecdotal, dismissing people's opinions views as worthless does not justify an argument. (sic)
In an intelligent society we tend to use facts with which to support our arguments and abandon logical fallacies. Of course you're entitled to your opinion, but don't use it to justify something of which you very obviously have little comprehension.

In the case of how the government should distribute or collect its taxes all opinions are valid.

They may all be equally valid, as in no one is going to claim you have no right to hold them, but unfortunately that doesn't necessarily make them all equally valuable.

"Obviously have little comprehension" - no, just a different view of the facts but not wrong or ill informed just different :)

There already is strong regulation - do you not accept that?

just a different view of the facts but not wrong or ill informed just different smile
You disagreed with the governments own figures. Wrong and ill informed.
You seem to think that those on disability benefits have enough to live on. Ill informed. I could trawl through the thread picking things up, but don't really consider it a good use of my time.

See, when someone says "their [sic] needs to be strong regulation" about something that's already strongly - some might say, in the case of sanctions, inhumanely so - regulated, as if strong regulation is a brand new idea, then that's when I think "if they don't even know that that's already in place, they really don't know anything about the process". And that's why I dismiss your opinion as uninformed.

But please tell us specifically which benefits you would cut, by how much and why, and what regulations you would introduce that aren't already in place.

"I do belive that their needs to be strong regulation of benefits."

and says.....but it is very tightly regulated!!

And how about the waste of tax payers' money in re-assessing the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of claims, in light of the new rule the tories are recommending? (Cutting the points assigned for using an aid, in half).

Capita and ATOS and whoever it is now, were already weltering under the strain of so many claims to get through (all of that would have been cheap if they'd simply transposed the people already on DLA for life and longterm, onto PIP but of course, that's sensible and logical so a no-no for IDS).

Now they will have the added admin of doing this.

On top of the unusually high level of mandatory reconsiderations and appeals because the assessors are so monumentally incompetent, the MAJORITY of decisions they ake are having to be overturned.

Just admit defeat and return it to the system that worked. We filled in 100 page forms, and got supporting info from a swathe of experts, 20 years ago. My son's condition - like thousands of other disabled people's conditions - has not changed and will not go away.

Whatever the Torygraph/Daily Heil readers are gullible enough to swallow, the reality is - it was never easy to get DLA and that was proven by the low level of fraud. This system where you are assessed by a randomer with minimal training, will surely lead to much more fraud, and people getting the benefit who (rightly) never got DLA. Whilst severely disabled people are being turfed off the benefit, to massage the figures.

Just seeing it reported over and over - people with surprisingly minor problems suddenly getting the highest rate, and people with severe disabilities getting nothing or standard.

Add message | Report | Message poster
JoffreyBaratheon Fri 11-Mar-16 19:02:57

I forgot to add but also another observation... people who have never claimed before and are claiming PIP for the first time, seem to be doing better under the system than people who have had highest rate DLA for years. Again, presumably for the spin
^
This above.

why cant every single able bodie person use a wheelchair/crutches/tie one leg up /one arm/wear a blindfold etc for just ONE week,and then come on threads like this and jud.

especially the fucking government.

The nation voted in the Tories to ensure things were fairer and we live within our means.

A bunch of selfish cunts did, mostly in the south of England.

Living within our means seems to be working really well, doesn't it.

Every fucking year more cuts to fill the hole George & co have made and deepened.

That's what you get when an apparent history expert tries to manage a country's economy.

Yes, it's really 'fairer'. robbing disabled people to give the wealthy a tax cut.

And these are for Luis.

I saw her say on another thread she felt shite for getting sucked in and rattled.

But I love Luis. Always fights the good fight.