The BIG National WELFARE REFORM Poll!

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Hugh

IB actually replaced IVB (Invalidity Benefit), which was introduced in 1971.

just a thought ,and speaking as someone who knows nothing of the benefits system ,but it strikes me that there are way too many types of benefits .Wouldn't it be more beneficial and cost effective to have only 2 maybe 3 benefits

[dilligaf1701]

Originally Posted by martyh

just a thought ,and speaking as someone who knows nothing of the benefits system ,but it strikes me that there are way too many types of benefits .Wouldn't it be more beneficial and cost effective to have only 2 maybe 3 benefits

Very much so - see here.


http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare...versal-credit/

[martyh]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

Very much so - see here.


http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare...versal-credit/

Thanks dilli ,the sooner the better i say

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

Are you serious .The shipyards where building ships with machinery from the turn of the century as late as the '70s .They simply could not compete .Before nationalisation the shipyards tried to invest and streamline but where stopped by the unions because it meant workers would lose jobs so in the end ships where being built at a loss ,too slowly and not very well .Yes i accept that the owners should bear some responsibility but the bulk of the blame must lie firmly with the unions ,the same applies to the steel workers the dockers and the miners

Have you ever worked at a Clyde shipyard, it was hard work and long hours even in the late 1960s, yet the manages had a good life, they did not invest in the good times after WW2 and when other nations started to compete with Britain, that is when it started to bite and we still did not invest enough money into workers and shipyards.

If Jimmy Reid did not do the famous “work-in”, all the shipyards of the Clyde would have been shut, thanks to him some were saved and they are now under the ownership of BAE Systems.

So it was mostly the fault of government and business!

[Hugh]

Actually, I lived in Govan in the 60s and early 70s - did you?

[denphone]

No don't you remember Hugh he comes from the planet which is square instead of round.

[Hugh]

"If you've done six impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe?"

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Actually, I lived in Govan in the 60s and early 70s - did you?

Did you know anyone who worked at the shipyards at that time?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Well Chrys i know what i witnessed more then once and also well remember the pressure put on myself to go onto it while i was claiming jsa.

Yes and since you have stated you have genuine health issues why was it wrong for them to pressure you?

or do you think instead you should have been told to look for work whilst ill?

---------- Post added at 11:53 ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

just a thought ,and speaking as someone who knows nothing of the benefits system ,but it strikes me that there are way too many types of benefits .Wouldn't it be more beneficial and cost effective to have only 2 maybe 3 benefits

There is a lot of benefits as welfare itself is complex.

It would be more cost effective to have less but as to who it would benefit I dont know, it wouldnt be claimants.

That new universal credit is not a good idea at all. Its purpose is clearly to save money and not much else.

Your looking at it as the only important thing is to save money which I think is wrong.

What stood out that I think is interesting is that you have stated you know nothing of the benefit system, the fact IDS thought of the same idea as you sort of backs up my belief he has no experience of the system either and his idealogy is typical of someone with no experience of it.

[RizzyKing]

At that time i wasn't showing any real symptoms other then a bit of stiffness no different to someone who had slept on a bad couch. What i did have quite regular were headaches which i was told later was the start of my spine moving forwards which put pressure on my spinal cord not something badly trained staff would spot.

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

Did you know anyone who worked at the shipyards at that time?

Yes, and I went to school just across the road from Govan Shipbuilders.

The "Spanish Practices" that were in place were frightening - here are a couple of examples

a) every welder had to have an assistant (or two), when everyone who did the job knew that they could manage perfectly well with one assistant between three

b) at lunchtime, a reasonable percentage clocked-out, and got their mates to clock back in again (and out at 4pm, when the shift ended) - how do I know this? My mum ran a pub, and they used to get drunk there until thrown out about 2:30pm (before all day opening), and then go home

c) the day shift finished at 4pm - there would be hundreds queueing up at the gates from 3:45pm onwards, waiting for the whistle; can you imagine the lost accumulated hours of productivity

d) if the HVAC or welders were on day-rate, rather than piece-work, if they finished what they thought was all they needed to do for the day, the would bunk off into one of the many "hidey holes" available, or scramble round the security fence at the river (getting one of their mates to clock off for them), rather than carry on working till the end of shift.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

There is a lot of benefits as welfare itself is complex.

It would be more cost effective to have less but as to who it would benefit I dont know, it wouldnt be claimants.

That new universal credit is not a good idea at all. Its purpose is clearly to save money and not much else.

Your looking at it as the only important thing is to save money which I think is wrong.

What stood out that I think is interesting is that you have stated you know nothing of the benefit system, the fact IDS thought of the same idea as you sort of backs up my belief he has no experience of the system either and his idealogy is typical of someone with no experience of it.

well i would have thought it would benefit everybody if the system was simpler ,it would cetainly be cheaper and that's the whole point isn't it ?.How many people don't get what they are entitled to because no-one understands the complexity of the sytem ?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by martyh

well i would have thought it would benefit everybody if the system was simpler ,it would cetainly be cheaper and that's the whole point isn't it ?.How many people don't get what they are entitled to because no-one understands the complexity of the sytem ?

You cannot apply a one size fits all policy to people in different situations and with different needs.

Also applications forms will be incredibly complex as go from one form for one benefit that covers one purpose to one super form for one benefit that covers everything.

Universal credit wont save on admin costs but its main savings will ultimately come from it will pay out less to claimants and less errors. The government loses a lot of money in errors.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

You cannot apply a one size fits all policy to people in different situations and with different needs.

Also applications forms will be incredibly complex as go from one form for one benefit that covers one purpose to one super form for one benefit that covers everything.

Universal credit wont save on admin costs but its main savings will ultimately come from it will pay out less to claimants and less errors. The government loses a lot of money in errors.

how on earth do you work that out .I would imagine that any form filling will be much simplified as you would only fill out the bits that apply .I remember when the self assessment tax forms came out ,everybody said it will never work it will be too complicated ,well it's not and it does .
Anyway we don't know yet how it will be implemented but any change that saves money on the welfare bill is fine by me .Get the scroungers off DLA or whatever it's called these days and get the money where it is really needed

[peanut]

Originally Posted by martyh

how on earth do you work that out .I would imagine that any form filling will be much simplified as you would only fill out the bits that apply .I remember when the self assessment tax forms came out ,everybody said it will never work it will be too complicated ,well it's not and it does .
Anyway we don't know yet how it will be implemented but any change that saves money on the welfare bill is fine by me .Get the scroungers off DLA or whatever it's called these days and get the money where it is really needed

I don't think you have any idea at all. It's not what you put on the forms but how you put it / word it is what decides if you get it or not. The questions are set to catch people out, genuine or not.

As for getting the scroungers off DLA, well if only it was as simple as you make it out. DLA is one of the hardest benefits to get, that's why the fraud level is so very low. So why pick on that one?

I keep hearing how those that need it or deserve it should get what they need, I just wish it was just that simple. And as for your 'any change that saves money' is just plain ignorant to say the least.