Welfare &c.

[teamsaint]

Finished the tiling. Phew. Back to decent music and board banter....where were we ?.....oh, lets leave it !!

Still got the grouting to do, but its not a big job.

[Nick Armstrong]

Finished the tiling. Phew. Back to decent music and board banter....where were we ?.....oh, lets leave it !!

Still got the grouting to do, but its not a big job.

Have a and have a look at the stickies thread: can you find the 'Symphonic Journey' thread we'd like made rather more instantly accessible? (The fact that I can't find it highlights why it would be useful, as you have previously suggested!)

[teamsaint]

Have a and have a look at the stickies thread: can you find the 'Symphonic Journey' thread we'd like made rather more instantly accessible? (The fact that I can't find it highlights why it would be useful, as you have previously suggested!)

Beer opened, ta,
The Symphonic journey posts are all in the "What are you listening to now" thread.
Could you extract Suffolkcoastal's posts, and then delete any of his that weren't specifically about his journey?

[Sydney Grew]

Request for a split thread - please

Would it be possible to calve or carve off all the replies from number 11 right down to the end (that is to say, everything from page 2 onwards) to a separate thread? I don't know or understand what the subject being discussed in that long later section is, but it has nothing whatever to do with the Golden Rule does it.

[amateur51]

This is what happens when the OP behaves in a dilettante fashion and abandons the direction of the thread to the whim of the common herd, reappearing some 50 posts later whingeing about things not being as he would have expected it.

Take responsibility for what you start, Sir!

[Resurrection Man]

....
"two anecdotes don't = data"

If that is true then most people contributing on political threads should not since they are unable to base it on personal experience. So all the beefs about, for example, the direction that the Coalition is/has taken us are invalid unless, again, from personal experience.

[Resurrection Man]

Really? Not quite, I fear! "Two sides to every coin" implies that the sides are of equal size, which is where what passes for your attempt at an argument here falls down. Don't take my word for it; consult DWP's own figures, which may not be 100% accurate - how could they be? - but are nevertheless a reasonably credible guide in terms of the extent of benefit fraud / cheating and losses sustained as a sole and direct consequence of its own administrative errors as a proportion of the whole system - and it is vanishingly small in proportional terms, even though the total amounts in pounds sterling are hardly small as such to you and me.

You misinterpret me. Please tell me where I have said anything that warrants 'consult DWP's own figures etc.'

All I was stating was that there are examples out there that did support Madrycka's viewpoint.

[Resurrection Man]

How are they known to you? By sight? By reputation? By personal knowledge derived from close contact, officially or personally?

I suspect that it's the first two, from the way you refer to them.

Well sorry to disappoint your 'suspicions'...which say more about your own prejudices ...I know them very very well.

[Resurrection Man]

.... it is, I believe, a generally recognised fact that if all these people immediately ceased to break the benefit and tax laws in these ways but at the same time everyone entitled to claim state benefits were to do so in full and everyone entitled to money back from the taxman managed to obtain it, HMRC/DWP's finances would be in a vastly more parlous state than they are now.

Care to back that up with any evidence?

[Resurrection Man]

This is what happens when the OP behaves in a dilettante fashion and abandons the direction of the thread to the whim of the common herd, reappearing some 50 posts later whingeing about things not being as he would have expected it.

Take responsibility for what you start, Sir!

That's 'Sheepist', Sirrah. I'd call you out for less

[amateur51]

That's 'Sheepist', Sirrah. I'd call you out for less

Why sheep, I wonder?

[ahinton]

You misinterpret me. Please tell me where I have said anything that warrants 'consult DWP's own figures etc.'

All I was stating was that there are examples out there that did support Madrycka's viewpoint.

And of course there are; their meaning helps us little. however, unless we address the extent to which fraud affects the total and, as DWP's figures demonstrate that it's a tiny proportion of it, it's clear that the number of fraudulent benefit claimants is very small as a proportion of benefit claimants as a whole.

[ahinton]

Care to back that up with any evidence?

Go find it yourself from HMRC / DWP sources, but first ensure that you know how much benefit fraud costs DWP before deciding how to go about your comparison.

[Resurrection Man]

Why sheep, I wonder?

Herd....plus we're surrounded by them at the moment and very grubby looking they are indeed, what with all the mud.

[Resurrection Man]

Go find it yourself from HMRC / DWP sources, but first ensure that you know how much benefit fraud costs DWP before deciding how to go about your comparison.

Ummm..no, it's not up to me. You made a grandiose statement claiming that 'it is, I believe, a generally recognised fact ' so you back it up. Otherwise, we know how to treat your next grandiose sweeping generalisation.