Benefit hatred is out of control.

[carernotasaint]

www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/owen-jones-hatred-of-those-on-benefits-is-dangerously-out-of-control-7763793.html

Yes, Gordon Brown did overspend - Northern Rock, RBS, etc. And was too lax on regulating public expenditure - deregulation of the City, demutualisation of building societies, etc. Also, not tight enough control of public money - Vodafone, Philip Green, etc.

my DF was paralsyed so i have some insight into disability but because i think the current system is: open to fraud, too expensive, encourages dependancy, i have been told i dont know what i am talking about, am vile etc. etc

Lots of disabled people are dependant though....being disabled is expensive.

DLA fraud rate 0.5% inc DWP error

DLA fraud rate 0.5% - this figure is very misleading. if your condition improves and you dont report the improvement, it is not counted as fraud.

plus as we all know DLA is just a small part of the benefits system.

so its not really a figure to quote,.

Yes it is really a figure to quote! its the DWPs own figure too! I also know that lots of people who should be getting DLA dont get it for various reasons.

I dont think people who have miraculous recoveries from disability are in any great number TBH.

AL - lots of conditions are not life long and you dont need a miracile to get better.

as a nation, our health is improving, but the number of people with hard to proove conditions (e.g. back problems) is increasing. i will find the report from Sheffield uni on the topic...

I don't understand how the 0.5% figure can be accurate. How on earth can they know exactly how many people are committing DLA fraud without knowing who they are and stopping their benefit?

yes but lots of conditions are lifelong yet people with them who currently get DLA will face having their DLA cut totally under these cuts.

Weedling out the so called back pain shirkers is going to also put people like my son under scrutiny...unless he grows a new brain there will be no improvement in his condition.

That facts are they want to cut the DLA bill by 20%

with the fraud rate at 0.5% that means an awful lot of genuinely disabled and vulnerable people are going to be fucked quite frankly.

I dont know how anyone can defend that.

Josephine I assume that the rate for people found to be claiming fraudulently that do have their money stopped.

DLA is very very hard to get so that alone stops fraud.

When I say its hard to get, you need supporting medical evidence when you apply for it.

Isn't it interesting that those who think there needs to be "a conversation" are not reliant on disability benefits?

Just because a disability is invisible does not mean it's not there.

My own feeling as I often repeat on MN is that all of us whether rich or poor should get a single universal benefit (i.e universal means everyone gets it)and then after that we all pay 50% tax on income without any allowances.

That way no one feels hard done by, no minimum wage is necessary and everyone pays the same marginal rate of tax, employers have to pay what is necessary to get employees.

MoreBeta - that's a very interesting propostion. I will vote for you!

There are life long disabilities unless any of you have a cure for Down Syndrome and their manky hearts and while you're about it have you a cure for deafblindness CP and Epilepsy. If you have a cure for Emanuel syndrome I am sure the University of Texas would be interested. Many many disabilities are for ever. Just come to my home.

Hi 2shoes realised after I'd posted. Oops.

2old2beamum, my DH has MS. He'll always have it and his condition will get worse, not better. My cousin has LD and that's not going to get any better.

MoreBeta, how much do you suppose this universal benefit should be?

Why is it that all those who complain about how much people receive on benefits are workers who have chosen to work to support a family. If it is so much better on benefits I suggest they try it.
I can't see how anybody could complain about DLA, ok there are cases of fraud I have seen several myself, but this is no reason for the govt or society to take it out on the real deserving disabled.
So to all those moaning, who are able bodied and in employment try a bit of humanity "There but for the grace of God go I"

Exactly morethanpotatoprints

YY potato.

Exactly potato.

Good post, potatoes - people who currently aren't in need of DLA for themselves or family would do really well to remember they're only one serious accident/illness away from being in that situation. It's the insularity of the narrow minded that gets me.

We all know there is a lack of money, we know this. But spending isn't exactly done sanely, is it? why spend all that money on ATOS(sers) who are making such a balls-up of the situation, and then spend even MORE on the appeals to correct their balls-ups? Why aren't they making ATOS(sers) pay for their mistakes? Why have they even still got the contract?
Why is it that George Osborne seemed to think that the £100m that he would have got by maintaining the 50% income tax on top earners was such chump change that he didn't need it? Sure, he might need billions, but even 0.1billion is worth hanging onto - in normal people's brains, anyway.

Josephine - I dont want to bring the sky down on my head by naming an exact figure. Obvioulsy that is part of teh national conversation we need to have.

Interestingly, the Institute of Directors and Taxpayers Alliance have come out this morning saying that they think that getting rid of all the current personal tax bands and having a £10k personal allowance and a flat 30% income tax rate would be a good idea. There is a groundswell of opinion moving to simpler flat taxes - we need to have the same thinking simpler flat benefits to go with it. Benefit and tax reform must go together.

The definition of fraud used by the dla is not what Joe public would consider fraud. Its someone who from the outset planned to defraud the system.

we are living longer and so fitter so raising disabilty rates dont make sense. The number of claimants with disabilities from birth is v low. Something like 10%. Am on the train but will find the paper by Sheffield hallam uni which explains this.

The number of claimants with disabilities from birth is v low. Something like 10%

So?

My son is disabled from birth.

My mother is disabled not from birth.

They are both disabled!

What are you saying exactly? that unless you are disabled from birth you should be viewed as a chancer trying your luck? pretending to be worse than you really are?

How can the flat rate tax scheme be introduced without causing huge resentment?

surely somebody earning £30k a year is going to be massively pissed off at paying the same rate as somebody earning £300k ?