Welfare bill becomes law: Cameron, your deceitful lies will catch you

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by mertle

feel free to edit it for me then but there is sometimes you cant as there limit on what you can do which happened before on thread which got accused it made no sense you need to go text speak at times.

I am disgusted at royals for this openess of giving her subjects who need help a good kicking.

I am officially now no longer supporter of the queen she let down many many people. Lords can goto hell too for destroying many disabled lives. I hope the lot rot in hell.

One of the disgraceful moves in the bill was removal of the giving a crisis loan to those who dont realise think it was handout its PAID back every penny.

Then the propaganda media never enphasised this made it sound like free junket. People used it to get fridges, even new suit for interviews to look smart. These vunerable now got only loan sharks left to goto.

I found this website on pip alot disabled now organising the fight for there rights. Sadly some the charities got juped it still going on with styche. I would question who those charities where who supported proposals there background if they came from middle class did they ever have true support of the disabled. I am questioning everything think the whole thing smells rotten to the core.

http://wearespartacus.org.uk/pip/

Social Fund Crisis Loans are to be replaced by locally administered discretionary schemes.

Originally Posted by Gary L

Thanks. so thousands of people on benefits will fall foul of this 'tax' then.
they'd have to find the shortfall of money out of their benefits to pay this tax. which will be approx £12 a week on average.

unless they get a smaller house which the council won't have available to give them.
the government will have to increase their benefit to make up the shortfall of the minimum the law says they need to live on. (unless it's not law anymore)

I think as long as you've registered with the council that you require a smaller property. then the tax shouldn't be liable.

how long it takes them to find you that smaller property is up to them. it's not the tenants responsibility. and it would be criminal to not give them a smaller property so as to avoid the tax.

it's madness. it's almost as mad as the old window tax.

Housing Benefit/Local Housing Allowance can legally be reduced, even if paying the shortfall in rent leads to the claimant living below the poverty line.

Housing Benefit/Local Housing Allowance are to be abolished, with claimants having to pay their rent from the new Universal Credit.

Originally Posted by mertle

not the formality you think she can act if its against the people. read the following although primary work with close relationships she can make here disaproval of the bill.

http://www.monarchist.org.uk/the-que...overnment.html

For people said been in the news yes lords one correct but refering to it being sanctioned by the queen.

This off topic The storms coming fear this country going down the craphole with this I am alright jack. Guess what these wont call them humanity would first to scream when the safety nets not in place anymore. I hope they drive safely from there middle upper class jobs because if they had car crash which made them disabled find there no help financial help is desperately needed due to disabilty. No would not ridicule them I would feel sorry for them but would hope they reflected on why they supported a stupid bill that they one day would rue. W need to fight this bill.

It was rushed horrid bill like many said, changes was needed to stop abuse to streamline it so people got what rightfully they could claim. Nope all we got was destruction and demolition of safety nets. Pompous lies about we will protect the real disabled rubbish.

I even question if there was different circumstances to chamerons life attacks on disabled would not happened.

I don't believe the queen has ever exercised her right to refuse to sign a bill. There were rumours that, when Thatcher talked of privatising the Post Office in the 80's, that she said she would refuse to sign as she was reported to have said "the Royal Mail it is and the Royal Mail it will stay".

Even if this were to be true, it looks like she may have mellowed as the last Government and this coalition have talked about privatising the Post Office since then.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by mertle

I am disgusted at royals for this openess of giving her subjects who need help a good kicking.

I am officially now no longer supporter of the queen she let down many many people. Lords can goto hell too for destroying many disabled lives. I hope the lot rot in hell.

what an utterly mindless, uninformed rant. If you truly believe that withholding Royal assent was even possible in these circumstances, let alone likely, then you are operating on a plane so far removed from the facts it's totally pointless even trying to argue with you.

By all means sit in a corner and stew in your Trotskyist bile. Ultimately you'll only make yourself miserable.

[mertle]

Some of the policies stark raving bonkers straight out of someone who needs to be round up put in straight jacket.

http://falseeconomy.org.uk/blog/work...ean-youre-safe

Take this Part time workers

Under UC, the earnings threshold for conditionality will be ‘gross taxable pay’ set at the national minimum wage for a 35-hour week, which comes to £212.80 per week or about £11,000 per year. The conditionality threshold for lone parents and possibly those with ‘work-limiting health conditions’ will be £120 per week. Anyone earning below these thresholds could be subject to conditions, which would force them to seek full-time work within 90 minutes travel time from their home.

This brings us to the ultimate absurdity. Will they force claimants to give up a low-waged or part-time job to work for nothing on a workfare scheme? Perhaps in-work conditionality has been slipping by unnoticed because it appears so ludicrous, often greeted with: “Nah… that will never happen. How will that work?�

So if someone who gets less 35 hours could be subject to this or Am I mis-understanding. When a person classed fulltime or partime does this incled the SELF-Employed who hours fluctuate.

Now what will happen if you fail to comply you will be removed from working (get me straight the government will sack you) & put on JSA and the workfare. It absolute stark raving bonkers feud needs to taken away locked up.

I dont care they on tax credit they atleast working. Hell the government sucking up to there chumps wonder how many tesco staff be sacked re-employed as workfare staff.

This the time to stand up not take this.

If you want to make a change cameron increase minimum wage for kickoff.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chris

what an utterly mindless, uninformed rant. If you truly believe that withholding Royal assent was even possible in these circumstances, let alone likely, then you are operating on a plane so far removed from the facts it's totally pointless even trying to argue with you.

By all means sit in a corner and stew in your Trotskyist bile. Ultimately you'll only make yourself miserable.

I'm just surprised you could understand enough of it to conclude it's drivel....

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Osem

I'm just surprised you could understand enough of it to conclude it's drivel....

I dont like the agenda of cableforum certain posters to ridicule spiteful which clearly against cableforum rules.

I have been accused off topic warned infactions may persue yet spiteful nasty comments been allowed to be feverant one of which was cableforum team. So Chris are you and Osem being warned.

I was understanding royalty could block bills which against public to stop a government being a rampant crazy dictator. Afterall she calls us her subjects then she should have those powers to prevent another poll tax riots.

So stop this move on its getting tiresome I dont think its fare to those if this thread GETS another CLOSURE because pstupid posters.

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by mertle

I dont like the agenda of cableforum certain posters to ridicule spiteful which clearly against cableforum rules.

I have been accused off topic warned infactions may persue yet spiteful nasty comments been allowed to be feverant one of which was cableforum team. So Chris are you and Osem being warned.

I was understanding royalty could block bills which against public to stop a government being a rampant crazy dictator. Afterall she calls us her subjects then she should have those powers to prevent another poll tax riots.

So stop this move on its getting tiresome I dont think its fare to those if this thread GETS another CLOSURE because pstupid posters.

You were understanding incorrectly.

As was pointed out to you, this has not happened since the Royal Assent was introduced in 1707 - just because you disagree with it, doesn't mean it's wrong...

[Maggy J]

I REALLY think it is time to get back to the original topic EVERYBODY.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I REALLY think it is time to get back to the original topic EVERYBODY.

indeed maggy.

Interesting the report which provided the basis for the White Paper on Universal Credit was created by the Economic Dependency Working Group:

David Godfrey, Chief of staff to Greg Clark (Con)
Nicholas Boys Smith (Con-home contributor and former advisor to Peter Lilley (Con))
Nick Hillman (Con)
Sara McKee (former A4E director)
Dr Peter King (Con-home contributor)
Lee Rowley (Con)
Debbie Scott (Tory peer, working alongside Lord Freud)
Corin Taylor (Taxpayers' Alliance)

Now this purge on part time workers is puzzling to say the least.

Although would love to see poster tell me if the article correct fulltime workers could also forced to lose there job.

A crazy way to look at issue if I am honest. For one they contribute yes they get topped up but at least coalition YOU only pay half which if they lost the job you would have to provide 100%. In my knowledge 50-60% support better 100%. You would actually drastically increase benefits not reduce them.

Now lets look part time who likely those who do so.

Sole Parent
Have children sole parent might want to just do part time work some cant afford full childcare might due to circumstances cant go 35hrs +

Looking after a disabled person or even elderly

Surely would not be right to try push these into fulltime position or shove them on welfare. You might say why they part time at all it maybe its there way getting break bit independance.

Disabled
They simply due to the way disibilty is unable go full time restricted to 16 hrs work. Due to its painful they need the days to rest. Dont think it would be right for these either

Those who cant find fulltime who ended up taking part time just get a job.

Then those the government identified scroungers the ones who do just enough. Again these still even if the government dont want admit to at least dont get 100%.

It seems strange rule but we still see the attack on the poor its not there fault companies only pay minimum wage less scaled for less skilled workforce. Maybe coalition talk to rich budies get better job prospects more wages and higher pay.

The other is again policy which actually will harm the economy not make it start to recover. Take that spending out of the system will make this country implode.

[dilligaf1701]

I was at a RNIB meeting today where this was discussed a lot. There are certainly interesting times ahead.

As it stands there is now very little provision for people who are blind in the assessment process and even less for those who are partially sighted.

As for pip some of the companies who have tendered are apparently worse that ATOS.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

I was at a RNIB meeting today where this was discussed a lot. There are certainly interesting times ahead.

As it stands there is now very little provision for people who are blind in the assessment process and even less for those who are partially sighted.

As for pip some of the companies who have tendered are apparently worse that ATOS.

not looking good at all seems vince cable had a go at lib dem conference about conservatives backward policies harming the economy

Basically we would be better off with ATOS. I will guess

A4E was one
G4s new medical division ran by ex bouncers.
Acme corrupt co. ran by bunch of crimelords who will threaten you next of kin will be shot if you dont accept your fit for work.

[dilligaf1701]

You think people's next of kin will be threatened with murder over this? I'm sure things will be bad for some but saying things such as you just did shows how little you care / understand the situation.

Perhaps it is time for you to take a break and have a rest - it will help you get some perspective.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by mertle

Acme corrupt co. ran by bunch of crimelords who will threaten you next of kin will be shot if you dont accept your fit for work.

WHAT !!!!! am i reading that right

[mertle]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

You think people's next of kin will be threatened with murder over this? I'm sure things will be bad for some but saying things such as you just did shows how little you care / understand the situation.

Perhaps it is time for you to take a break and have a rest - it will help you get some perspective.

no cause suprised it was taken seriously but just making light fun of the situation just forgot to put lol or indicate it was humour.

---------- Post added at 21:49 ---------- Previous post was at 21:48 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

WHAT !!!!! am i reading that right

martyh it was little bit humour

dilligaf1701 I realise the extent how bad it is or even will be just wanted try put little lightheartedness I was wrong maybe but we all on tender hooks.

Think the nation gone to pot with this eat dog atitude caused by this horrendous policy feel those who in power failed many disabled, poor and low paid workers.

The lords was cowards to not stop it labour was awful not to fight hard against this bill. The lib/dems are slimy to side with policies that in normal circumstances they would voted hard against.

[dilligaf1701]

You think suggesting murder is on the cards is funny?

If you wish to make light of it then as you say you should remember your smileys.

Still - each to their own.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

You think suggesting murder is on the cards is funny?

If you wish to make light of it then as you say you should remember your smileys.

even with smilies it would have been out of order and in very poor taste imo.
It is quite obvious that people are very worried about this whole afair and making light in such a manner will only fuel such worries