'Wings Over TalkHearts' Politics Thread

[Mr A]

This all done with the classic Tory end game of privatising the health service in England and Wales I take it?

This isn't the classic Tory end game. Some aspects are better dealt with by private enterprise but they will never privatise the lot.

Our 'NHS' also uses private companies up here - where there's barely a Tory in sight

[PHOODLE-OUt]

It's ttip that's being welcomed in we've got to worry about up here now

[Crocodile Busan]

This isn't the classic Tory end game. Some aspects are better dealt with by private enterprise but they will never privatise the lot.

Our 'NHS' also uses private companies up here - where there's barely a Tory in sight

Just a wee joke Mags

Seriously though, this is scandalous from Hunt. At what point does Cameron step in and give him a boot out the door?

[Mr A]

Just a wee joke Mags

Seriously though, this is scandalous from Hunt. At what point does Cameron step in and give him a boot out the door?

I think it'll depend how this pans out. If imposing this on the Doctors causes more chaos to the point that he has to back down he'll get the boot.

[PHOODLE-OUt]

If Hunt ever needs to visit a hospital he'll get Shipman'd

[Zizou]

If Hunt ever needs to visit a hospital he'll get Shipman'd

A Tory using the NHS

[PHOODLE-OUt]

true

[PHOODLE-OUt]

http://m.heraldscotland.com/news/1427113..._backlash/

:what:

[Papin]

He's just launched an urgent enquiry into Junior Doctor morale.

[PHOODLE-OUt]

MSPs vote for the first time on a Scottish rate of income tax, and vote by 74 t0 35 to keep it the same

The conservative 'tax alliance' has voted for passing on spending cuts. So much for socialist Scotland

[Zizou]

He's just launched an urgent enquiry into Junior Doctor morale.

Staggering

[PHOODLE-OUt]

He's just launched an urgent enquiry into Junior Doctor morale.

This has to be a wind up.

[Mr A]

Good troll from Hunt if true tbf

[shaun.lawson]

If you want to have a discussion about welfare lets have a discussion about it.

Don't parade the tragic death of a mentally ill man around as if it is some sort of golden bullet that should put an end to any form of welfare assessment criteria.

Next week, my sister - diagnosed with clinical depression in 2001, then with Borderline Personality Disorder in 2008, but who has received no treatment for the latter because of lack of funding - will have her Atos assessment for Personal Independence Payments (PIP). The questions will involve things like:

- Can you walk in a straight line?

- Can you lift your right foot up?

This is the basis from which Atos, a private company incentivised to find totally unfit people "fit for work", do so.

We already know my sister will almost certainly lose: at which point, her PIP will be removed. Then she'll appeal. As the appeal is independent and involves actual doctors, she'll almost certainly win. However, the appeal can take up to a year to take place.

Fortunately, my sister has a roof over her head and parents who provide for her. Many, many, many of those who Atos find "fit to work" and have their benefits removed do not. What do you think happens to them? Really, tell me: WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENS TO THEM?

The link below shows that 56% of those appealing PIP decisions win. Fifty-six percent. When more than half of the original decisions are being overturned, we have a problem. Sadly though, many of those who fail the original assessment are either a) too drained and exhausted by the system to appeal at all; or b) don't have the means or support to do so. These are sick or disabled people we're talking about. Iain Duncan Smith loves people like them - because they disappear off the system, the government can hail cuts to the 'welfare bill', and they are forgotten about. Forever.

https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/3...p-climbing

[Cheeky Gnando’s]

Mags doesn't want a discussion on welfare. He tried to hand wave away the government figures I produced last week, that prove the 'tragic death' he is desperate to dismiss as isolated is actually part of a much wider issue. The quite distasteful "parading around" comment just shows he should stick to the "lol look what the SNP are up to today" comfort zone.

[GeoffK1874]

Debate on welfare then Mags? Let's start with Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Should government provide enough to ensure everyone has food, clothing or shelter? If no, why not? If yes, wouldn't a basic income policy make more sense? Other benefits on top of that would be earned from contributions.

[Mr A]

Mags doesn't want a discussion on welfare. He tried to hand wave away the government figures I produced last week, that prove the 'tragic death' he is desperate to dismiss as isolated is actually part of a much wider issue. The quite distasteful "parading around" comment just shows he should stick to the "lol look what the SNP are up to today" comfort zone.

It wasn't distasteful, Beggers. You lot were trying to show that a mentally ill man that has killed himself is somehow proof that the welfare system doesn't work. It's hysterical nonsense and it's impossible to have a discussion about an issue when you highlight a tragic individual case. That guy was mentally ill and there will have been many issues that contributed to him killing himself.

See Geoff's post below as and example of how to make a grown up point on welfare.

Debate on welfare then Mags? Let's start with Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Should government provide enough to ensure everyone has food, clothing or shelter? If no, why not? If yes, wouldn't a basic income policy make more sense? Other benefits on top of that would be earned from contributions.

Yes I think the government should provide enough to make sure everyone has food, clothing and shelter. Welfare should be there as a safety net to help those in the most need.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. The problem is assessing who is in actual need and who isn't.

I think they proposed paying a basic income to all citizens in Switerland. After doing the sums that worked out cheaper. I think it's a decent idea. But there's a reason a lot of housing benefits payments are made directly to landlords. Some people would just squander the basic income - what would you do in that instance?

[GeoffK1874]

It wasn't distasteful, Beggers. You lot were trying to show that a mentally ill man that has killed himself is somehow proof that the welfare system doesn't work. It's hysterical nonsense and it's impossible to have a discussion about an issue when you highlight a tragic individual case. That guy was mentally ill and there will have been many issues that contributed to him killing himself.

See Geoff's post below as and example of how to make a grown up point on welfare.  


Yes I think the government should provide enough to make sure everyone has food, clothing and shelter. Welfare should be there as a safety net to help those in the most need.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. The problem is assessing who is in actual need and who isn't.

I think they proposed paying a basic income to all citizens in Switerland. After doing the sums that worked out cheaper. I think it's a decent idea. But there's a reason a lot of housing benefits payments are made directly to landlords. Some people would just squander the basic income - what would you do in that instance?

It's quite simple. Squander your basic income and you starve. The idea that the state should then have any responsibility if you can't look after yourself is ridiculous. You make your choices in life, you deal with the consequences.

[shaun.lawson]

Yes I think the government should provide enough to make sure everyone has food, clothing and shelter. Welfare should be there as a safety net to help those in the most need.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that. The problem is assessing who is in actual need and who isn't.

I think they proposed paying a basic income to all citizens in Switerland. After doing the sums that worked out cheaper. I think it's a decent idea. But there's a reason a lot of housing benefits payments are made directly to landlords. Some people would just squander the basic income - what would you do in that instance?

It's quite simple. Squander your basic income and you starve. The idea that the state should then have any responsibility if you can't look after yourself is ridiculous. You make your choices in life, you deal with the consequences.

A basic income is a very good idea which I think, at a time of diminishing government and tax revenue, will become commonplace eventually. It'd turn the appalling narrative on benefits on its head.

But if at all possible, I'd go a lot further. As well as the basic income, I'd want:

1. Kids to be taught at school about how to manage money

2. The legalisation of all drugs and beefing up of rehabilitation centres - because a lot of those who squander the basic income will be drug addicts

3. Beefing up of social services too. They're an utter joke in Britain; the lack of funding is a national scandal. But if feckless parents squander the basic income, how can we make their kids starve as a result?

In other words, as ever, there are no panaceas, no one-size-fits-all policies... and we still need serious investment into various areas. Lots of it.

[Walter Sobchak]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hom...74006.html