Benefits v Defence Lord Robertson

[Wednesdayschild87]

Lord Robertson’s Speech… seriously does anyone care?? He’s laid out the fact that as a nation we can’t carry on like this… he said we can’t afford to keep throwing money at benefits whilst leaving our country defences I’m actually shocked no one has come out and spoken on this matter before. I’m incredulous.

Well its worth checking out but my husband actuallty works for tesco in the warehouse and they are not the worst employer but they are not as flexible as they could be in reality

I've certainly seen some creative suggestions on past threads. I think my recent favourite was wondering why parents like me can't just hire a carer so we can go to work or if I just moved to a cheaper area in a basic house then I simply wouldn't need UC at all.

Yep.

I'd have to have very understanding employers with very specific hours and a crazy amount of flexibility.

1-2 appointments a week for my son is considered to be a quiet week.

In reality, no one wants to hire me when they have hundreds of other options that don't involve dipping out at least 1-2 times a week but more likely 3-5 times a week plus school hours only plus no flexibility to work evenings or nights.

I know 2 Tesco employee. One on checkouts, one doing deliveries. They recently bought a house.

I met someone else doing retail at M&S, he rents privately, lives a fun life and travels a lot.

Is it really all that bad? Doesn't seem to be living off UC top ups.

I dont think you are getting told the whole picture there.

No if you dont have disabled childrem

My husband has worked goTesco for nearly 17 years they are not a bad employer if the employee can be flexible.

Its laughable unless you are a very high earner and im assuming your not if if you are relying on UC etc ( like me) how would hiring a carer help ?you would be paying out all your earnings + to the carer

based on objective diagnosis. Modern medicine is advanced enough to understand severity of impact on ones life;

what are you on about? One health condition can affect people very, very differently.

my sister has a health condition that affects some people very mildly, they can run marathons, some need canes, and some so severely they are in wheelchair. Every patient is affected very differently.

and no medicine is not that advanced.

it also took her 12 years to get diagnosed

sick of people talking so confidentially about things they have no idea about.

Comparing a disability to a period is so extremely insulting and offensive I have no words

and I say this as someone with endometriosis.

you think you have it bad with periods and being a mother? now Imagine if you were disabled on top of that.

Exactly.

It's just wild suggestions often from people who have no idea of the actual reality. The person did acknowledge in the end that the carer idea was probably a bad one when I pointed out how unimpressed my son's consultant would be if a carer with no parental responsibility rocked up to his appointments and that's without the financial implications.

And yet if you could choose between being someone with kids (even ones you didn’t plan) and being disabled (even disability you’d get by bad choice) you’d pick kids each and every time!!!!

and considering adoption and abortion exist yes you do choose to be a parent.

Would you still be thinking this if you woke disabled tomorrow like my sister did?

she is also a mother btw

you think you have significant costs now with your kids and your period, imagine being disabled on top of it

You could always start a thread to exclusively discuss defence?

Hang on, as per the title this actually started as as a thread about benefits v defence.

Maybe it would be fairer for those that really want to discuss the finer points of benefits and benefits only, to start another thread.

But this post is about about the costs of welfare vs defence. You can’t just say cut welfare to fund defence, without pinning down what that cut means, who it applies to and what other costs arise from doing so.

if someone wants to discuss defence in its own right, rather than in the context of being more important than welfare spending, this thread title wasn’t for them.

The only fair thing is to cut everything rather than pointlessly picking on one thing like Inherit. Tax on farmers or winter fuel. Hit everything -ok they’ll say it costs too much to implement but over time it will make money. And I dare people to whinge.

Exactly. I was diagnosed with something in my 30s. I've met people whose DC were diagnosed during pregnancy. There's those of us with Autism plus a few neurological things. I've met someone whose DS is 6. He can't talk; he'll babble and he's unable to walk. There's parents in a Facebook group I'm a member of whose children are developmentally delayed because of it

It makes no sense to base it on diagnosis. That being said, at my pip assessment it was decided that because (it's not that rare) the assessor hadn't heard of one of my diagnosis, it couldn't be that bad. I wouldn't have been diagnosed if that was the case

"But this post is about about the costs of welfare vs defence."

Well then maybe you might want to point that out to the multiple posters on this thread who had posted zilch about defence and concentrated on benefits...as an example see the post immeduately after your's..

The way the thread has gone might make some believe Lord Robertson was making a valid point.

Wow, I'm flattered, I've never had my sprawling and meandering prose mistaken for AI-generated text before. What a compliment.

They always think peoples responses are AI generated, seem to think people can't form a thought if it's not AI.