| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:16 - May 22 with 1399 views | footers |
The government's hollow words on this run counter to the day-to-day experiences most of us have living in this country. We can see it's happening but they just use cash amounts as examples of improved spending when in real terms there have been swingeing cuts. |  |
|  |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:17 - May 22 with 1397 views | Oldsmoker |
The government did some research into UC.
They buried it.
She knows full well that the UN report is close to the truth.
When a minister denys something so strongly you know there's a reason why.
If it's untrue they just laugh and dismiss it. |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:32 - May 22 with 1346 views | factual_blue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:16 - May 22 by footers |
The government's hollow words on this run counter to the day-to-day experiences most of us have living in this country. We can see it's happening but they just use cash amounts as examples of improved spending when in real terms there have been swingeing cuts. |
Sadly, and to use a time worn Civil Service phrase, UC is 'doomed to succeed'. |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:35 - May 22 with 1338 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:32 - May 22 by factual_blue |
Sadly, and to use a time worn Civil Service phrase, UC is 'doomed to succeed'. |
One has to wonder whether the consequences that the UN report criticises it for are actually measures of success for this government. If there are fewer people alive to claim the benefits it helps their position.
An extreme right-wing policy but there seems to be a lot more of them far too widely accepted nowadays. |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:43 - May 22 with 1318 views | factual_blue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:35 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
One has to wonder whether the consequences that the UN report criticises it for are actually measures of success for this government. If there are fewer people alive to claim the benefits it helps their position.
An extreme right-wing policy but there seems to be a lot more of them far too widely accepted nowadays. |
They decided they wanted to cut welfare spending. The unemployed wouldn't deliver a big enough saving - it's always been one of the smaller areas of welfare spending.
Pensions and child benefits are political death traps for any who want to mess with them. That leaves the sick and - particularly - disabled.
Now I have some sympathy with the broad concept that a disability might prevent you from doing X, but not Y. That's the theory, but the practice as currently carried out is nowhere near delivering that in a sensible, humane way: that would require resources this government are prepared to deploy. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:45 - May 22 with 1309 views | sparks |
Is it possible that there was a degree of political motivation given current tensions between us and the EU? Is it possible that the report is thin on proper evidence?
I'd generally be slightly less hurried to assume that one side of an argument is 100% true and vice versa. |  |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:47 - May 22 with 1300 views | footers |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:45 - May 22 by sparks |
Is it possible that there was a degree of political motivation given current tensions between us and the EU? Is it possible that the report is thin on proper evidence?
I'd generally be slightly less hurried to assume that one side of an argument is 100% true and vice versa. |
Why would the UN be in collusion with the EU? That's a bit of a tinfoil hat position, buh.
Take a look around at what's going on. The report is merely stating what is blatantly obvious. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:48 - May 22 with 1296 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:43 - May 22 by factual_blue |
They decided they wanted to cut welfare spending. The unemployed wouldn't deliver a big enough saving - it's always been one of the smaller areas of welfare spending.
Pensions and child benefits are political death traps for any who want to mess with them. That leaves the sick and - particularly - disabled.
Now I have some sympathy with the broad concept that a disability might prevent you from doing X, but not Y. That's the theory, but the practice as currently carried out is nowhere near delivering that in a sensible, humane way: that would require resources this government are prepared to deploy. |
Indeed, it has long been known it would cost more than it would save.
The obvious place for saving government expenditure is by closing tax loopholes but there appears to be some reason the party of the ultra rich does not seem to want to do that. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:49 - May 22 with 1288 views | giant_stow |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:45 - May 22 by sparks |
Is it possible that there was a degree of political motivation given current tensions between us and the EU? Is it possible that the report is thin on proper evidence?
I'd generally be slightly less hurried to assume that one side of an argument is 100% true and vice versa. |
EU? |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:49 - May 22 with 1283 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:47 - May 22 by footers |
Why would the UN be in collusion with the EU? That's a bit of a tinfoil hat position, buh.
Take a look around at what's going on. The report is merely stating what is blatantly obvious. |
He was American if that helps … not sure how. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:53 - May 22 with 1269 views | sparks |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:49 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
He was American if that helps … not sure how. |
Ive not read the thing or considered the research.
Its just notable that there is criticism for not accepting findings. But no skepticism applied whatsoever about whether to consider that there might be some valid objections.
Surely the same level of skepticism and information ought to be sought for both? | |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 19:04 - May 22 with 1220 views | chicoazul |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:49 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
He was American if that helps … not sure how. |
Alston is Australian. |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 19:04 - May 22 with 1223 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:53 - May 22 by sparks |
Ive not read the thing or considered the research.
Its just notable that there is criticism for not accepting findings. But no skepticism applied whatsoever about whether to consider that there might be some valid objections.
Surely the same level of skepticism and information ought to be sought for both? |
OK. Since you can't be bothered to read it yourself before dismissing it and defending it with false information yourself. Here is her defence:
He spent only 11 days collecting evidence from people in this country. She claims it is "a barely believable documentation of Britain, based on a tiny period of time spent here” and said it was “a completely inaccurate picture of our approach to tackling poverty”.
The article points out "Either side of his trip, Alston worked for several months with a team of legal scholars and staff from the office of the UN high commissioner for human rights researching austerity in the UK.
According to the footnotes to today’s report they analysed the government’s own official data, information from three ministries as well as the Scottish and Welsh governments, the National Audit Office and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. They examined reports from outside organisations including the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the OECD and received more than 300 written submissions."
Not sure why you should be so quick to dismiss the report and suggest her complaint is founded. There is a large body of anecdotal evidence available to anybody who mixes in general society and opens their eyes. Do you have ANY evidence to support your position? | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 19:52 - May 22 with 1156 views | BlueBadger |
Not the first time they've pulled this sh*t.
One of Rhyming-Slang's first actions as Health Secretary was to quietly instruct NICE to stop all research and recommendations into safe nursing staffing levels for hospitals. |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:00 - May 22 with 1136 views | factual_blue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:48 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Indeed, it has long been known it would cost more than it would save.
The obvious place for saving government expenditure is by closing tax loopholes but there appears to be some reason the party of the ultra rich does not seem to want to do that. |
The IT alone has been calamitous. The initial work, costing hundreds of millions, had to be written off because it wouldn't work with the Gov.uk platform.
Then they found out that the only internet access many have is by smartphone, so they needed an App/mobile website. Finding people of the calibre and experience - and the security awareness - to construct the apps was like looking for hen's teeth. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:01 - May 22 with 1127 views | sparks |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 19:04 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
OK. Since you can't be bothered to read it yourself before dismissing it and defending it with false information yourself. Here is her defence:
He spent only 11 days collecting evidence from people in this country. She claims it is "a barely believable documentation of Britain, based on a tiny period of time spent here” and said it was “a completely inaccurate picture of our approach to tackling poverty”.
The article points out "Either side of his trip, Alston worked for several months with a team of legal scholars and staff from the office of the UN high commissioner for human rights researching austerity in the UK.
According to the footnotes to today’s report they analysed the government’s own official data, information from three ministries as well as the Scottish and Welsh governments, the National Audit Office and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. They examined reports from outside organisations including the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the OECD and received more than 300 written submissions."
Not sure why you should be so quick to dismiss the report and suggest her complaint is founded. There is a large body of anecdotal evidence available to anybody who mixes in general society and opens their eyes. Do you have ANY evidence to support your position? |
Your first paragraph is embarrassing and very obviously not anything I said.. I stopped reading at that point. | |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:09 - May 22 with 1105 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:01 - May 22 by sparks |
Your first paragraph is embarrassing and very obviously not anything I said.. I stopped reading at that point. |
as you usually do. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:11 - May 22 with 1098 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 18:53 - May 22 by sparks |
Ive not read the thing or considered the research.
Its just notable that there is criticism for not accepting findings. But no skepticism applied whatsoever about whether to consider that there might be some valid objections.
Surely the same level of skepticism and information ought to be sought for both? |
Hypothetically, yes skepticism is good. And in this case the balance of evidence seems to be quite damning of the govt’s position. |  |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:20 - May 22 with 1076 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 19:04 - May 22 by chicoazul |
Alston is Australian. |
Sorry, yes you are correct. Based in New York but actually Australian. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:27 - May 22 with 1052 views | sparks |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:09 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
as you usually do. |
You seem absolutely dead set on fibbing about me. | |
| The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett) | | Poll: | Is Fred drunk this morning? |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:54 - May 22 with 1009 views | BlueBadger |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 19:04 - May 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
OK. Since you can't be bothered to read it yourself before dismissing it and defending it with false information yourself. Here is her defence:
He spent only 11 days collecting evidence from people in this country. She claims it is "a barely believable documentation of Britain, based on a tiny period of time spent here” and said it was “a completely inaccurate picture of our approach to tackling poverty”.
The article points out "Either side of his trip, Alston worked for several months with a team of legal scholars and staff from the office of the UN high commissioner for human rights researching austerity in the UK.
According to the footnotes to today’s report they analysed the government’s own official data, information from three ministries as well as the Scottish and Welsh governments, the National Audit Office and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. They examined reports from outside organisations including the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the OECD and received more than 300 written submissions."
Not sure why you should be so quick to dismiss the report and suggest her complaint is founded. There is a large body of anecdotal evidence available to anybody who mixes in general society and opens their eyes. Do you have ANY evidence to support your position? |
My main take-away from all this is that Bullers is less keen on people showing him the evidence when it totally shows up his position. | |
| |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 21:09 - May 22 with 970 views | footers |
| Absolutely disgraceful on 20:27 - May 22 by sparks |
You seem absolutely dead set on fibbing about me. |
And you seem dead set on not admitting you confused the UN with the EU but here we are. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
