Poll: Benefit cap vote.

['Harry]

Not sure if anybody has posted this yet but it attempts to explain the situation (yes it was made by the Conservative party).

LOL!

Like they'd spend the money saved on doctors/teachers That is nothing more then BS to get the middle class up in arms.

 

[Tummy]

Conservatives. Ugh.

 

[Gilly]

Well I Now go back to your original point.



Is this the case?

From the areas that I have personally seen I stand by my original statement.

I am not narrow minded enough to say that it would be right in every single situation, but on average I would stand by it.

 

[dowie]

It's draconian, ineffective (it has been done, by the way), unnecessary and demeaning. Why on earth should someone who's lost their job be told they can't spend it as they wish whilst they look for their new job? Why should someone stuck in a wheelchair not choose to watch Sky TV? Why should the child of someone on benefits not get toys?

I'd separate those people tbh...

Someone out of work because they're physically incapable of work is a bit different and deserves a certain standard of living. Someone out of work who is able to work should have a safety net but that's about it IMO - there should be an incentive for people out of work to actively either seek employment or create work themselves. I don't see why a child shouldn't get toys - more to the point, what portion of the benefits which get earmarked for children actually get spent on the children - currently there is not control over this (and its not really feasible to control it). If controlling/monitoring spending were feasible then you could make the system more efficient, you could get a better idea of the needs of claimants and adjust benefits accordingly and you could prevent waste.

 

[Gilly]

Well I Now go back to your original point.



Is this the case?

From the areas that I have personally seen I stand by my original statement.

I am not narrow minded enough to say that it would be right in every single situation, but on average I would stand by it.

Yeah, more bad than good...

I'm glad we agree

I'm against privatising the public sector. Privatisation = ran for profit, the public sector shouldn't be about profit, it should be about service. The public sector is always going to be a black hole of money, but hey!

Whoa! No-one mentioned privatisation.

 

[Tummy]

I am narrow minded

Oh look, selective quoting . It's boring.

We disagree on Unions. Mainly because you're wrong .

Whoa! No-one mentioned privatisation.

I did, I thought you two were going to end up having a arguement over the privatisation of the fire service, you didn't, you've ended up just ... I don't really know what you're discussing.

Also, don't ban me.

 

[Jono]

Is this still being debated at this time? Why is the house of commons almost empty?

 

[Tummy]

Is this still being debated at this time? Why is the house of commons almost empty?

All the MP's are busy filling out their claims for the second homes, time consuming yo!

 

[Gilly]

Hey, I did put a wink in, it's not like I did it with malicious intent.

Unions cause problems. That you are in favour doesn't change that.

 

[FARGO]

If it was guaranteed to go to those who genuinely need the help, then I wouldn't begrudge the rise.

 

[Tummy]

Hey, I did put a wink in, it's not like I did it with malicious intent.

Unions cause problems. That you are in favour doesn't change that.

No, they don't always cause problems. They can do, but in reality they only cause problems when they feel that what is happening isn't best for the workers.

Life (and work) is about having a positive balance. It's just a matter of debating and finding a happy place for y'all.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Life (and work) is about having a positive balance. It's just a matter of debating and finding a happy place for y'all.

Correct. Example where an unbalance causes detriment to society: NUT

 

[Tummy]

Correct. Example where an unbalance causes detriment to society: NUT

Disagree but then I'm guessing you knew that due to saying NUT.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Disagree but then I'm guessing you knew that due to saying NUT.

No, I didn't (I've forgotten your affiliations with this stuff... but if I recall something public sector so maybe now you've said that, NUT? ).

It should be easier to dismiss under performing teachers, and they should be held more accountable for outcomes (granted we need to fix measurement of outcomes too). Fundamentally there should naturally be greater attrition and churn in the profession, but there isn't. Poor teachers are being shuffled around, rather than dismissed - I mostly blame the NUT for that.

 

[Tummy]

No, I didn't (I've forgotten your affiliations with this stuff... but if I recall something public sector so maybe now you've said that, NUT? ).

It should be easier to dismiss under performing teachers, and they should be held more accountable for outcomes (granted we need to fix measurement of outcomes too). Fundamentally there should naturally be greater attrition and churn in the profession, but there isn't. Poor teachers are being shuffled around, rather than dismissed - I mostly blame the NUT for that.

Personally, if a teacher isn't good enough they will go, from first hand experience. It shouldn't be that easy because there can be a list of contributing factors to why the teacher is under performing or not hitting targets, aside from their actual teaching ability. Rather than dismissing them, they often work with the teachers to help them improve and help senior management understand better the circumstances.

It's not just a black and white case of, they're not a very good teacher, sack them.

They are accountable for outcomes, but they will vary from school to school and the pressure put on teachers from the off is pretty much ridiculous imho, honestly it's a huge amount of pressure to meet targets. There are other teaching unions that offer the same support or similar to the NUT too.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Personally, if a teacher isn't good enough they will go, from first hand experience. It shouldn't be that easy because there can be a list of contributing factors to why the teacher is under performing or not hitting targets, aside from their actual teaching ability. Rather than dismissing them, they often work with the teachers to help them improve and help senior management understand better the circumstances.

Of course, I agree (same with any other profession - try to fix, nurture, if that fails, sack them). If this was the case like every other profession, then as I said - attrition and churn would be at the least approaching private sector norms, but it isn't. It's one of the lowest in the public sector.

 

[King Damager]

Whilst I agree that in principle normally this should increase in line with inflation - otherwise you have the effective loss, given that many people are currently, or have in the last few years at least experienced a pay freeze, I feel that benefits should also have a pay freeze.

kd

 

[Freddie1980]

I do not support the cap, I think it's a stupid idea, the benefits that people that need them are getting aren't enough already.

Public sector wages are not a fair reflection on benefits given that public sector wages are astronomically high in comparison to private.

Why do we have benefits? I was under the impression that you received benefits to help you if your in need and weren't there to support your whole life.

1% is fair given how high RPI is at the moment.

 

[elmarko]

Whilst I agree that in principle normally this should increase in line with inflation - otherwise you have the effective loss

Translation - I have reasonable & fair principles.

given that many people are currently, or have in the last few years at least experienced a pay freeze, I feel that benefits should also have a pay freeze.

kd

Translation - Which I'd sacrifice for no good reason other than mutual misery.

Disappointing to say the least.

 

[Moothead2]

I think 1% rise brings a happy medium for everyone. It reduces the impact of the inflation on those who will obviously be struggling anyway money wise and it's also not a huge kick in the teeth to workers who have pay freezes.