Be Excellent To Each Other :: View topic - Political Banter and Debate Thread

While I take that point, someone at the ministerial level is seeing all the press about the fucking horrendous decisions ATOS are making, and taking no action. I have no issue with ATOS being hired, I have an issue with the lack of oversight.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/thousands-with-degenerative-conditions-classified-as-fit-to-work-in-future--despite-no-possibility-of-improvement-9811910.html

The contempt with which this government treats the disabled is beyond words. What sort of a vile, callous, lowlife absolute piece of fucking shit would you need to be to invent a scheme like that to save some money?

Well that's pretty true of any company that ever bids for IT contracts.

The plans set out by George Osborne in the Autumn Statement on Wednesday will require government spending cuts "on a colossal scale" after the election, an independent forecaster has warned.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said that just £35bn of cuts had already happened, with £55bn yet to come.

The detail of reductions had not yet been spelled out, IFS director Paul Johnson said.

As a result, he said it would be wrong to describe them as "unachievable".

However, voters would be justified in asking whether the chancellor was planning "a fundamental reimagining of the role of the state", Mr Johnson told a briefing in central London on Thursday.

If reductions in departmental spending were to continue at the same pace after the May 2015 election as they had over the past four years, welfare cuts or tax rises worth about £21bn a year would be needed by 2019/20, at a time when the Conservatives were committed to income tax cuts worth £7bn, according to the IFS.

Mr Johnson added: "One thing is for sure - if we move in anything like this direction, whilst continuing to protect health and pensions, the role and shape of the state will have changed beyond recognition."

He told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4: "The scale of the cuts has been added to by one year further. We are looking at a world in which only about 40 per cent of them have been carried out in this Parliament, with 60 per cent to come. Cuts of up to 50 per cent per head in some of those non-protected department. Not even very close to halfway there.

If you look at Ireland not only is it cheaper its a lot simpler as well. The UK has so many rates and bands.

asfish wrote:

If you look at Ireland not only is it cheaper its a lot simpler as well. The UK has so many rates and bands.

This is the same Ireland that ran out of money in 2010, right?

Yet you're looking to them as a model of fiscal policy.

a) I think there's some merit to the idea that foodbank usage has gone up due to publicity. I basically had no idea they existed in this country until recently. (Could I have used them in 2007 as a student? I remember having a single bag of rice for a week once...).

I'm actually slightly surprised that Cameron hasn't seized on the increased use and number of Foodbanks as a shining example of the Big Society that he aimed for at work.

Question time bun fight with Farage and Brand

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2RSKJC-ugk

A disabled guy shut Brand down telling him he should stand for parliament.

However, we shouldn't be too ashamed that civil society has stepped into the breach. Whether it should or not is a seperate political question, but I don't think we should criticise the existence of such charity, but only the necessity of it.

I'm actually slightly surprised that Cameron hasn't seized on the increased use and number of Foodbanks as a shining example of the Big Society that he aimed for at work.

he might realise that grandstanding a-level student political opinions doesn't actually help that much.

Author:	markg [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 0:17 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 11910.html The contempt with which this government treats the disabled is beyond words. What sort of a vile, callous, lowlife absolute piece of fucking shit would you need to be to invent a scheme like that to save some money?

Author:	Trooper [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 1:50 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Working within government, I can almost guarantee you that policy itself probably isn't too bad, it's the civil servants who interpret it and either run it themselves or farm it out to shitty companies without doing any real due diligence, that are the problem. You have no idea quite how imbecilic a lot of them are. Unfortunately, the civil servants stay the same regardless of the government they work under. Nothing will change there no matter how you vote.

Author:	markg [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 4:13 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Yeah, clearly the government intended to raise disability benefits but stupid civil servants done got it all backwards. No, I'd take some convincing that anyone in government really gives much of a shit about any effects of their "difficult decisions" beyond counting the beans and minimising losses due to malfunctioning and unviable economic units such as ill people.

Author:	BikNorton [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:40 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
That article does seem to be atos being cunts rather than the policy behind it.

Author:	markg [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:50 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Hiring a private company to do their dirty work doesn't absolve them of any responsibility at all. The government hired them, the buck tops there. There have been far too many well-publicised cases of intolerable cruelty doled out by this bunch of psychopaths.

Be Excellent To Each Other https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/

Political Banter and Debate Thread https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10024	Page 15 of 288

Author:	Cras [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:54 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Agreed. You want to hire a third party to administer the assessment process? Knock your socks off. You have an obligation, however, to provide oversight to ensure that those most vulnerable in society aren't made to suffer as a result. For a start this sort of thing should fall under the purview of the health ministry, not the DWP. If you tell ATOS they're doing a good job if claimant numbers and totals fall, what do you expect they're going to do? Outsourcing requires reliable metrics to validate its effectiveness. If cost is the only metric, this shit happens. There needs to be a way of ensuring that the most vulnerable aren't out through hell to get the support they need.

Author:	Trooper [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:01 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
My point was, the "government" didn't hire them. Civil servants hired them. Those civil servants don't change between elections.

Author:	Cras [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:08 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
While I take that point, someone at the ministerial level is seeing all the press about the fucking horrendous decisions ATOS are making, and taking no action. I have no issue with ATOS being hired, I have an issue with the lack of oversight.

Author:	Trooper [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:26 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Cras wrote: While I take that point, someone at the ministerial level is seeing all the press about the fucking horrendous decisions ATOS are making, and taking no action. I have no issue with ATOS being hired, I have an issue with the lack of oversight. Aye, that's a fair assessment. I'm assuming you have seen yes minister? It's surprisingly accurate when it comes to who actually runs the show and makes the decisions. Short of sacking the individuals involved, the power the minister has over changing behaviour is shockingly low.

Author:	asfish [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 14:15 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
markg wrote: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/thousands-with-degenerative-conditions-classified-as-fit-to-work-in-future--despite-no-possibility-of-improvement-9811910.html The contempt with which this government treats the disabled is beyond words. What sort of a vile, callous, lowlife absolute piece of fucking shit would you need to be to invent a scheme like that to save some money? We have a guy at work who was given thousands in grants from the job centre to get him back to work, they paid for an Ipad, specialist chairs and other equipment to allow him to work at our place. I'm not 100% sure what his condition is but its like a very bad RSI. So there does look to be some sensible schemes out there, as usual those who aren't in the know will be treated like shit by process monkeys who aren't qualified to asses a condition, its rather shocking that somebody with a illness like Parkinson's who would have to been signed off long term by a GP or specialist can now have this cancelled by a nurse.

Author:	asfish [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 14:18 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Cras wrote: While I take that point, someone at the ministerial level is seeing all the press about the fucking horrendous decisions ATOS are making, and taking no action. I have no issue with ATOS being hired, I have an issue with the lack of oversight. My old boss works for ATOS in their IT outsourcing, he has to go and make the sales pitch a reality after the outsourcing contracts have been signed. He said the sales guys promise all sorts of stuff to get the signature and there is seldom any contact with him to check its possible before hand.

Author:	Cras [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 14:25 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Well that's pretty true of any company that ever bids for IT contracts.

Author:	Grim... [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 14:29 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Cras wrote: Well that's pretty true of any company that ever bids for IT contracts. Obligatory vid:

Author:	asfish [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 14:36 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Cras wrote: Well that's pretty true of any company that ever bids for IT contracts. Ours is a nightmare at work, its in India but not outsourced, we have a number of employees who just get external contractors from anywhere (job adds, other providers) to do the work. Worst part is that it reports into our CIO so nobody dare criticise it, he is a pretty decent guy but walks around thinking its the best thing ever as all the ass kissers that report to him are too scared to say otherwise.

Author:	ApplePieOfDestiny [ Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:25 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Ireland would have been more fucked without 10% (now 12.5%) tax. Think about it, all its domestic businesses were making losses so the home tax base was nil regardless of the rate. Therefore the only material corporate tax receipts from 2008 to present come from businesses that are "there" (not really there) for the low tax rate. If they'd jacked up the rate to help fill the gap they'd have all left overnight which is why the EU reluctantly removed it from their list of bailout demands.

Author:	Doctor Glyndwr [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:00 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
The Big Society's Economic Boom, as expressed through the medium of foodback usage: Shameful. Almost a million people relying on charity to not go hungry. The government's response? "The initial Conservative reaction to leaks of the report – which is formally published today – was hostile, with one minister claiming the increased use of food banks was due to greater publicity about their existence." Right. People only go to food banks because they know they exist.

Author:	Doctor Glyndwr [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 14:20 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
It's OK, though, because employment is at a record high; ignore the man behind the curtain waving the zero-hour contract with below-poverty-level pay rates. That man doesn't exist.

Author:	MrChris [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 20:46 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Fuck me, learn to recognise sarcasm dude.

Author:	Doctor Glyndwr [ Thu Dec 04, 2014 15:24 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30327717 Quote: The plans set out by George Osborne in the Autumn Statement on Wednesday will require government spending cuts "on a colossal scale" after the election, an independent forecaster has warned. The Institute for Fiscal Studies said that just £35bn of cuts had already happened, with £55bn yet to come. The detail of reductions had not yet been spelled out, IFS director Paul Johnson said. As a result, he said it would be wrong to describe them as "unachievable". However, voters would be justified in asking whether the chancellor was planning "a fundamental reimagining of the role of the state", Mr Johnson told a briefing in central London on Thursday. If reductions in departmental spending were to continue at the same pace after the May 2015 election as they had over the past four years, welfare cuts or tax rises worth about £21bn a year would be needed by 2019/20, at a time when the Conservatives were committed to income tax cuts worth £7bn, according to the IFS. Mr Johnson added: "One thing is for sure - if we move in anything like this direction, whilst continuing to protect health and pensions, the role and shape of the state will have changed beyond recognition." The IFS is generally politically neutral, having attracted criticism from both sides of the spectrum. It is no left-wing organisation. Covering the same story, the right-leaning Telegraph went so far as to use the quote 'gruesome' in its headline: Quote: He told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4: "The scale of the cuts has been added to by one year further. We are looking at a world in which only about 40 per cent of them have been carried out in this Parliament, with 60 per cent to come. Cuts of up to 50 per cent per head in some of those non-protected department. Not even very close to halfway there.

Author:	asfish [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:23 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Its really time we sorted out tax in the UK. Starting with big corporations. If you look at Ireland not only is it cheaper its a lot simpler as well. The UK has so many rates and bands. I have IT contractors working for me who send their money through shell companies with complex loan arrangements. The end result is they get 85% or more of gross salary. There is little chance the government sees any remaining 15% as I suspect the people running the scheme take that. I've all for contractors being tax efficient as these guys don't get holidays, pensions etc like the full time people. But what they are doing is opting out of paying anything even NI. I don't think that is right, if you earn a decent living you should pay in. How its wasted\spent by those in power is another longer discussion. This country just appears incapable of shutting schemes like this down quickly, its always appeals that drag on, in the meantime another one pops up as there just look to be so many loopholes. I also have doubts that the Revenue is efficient enough to collect tax from those willing to pay it either!

Author:	Grim... [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:57 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
asfish wrote: If you look at Ireland not only is it cheaper its a lot simpler as well. The UK has so many rates and bands. This is the same Ireland that ran out of money in 2010, right?

Author:	Kern [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:59 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
It's interesting (to me at least) that the government want to devolve corporation tax to Northern Ireland but not to Scotland. I assume it's to allow it to better compete with the republic.

Author:	asfish [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 17:55 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Grim... wrote: asfish wrote: If you look at Ireland not only is it cheaper its a lot simpler as well. The UK has so many rates and bands. This is the same Ireland that ran out of money in 2010, right? Yes the same one that got what 8-10 Billion bail out from the UK alone and now they poach all the blue chips tax money!

Author:	Cras [ Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:07 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Yet you're looking to them as a model of fiscal policy.

Author:	Cras [ Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:09 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Also, since when has simpler tax been attractive to large corporates? I have a fair inkling that big companies have well paid tax lawyers that don't particularly struggle with this shit.

Author:	itsallwater [ Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:47 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
I do find the tax system a bit odd. A contractor can be payed twice or more than myself yet pay less tax. Granted he doesn't get the benefits of leave and a pension but he gets paid a vast amount more. Also I imaging many plumbers and builders get the same benefits and get paid cash in hand also. I know its not all like that and there are reasons for taking this approach for some self employed people but when I know people earning way more and paying less tax it annoys me a little.

Author:	MaliA [ Sat Dec 06, 2014 10:38 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
It annoys me when Lewis Hamilton parades around with a Union Flag and owns a bulldog and stuff like that when he says he has no intention of leaving tax exile.

Author:	asfish [ Sat Dec 06, 2014 17:41 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Cras wrote: Yet you're looking to them as a model of fiscal policy. Not at all, my point was that that they are cheaper rate wise and the bands look to be a lot simpler so little wonder all the blue chips pretended all there income is generated in Ireland whilst having huge presence and people in the UK.

Author:	markg [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:04 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
It's clearly the fault of the foodbanks for existing. If they weren't there then the greedy poor would have to buy their food instead of getting it for free and spending all their massive state handouts on fags and tattoos.

Author:	asfish [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 20:16 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Do you really think that people go to food banks just to get free food they don't need?

Author:	markg [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 21:11 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
To be fair there are plenty of people saying exactly that with no sarcasm intended.

Author:	MrChris [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 21:19 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
How many of them are short Welsh social justice warriors?

Author:	asfish [ Fri Dec 12, 2014 8:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Question time bun fight with Farage and Brand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2RSKJC-ugk A disabled guy shut Brand down telling him he should stand for parliament.

Author:	Pod [ Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:10 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
a) I think there's some merit to the idea that foodbank usage has gone up due to publicity. I basically had no idea they existed in this country until recently. (Could I have used them in 2007 as a student? I remember having a single bag of rice for a week once...). b) I don't think someone offering "advice" or criticism of the current political situation should have to stand for Parliament. If anything that's the opposite of what they should do. To stand for parliament you have to give a shit about a local constituency. If you ignore them then you're just as bad as the people you're complaining about.

Author:	ApplePieOfDestiny [ Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:15 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
Pod wrote: a) I think there's some merit to the idea that foodbank usage has gone up due to publicity. I basically had no idea they existed in this country until recently. (Could I have used them in 2007 as a student? I remember having a single bag of rice for a week once...). There's chicken and egg to this. If the number of foodbanks had stayed at 2005 levels, then there is no way that the number of people using them in 2013 could possibly have used them. So yes, to a degree, I agree. Of course people don't setup food banks for shits and giggles without a need (although, I am aware of one company making profits out of servicing them). I'm actually slightly surprised that Cameron hasn't seized on the increased use and number of Foodbanks as a shining example of the Big Society that he aimed for at work.

Author:	Kern [ Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:18 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
ApplePieOfDestiny wrote: I'm actually slightly surprised that Cameron hasn't seized on the increased use and number of Foodbanks as a shining example of the Big Society that he aimed for at work. Yes, it's horrible that people cannot afford to eat, and that state benefits might or might not be sufficient to cover even this essential. However, we shouldn't be too ashamed that civil society has stepped into the breach. Whether it should or not is a seperate political question, but I don't think we should criticise the existence of such charity, but only the necessity of it.

Author:	MrChris [ Fri Dec 12, 2014 11:21 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
It comes down to the old canard about whether increased supply increases demand, which I've never been convinced by (particularly if the existing suppy is not being overrun with demand - I don't believe foodbanks in 2005 were turning people away because they had too many clients). And, as you say, it's not as if most of these have been set up for a laugh. Also, living off one bag of rice for a week is part of being a student, Pod. It's character building.

Author:	DavPaz [ Fri Dec 12, 2014 12:35 ]
Post subject:	Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread
One bag of rice? Luxury!