To think Toby Young deserves scorn for this article?

[BowieFan]

Apologies for linking to the Daily Mail, but I've used a service that denies them advertising revenue: <a class="break-all" href="https://anonym.to/?www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3869182/Why-Lefties-misty-eyed-movie-romanticises-Benefits-Britain-says-TOBY-YOUNG.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">anonym.to/?www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3869182/Why-Lefties-misty-eyed-movie-romanticises-Benefits-Britain-says-TOBY-YOUNG.html

Aside from the basic errors (it's 100minutes long, not nearly 3 hours), it's just an awful article. The fact that Toby Young thinks everyone claiming benefits is a smoking/gambling/drinking loudmouth is just offensive. I'm shocked - not that it was published - but that he thinks his opinion is the opinion of everyone.

I'd love to see him survive on benefits. I wonder if he'd be saying the same things then?

"claimants gather round the piano for a medley of Madness’s greatest hits, and anyone who’s a bit puffed out after “Baggy Trousers” is given a mobility scooter." made me laugh out loud.

My previous post was full of typos and grammar horrors - I was cross!

People just don't seem to get what happens when people don't fit the right box. There are comments below the Independent article verifying that heart patients are not properly dealt with and are labelled fit to work when they are very much not.

That mark steel article is spot on!

Re £10k I live in a VERY cheap part of uk and would need £15k minimum just to cover basics - that doesn't include extras my daughter and I need as a result of our various health conditions,

doesn't include

Alcohol
Cigarettes
Manicures
Fake tan
Haircuts
Nights out (what's that?)
Pay tv
Phones (not even sim only)

The only one I'm 'guilty' of is having a mobile phone - which as I experience panic attacks and can get lost/stuck as a result is in my opinion an essential.

The critics of the system usually have not lived it!

The Independent, today

graph, my £10k oplan - well that would mean people would need to live like the rest of us in bigger units, suffering living with our awful mother or tolerating a smelly man and his mess around the bed room so they would have £20k or £30k to spend. I don't think that's a big price to pay for those in work to support those not in work to be honest. The rest of us who work full time and have no state benefits have to tolerate living with others even if we don't like it - just to get by. I don't see why those claiming benefits get special treatment.

I'll say it again
How sad that the height of someones achievement is to goad and goad and goad
Being banned repeatedly and then back again to sneer and deride
How pathetic

well that would mean people would need to live like the rest of us in bigger units, suffering living with our awful mother or tolerating a smelly man and his mess around the bed room
And people staying with abusive partners?
You really don't have a clue, do you.
(Note; no question mark).

So disabled people should be forced to live in poverty because they can't work Me2017?

Hmm.

My point is - even if people on benefits are drinking and smoking or have Sky - so what? I have a disabled friend who is housebound and is severely disabled. The only joy in his life is watching documentaries and football on Sky. I don't begrudge him that at all - he has gone without so much in life that I think we can all let him at least have that.

I agree hobnob

www.theguardian.com/education/2016/oct/29/toby-young-head-new-schools-network-nsn-free-schools

🙄🙄🙄

You really would think he'd have grown beyond the teenage rebellion stage by now!

He's beyond description.

No Targets Going back a bit, I know but Old did insist there weren't any, so just chucking a bit more evidence in there.

Me2017 you don't even realise you're essentially describing a move towards Victorian workhouses! Geez the lack of humanity is astounding!

Me2017, you sound, er, lovely?

Does your grand masterplan include vulnerable people who simply cannot work, or are you having them bumped off earlier in the chain?

Me2017 just why have you felt it necessary to bring five humans into the UK, all of whom are potential benefit claimants, users of the roads, the schools, the health service, the general infrastructure of the country etc etc if you find it hard enough to stomach 'supporting' all these other people?
Sigh...

Well well well. The Mail puts a tiny correction on its website which admits that one of the main claims of the article was total rubbish.

Me2017 is an interesting person, I know her a little in real life.

For what it's worth, she would say all this stuff at a dinner party.

I do hope I never meet her at a dinner party, then. Does she get shouted down?

To be fair I haven't seen her at a dinner party and can't really imagine it. I just mean that her opinion on here are the same as real life. I find some of her views pretty outrageous but I do find her quite admirable. Also I'd be amazed if she's neurotypical.

I do wonder what her clients would think if they knew she spends so much time revisiting a site from which she's been banned - and indeed if they knew the views she espouses.

I didn't know she was banned from here. I don't think this is the site she spends the most time at. I used to see her constantly on a legal board.

Anyway sorry I'm derailing.

Also I'd be amazed if she's neurotypical.
I'm on the spectrum, (diagnosed).

I don't follow you there Dawn sorry.

Also I'd be amazed if she's neurotypical.

That's an appropriate remark how?

Sorry didn't mean to be inappropriate. It's an honest opinion and I doubt Me2017 will have taken offence. Which is good as not being neurotypical is not an insult.