Logic fail at Liberal Conspiracy

The Minimum Income Standard found that:

basic out-of-work benefits provide well under half of the minimum income (net of rent and council tax) required for an adult with no children, and somewhat less than two-thirds for families with children.

If the government goes ahead with this, the number of children in poverty – already due to rise 200,000 by the time of the next election – will rise even further. I hope the government will decide that forcing children into poverty is as politically risky as doing the same to pensioners.

If anyone doubts what this could mean, it’s worth looking at this story from yesterday’s Coventry Telegraph: an ex-serviceman and his wife, who have committed suicide after being denied benefits.

Sigh.

Whatever the level of benefits is or should be has no effect on someone denied benefits.

7 comments on “Logic fail at Liberal Conspiracy

  1. Plus perhaps less should be made of the ‘poverty’ angle in that sad case, and more should be made of their apparent fears that the wife would be sectioned?

  2. Is it just me that found the jolly jingly advert that played despite my trying to stop it singularly inappropriate? I really do think that people who embed videos in nominally text web pages ought to be taken outside, savagely beaten, and then killed and their heads put on a spike at the town gate. Bastards.

    At the risk of being callous, I find it hard to believe that somebody can have no literacy or numeracy skills at all, without being so mentally deficient that they’re retarded. Having lived an exciting blue collar work life, I can say honestly I’ve worked with people who could not fill in a job application form or even construct simple sentences, and I’ve had to do it for them. But they’ve had jobs.

    But I think maybe the basic problem is that the intensely bureaucratised/rigid society that “Progressives” have inflicted on us has led to a situation where if you don’t have communication skills, you can’t manage the system in which you’re imbedded, and that’s why people fall through the cracks.

  3. Logic fail on your part I’m afraid.

    Being “denied benefits” does not necessarily mean being denied all benefits so therefore level of benefits (plural) does have an effect.

  4. That very sad story seems to me to be more of an indictment of the bureaucratic nature of State provision than evidence of ‘evil Tories denying benefits to people in need’.

    I have no doubt that these people qualified for some benefits, but the ‘computer says no’ attitude of the staff (and a distinct lack of compassion) allowed them to slip through the cracks. Sadly they obviously lacked the communication skills to make their case effectively.

    Just another example of how the bureaucratic State machine actively disadvantages many of the people at the edges of society who need (as in truly need) assistance, and doles out money left right and centre to those smart enough to play the system.

  5. “..the intensely bureaucratised/rigid society that “Progressives” have inflicted on us has led to a situation where … people fall through the cracks.” Well said: I hadn’t looked at it like that before.

    “…the ‘computer says no’ attitude of the staff (and a distinct lack of compassion)…”: I learned young that the workers treat the workers very shabbily.

  6. ” computer says no ” is wrong in my area. The computer definitely says “yes” in everyway possible to benefit claimants.
    We have teenagers who fully understand the sliding scale benefits that accrue by producing off-spring. The ‘Motability’ claimant with his £35K BMW Coupe. The guy who got an emergency loan to buy his kids shoes, but went straight to the local garden centre and bought a fountain for his back garden renovation.
    I could continue for hours but whats the point. I’ve now been banned from posting on Richies blog as I keep pointing out these inconveniences when he’s banging on about taxation and benefits.

  7. “the number of children in poverty – already due to rise 200,000 by the time of the next election”

    So Labour have already decided on the figure they’re going to throw at the coalition at the next campaign. An election that could be next month or in 2015, so even an extrapolation of current rates of change is meaningless.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.