If you read the article there is no evidence of ‘faking’ whatsoever. Some of the people simply got better so stopped claiming.
The 1 in 20 is the wrong test as that is the proportion of people who are eligible for the highest rate of ESA due to exceptionally severe disability: it is nothing to do with the others being capable of work.
They should all get a job, obviously.
If you’d like to join that queue over there, folks. Yup, that’s it: The one with two and a half million people already in it…
In fact it’s even worse than my first comment acknowledged.
There is no suggestion at all that 75% are ‘faking’. This is a vicious lie aimed at the vulnerable.
It’s the percentage that have either got better, as above, or have been found not to meet the more stringent conditions introduced with ESA. A claimant could be moderately ill or disabled and be found to be entitled to nothing other than jobseeker’s, under this system. There is no suggestion at all of ‘faking’.
This front page would be bordering on a hate crime if the proposed disability-related offence were brought in.
For the same reason that someone who can afford to buy a house or raise a child is still elligable for housing and child benefits, so a person who is capable of working is still elligible for sickness benefits. There are different levels of support for different situations.
But of course in tabloid land you’re either a quadraplegic vegetable, or you need to man up.
I believe there has been a new set of figures released yesterday which show a huge number of people have been thrown off ESA and onto JSA. The total thrown off, or withdrawing their claims, is therefore about 75%.
But this is in no way evidence of faking. It just means the new more stringent rules are a shambles and will condemn millions of vulnerable people to despair and poverty despite their being genuinely ill to at least some extent: probably to the extent they can be sacked / completely refused work.
If you read the article there is no evidence of ‘faking’ whatsoever. Some of the people simply got better so stopped claiming.
The 1 in 20 is the wrong test as that is the proportion of people who are eligible for the highest rate of ESA due to exceptionally severe disability: it is nothing to do with the others being capable of work.
They should all get a job, obviously.
If you’d like to join that queue over there, folks. Yup, that’s it: The one with two and a half million people already in it…
Is Stephen Gateley the new Diana?
The 75% sick have obviously been reading The Express. It can induce total uncontrollable nausea.
In fact it’s even worse than my first comment acknowledged.
There is no suggestion at all that 75% are ‘faking’. This is a vicious lie aimed at the vulnerable.
It’s the percentage that have either got better, as above, or have been found not to meet the more stringent conditions introduced with ESA. A claimant could be moderately ill or disabled and be found to be entitled to nothing other than jobseeker’s, under this system. There is no suggestion at all of ‘faking’.
This front page would be bordering on a hate crime if the proposed disability-related offence were brought in.
For the same reason that someone who can afford to buy a house or raise a child is still elligable for housing and child benefits, so a person who is capable of working is still elligible for sickness benefits. There are different levels of support for different situations.
But of course in tabloid land you’re either a quadraplegic vegetable, or you need to man up.
Do you actually want to know what the study is. What they are basing this on.
A recent government backed study, using 200′000 people, found that 1 in 6 were fit to work.
That’s 1 in 6. Not 75%
Translated to the national population, that was 400′000, out of 2.5 million claiming it.
So in fact, the vast majority of claiments have been found too ill to work. Only 1 in 6 have been found not to.
The Mail are running a similar story, although a bit toned down
I have to admit, I’m an economist, so know my maths. I really can’t work out where they could even got 50% from. let alone 75%.
The study actually found that 2/3rds of people were too ill to work. The maximum number of people “faking it” was 1/3rd.
However, most of these people were “inbetween” as in, technically able to work, but there was no suitable jobs for people of their disability to do.
Stating 75% as fact. When the study said closer to 20%.
That’s just an example of what a trashy piece of crap this thing is
I believe there has been a new set of figures released yesterday which show a huge number of people have been thrown off ESA and onto JSA. The total thrown off, or withdrawing their claims, is therefore about 75%.
But this is in no way evidence of faking. It just means the new more stringent rules are a shambles and will condemn millions of vulnerable people to despair and poverty despite their being genuinely ill to at least some extent: probably to the extent they can be sacked / completely refused work.
“Is Stephen Gateley the new Diana?”
Wrong hair colour. He was also Irish and hence one of those European migrants over here to steal all our hard-earned tax.
Only 75%? I am sure the percentage of Daily Express headlines that are ‘faking it’ is higher than that.