More Conservative Vision an Innovation....

[Beef Oven!]

Indeed - and many thanks for posting this. The headline article (as distinct from the other official links) is not from the same source as the figures that Richar Barrett cited some time ago but it makes the same very important point and puts matters into a sensible perspective.

There's no need for a 'perspective' it's pretty straight forward. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[teamsaint]

No ts, it's not a smokescreen for anything. All fraud and tax evasion etc is wrong.

so no prioritisation in use of resources under your regime then, Beefy?

Hit the little guys hard as an example to the big guys?

[Beef Oven!]

so no prioritisation in use of resources under your regime then, Beefy?

Hit the little guys hard as an example to the big guys?

No. Hit them all. Take the emotion and politics out of it and focus on the decent people.

[ahinton]

The whole population is a potential claimant.

No, the whole population includes potential claimants; those of state retirement age and above who are in receipt of state retirement benefit are usually not entitled to any additional benefits and those under 18 are not usually entitled to any in their own right but they're still part of "the whole population"....

Bullied away by the Daily Mail? This is an hysterical viewpoint!

My view of that rag notwithstanding, it is not a "hysterical viewpoint" at all but a mere illustration; am51 does not mean bullied away only by the Daily Mail or even by some of its readers and I should have thought that this was obvious, since that rag and certain among its readership are by no means the only source of misuse of the term "scrounger".

[Mr Pee]

They're potential benefit claimants who are bullied away from claiming by the Daily Mail et al's use of the word scroungers.

This is not a new phenomenon - lots of poor people have denied themselves access to 'charity' because of the attitudes of others.

Do you have the figures to back up that claim?

If a potential and legitimate claimant really needs and is entitled to the money, then they would go ahead and claim it. Nobody need know except themselves and the benefit office. If they decide not to claim, for whatever reason, then their need can't have been that urgent in the first place, whatever the Daily Mail might or might not have said.

[teamsaint]

No. Hit them all. Take the emotion and politics out of it and focus on the decent people.

isn't that what the government would say they are doing?

("hard working families")

[Beef Oven!]

isn't that what the government would say they are doing?

("hard working families")

I have no idea. What's that got to do with anything?

[ahinton]

No ts, it's not a smokescreen for anything. All fraud and tax evasion etc is wrong.

But TS quite clearly did not suggest that it is a smokescreen for anything; he specifically stated that it is "used as [my boldface] a smokescreen by those who wish to avoid taking action elsewhere", which is quite a different matter.

I don't think that anyone here has sought to suggest that they believe any particular fraus and tax evasion to be right.

[amateur51]

The whole population is a potential claimant.

Bullied away by the Daily Mail? This is an hysterical viewpoint!

People not wanting to sign on etc is indeed nothing new; a marginal phenomenon albeit.

Back you go with your head in the sand then

[ahinton]

There's no need for a 'perspective' it's pretty straight forward. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Two wrongs indeed do not make a right but, in order properly to assess the extent of any wrong and its effect on its victims as part of the entire UK fraud market, there is indeed a very pressing need for "perspective", otherwise conclusions reached that might be out of proportion in due consideration of that market as a whole are likely to lead to inappropriate and possibly unhelpful knee-jerk responses on the part of those in power who allow themselves to be led to make, or endorse, such conclusions.

[Beef Oven!]

No, the whole population includes potential claimants; those of state retirement age and above who are in receipt of state retirement benefit are usually not entitled to any additional benefits and those under 18 are not usually entitled to any in their own right but they're still part of "the whole population"....


My view of that rag notwithstanding, it is not a "hysterical viewpoint" at all but a mere illustration; am51 does not mean bullied away only by the Daily Mail or even by some of its readers and I should have thought that this was obvious, since that rag and certain among its readership are by no means the only source of misuse of the term "scrounger".

The whole population is a potential claimant. Think about it.

am51 means they've been bullied away. I can see as far into his head as you can. And I know he's polite enough to stay out of the discussion while we decide what the chap means.

[teamsaint]

I have no idea. What's that got to do with anything?

well if its what you believe, and its what the governmentare doing, or claim to be doing, then all is well in your world view.

Isn't it?

Anyway, stop arguing, I am a decent hard working person trying to get some work done !!

At least AH knows what I meant. I have already forgotten.

[amateur51]

No. Hit them all. Take the emotion and politics out of it and focus on the decent people.

Classic Daily Mail-speak - 'decent people' - I bet they're 'hard-working' too

[ahinton]

No. Hit them all. Take the emotion and politics out of it and focus on the decent people.

If a government is going to amend laws about how various convicted financial fraudsters may be punished, they can't take the politics out of it becuase that IS the politics! The initial focus of such amendments needs to be upon the fraudsters, be they benefit or other or both, hopefully for the ultimate benefit of society as a whole.

[Beef Oven!]

well if its what you believe, and its what the governmentare doing, or claim to be doing, then all is well in your world view.

Isn't it?

Anyway, stop arguing, I am a decent hard working person trying to get some work done !!

I'm confused. You tell me that's what the government saythey are doing, now you say they are actually doing it?