Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

NHS


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#61 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:23 AM

Its not completely a myth though. People can get brand new cars every year for the slightest disability - how is that reasonable? Why does everyone on disability have to have a new car? What's wrong with a decent one?

I know a guy, who has been on the sick since the early 80's with 'tennis elbow'. Every year since 1988 (at least) he has had a new 'people carrier' type car. Why he needs this is anyones guess but he does because he can, probably edged on by the dealership. Of course, this doesn't mean the scheme should be scrapped, many people benefit from such a scheme. But if we're struggling for cash in the NHS, then a clampdown on pee takers is a reasonable start.


But if he is getting a new car then there's a good to high chance he's losing out on benefit elsewhere (obviously there's a debate about whether he should be getting benefit at all or at what level).
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#62 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,159 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:25 AM

But if he is getting a new car then there's a good to high chance he's losing out on benefit elsewhere (obviously there's a debate about whether he should be getting benefit at all or at what level).

Yes, he loses a certain benefit in return but no way does it come anywhere near the cost of a new car.

#63 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,732 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:45 AM

Its not completely a myth though. People can get brand new cars every year for the slightest disability - how is that reasonable? Why does everyone on disability have to have a new car?


your first sentence is well wide of the mark.

There is a huge number of disabilities which preclude people from driving without a modified car, They are adapted to suit the individual.
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#64 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,521 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:49 AM

http://www.dailymail...es-welfare.html

<_<

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#65 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:51 AM

http://www.dailymail...es-welfare.html

<_<


Too many pensioners.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#66 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,159 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:59 AM

your first sentence is well wide of the mark.

There is a huge number of disabilities which preclude people from driving without a modified car, They are adapted to suit the individual.

So how come the guy I know gets it with 'tennis elbow'. (100% true). Luckily for him though, it doesn't affect his ability to play snooker in the local WMC.
I aren't arguing they should be scrapped or anything, just that if we need to save money, start with the pee takers.

#67 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,521 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:09 AM

your first sentence is well wide of the mark.

There is a huge number of disabilities which preclude people from driving without a modified car, They are adapted to suit the individual.



I can quote two instances of personal knowledge regarding the provision of new ford cars for people who I know: -

1. the car was not actually for the person I know ... a former work colleague ... it was for his next door neighbour who could not drive. The neighbour nominated my former colleague as his driver who would take him shopping and on visits. my colleague drove it to his own work every day, leaving his own car for his wife to use.
2. A chap I know had a heart attack and had to retire early about ten years ago. He gets a new car, arguably as a reward for being a heavy smoker for many years.

Both of the car-recipients could walk and were not actually housebound. I don't know about the first one but the second one still occasionally walks to and from the shops and club ... around half a mile away. To be fair, it would not be appropriate for him to carry heavy shopping bags etc on foot and he would need transport on shopping trips.

I certainly think that such people deserve some help to cope wth essential travel requirements but can't see how, in Bradford and Keighley, it wouldn't be cheaper to give such people £30 per week in benefits to pay for three return taxi journeys.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#68 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,732 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:11 AM

So how come the guy I know gets it with 'tennis elbow'. (100% true). Luckily for him though, it doesn't affect his ability to play snooker in the local WMC.
I aren't arguing they should be scrapped or anything, just that if we need to save money, start with the pee takers.


dunno

maybe he's committing fraud.
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#69 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,521 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:14 AM

Too many pensioners.


That will predoninantly be pensioners who have paid something into the pot during their working lives. Many of whom will have fought for this country.

http://www.dailymail...mmigration.html
:angry:

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#70 Shadow

Shadow
  • Coach
  • 8,085 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:35 AM

Do you honestly believe that the truth of the matter will bear any relation to the story in the Daily Mail?
Every single time their fantasies stories about immigration, benefits, the young, the old, what causes cancer, what prevents cancer, exam results, MMR, Autism, Foreigners, pies or the EU are given even a cursory comparison with the actual facts they are generally seen to be so far from the truth that you could almost think it was willful and only being done to serve an agenda of the Editor and Publishers.
God Rides a Harley but the Devil rides a Ducati!

#71 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 13,131 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:38 AM

Do you honestly believe that the truth of the matter will bear any relation to the story in the Daily Mail?
Every single time their fantasies stories about immigration, benefits, the young, the old, what causes cancer, what prevents cancer, exam results, MMR, Autism, Foreigners, pies or the EU are given even a cursory comparison with the actual facts they are generally seen to be so far from the truth that you could almost think it was willful and only being done to serve an agenda of the Editor and Publishers.

The problem is maybe the Mail may be correct just once, but no intelligent person will believe them.
Fides invicta triumphat

#72 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:39 AM

That will predoninantly be pensioners who have paid something into the pot during their working lives. Many of whom will have fought for this country.


That's irrelevant to the discussion. There are more pensioners being paid more in pensions and non-means tested universal benefits that at any time in history.

To have fought for this country - by which I assume you mean in the Second World War - a person will have to be at least 85.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#73 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,521 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:44 AM

That's irrelevant to the discussion. There are more pensioners being paid more in pensions and non-means tested universal benefits that at any time in history.



No it's not irrelevant. Ultimately there is a single overall public purse to pay for debt repayments, welfare, the police, armed services, libraries, roads, education etc. A lower level of sponging, an absence of futile wars and more prudent control of budgets would leave plenty of money to pay for the pensioners.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#74 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,159 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:45 AM

dunno

maybe he's committing fraud.

No, its all 'above board' so to speak. He must be near 'retirement' age now so not sure what will happen then.

#75 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:46 AM

No it's not irrelevant. Ultimately there is a single overall public purse to pay for debt repayments, welfare, the police, armed services, libraries, roads, education etc. A lower level of sponging, an absence of futile wars and more prudent control of budgets would leave plenty of money to pay for the pensioners.


And pensioners - many of whom will have been scroungers all their lives despite being white and possibly an occasional soldier - should be protected above everyone else because ... ?
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#76 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:46 AM

No, its all 'above board' so to speak. He must be near 'retirement' age now so not sure what will happen then.


He'll get a pension and Wolford will stop complaining about whatever amount of money he gets.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#77 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,521 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:47 AM

To have fought for this country - by which I assume you mean in the Second World War - a person will have to be at least 85.


Suez, Aden, Korea, Malaya, Kenya, Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Oman, the Falklands, two Gulf Wars, Afghanistan.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#78 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,521 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:49 AM

And pensioners - many of whom will have been scroungers all their lives despite being white and possibly an occasional soldier - should be protected above everyone else because ... ?


Because we've got enough scroungers of our own to pay for, without importing everbody else's.
;) :D

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#79 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,732 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:50 AM

That's irrelevant to the discussion. There are more pensioners being paid more in pensions and non-means tested universal benefits that at any time in history.

To have fought for this country - by which I assume you mean in the Second World War - a person will have to be at least 85.


I take your point

korea
cyprus
malaya
suez
Northern Ireland
and I'm sure there are now Falklands vets who now qualify for the state pension.
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#80 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:51 AM

Suez, Aden, Korea, Malaya, Kenya, Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Oman, the Falklands, two Gulf Wars, Afghanistan.


They all get a nice army pension as well as the state pension. No problem with that at all.

It doesn't alter the fact: more pensioners getting more money and more benefits means that the overall cost of 'welfare' will increase.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users