The Man with 20 kids BB1 Monday night

[indiepanda]

Given the amount of abuse in care homes it's debatable isn't it?

I was at a conference today and one of the presenters was a consultant to the DWP who has been involved in some work with incapacity benefit claimants to get them back into work. One of the interesting points he made was that many of the people on IB don't have objective medical conditions - e.g. multiple sclerosis, cancer etc. What they do have is a combination of subjective illnesses - stress, back trouble etc.

The interesting this about this is that these are things most people manage to suffer from without ending up long-term sick. I think most people can think of a time they've had a sore back, or sleepless nights due to anxiety about some problem or another. So, the question is what is it that is different about the ones that end up signed off sick? In many cases it seems to come down to beliefs and attitudes. If you believe that you can't cope with stress, or that you have no control over a situation, you are more likely to end up signed off sick.

Since beliefs are often influenced by the environment you grow up in it's not surprising generation after generation of people in some deprived areas have grown up with some pretty negative beliefs about their ability to work. I agree its not all people - some will always buck the trend of their genes and upbringing.

It's also been noted that claims tend to rise when the economy is doing badly, even though there's no reason why people should be sicker then. So economically disadvantaged areas of the country tend to have much higher rates of IB claims. Might also be something to do with government choosing to manipulate unemployment stats by letting people claim sick benefit instead... or is that too cynical??

I think it's unfair to suggest some people are just lazy, it's not quite as simple as that. What is true is that being off work sick is fantastically bad for people. The data I saw today was quite alarming. The impact of being out of work for over 6 months had the same impact on life expectancy as smoking 10 packets of cigarettes a day! Young men out of work were 40 times more likely to commit suicide than the average person.

What the government is starting to do is make more constructive steps to get people back into work, rather than just trying to cut benefits off. Things like sending people for cognative behavioral therapy to help them develop the skills to deal with stress, and paying people benefits when back in work to encourage them to make the first steps back. They've concentrated efforts on areas of the country with major issues like the former coal mining areas where lots of people are on IB. I gather the results have been very positive, and the intention is to roll out further to help more people back into work. They've got a big task on their hands for sure and if we end up in recession it won't help matters, but at least they are trying.

I'll hop off my soap box now ;-)

[Guest]

Worrying reading, Indiepanda. With recession apparently threatening (I'd say here already for some time), no doubt we should expect unemployment levels to start rising sharply, along with bankruptcies, repossessions and so on, presumably with a knock-on effect on Invalidity Benefit claims.

I have some sympathy with people with 'subjective' long-term health conditions. I can see how easy it could be to get stuck in that kind of pattern once you've had a few setbacks. I agree they need help, but I hope it comes in a form that includes support and understanding.

[Huguenot]

Oh pinkle pinkle.

8,000 miles gives you a hell of a perspective, as does living in Asia. Clive's points are well made.

In a study made from the 1950s right through to the present day, 'society' was segmented into four groups, from disenfranchised and skint to landed gentry. A truly mobile society would suggest that 75% from the bottom quartile should have moved into one of the other quartiles by the time they were 35.

For those born in 1953, the figure was 70%, and for those born in 1970 63%.

To drive the message home that means that in small circles, 7 out of 10 people brought up in these 'tragic' environments find their way out. 7 in 10. I think that given those percentages anyone still there merits a school report of 'could do better'? Aside from these lazy arsed prats, it also gives us hope in that 3 in 10 landed gentry find themselves to be paupers by the age of 35 ;-)

So I appreciate that it's not all fugging roses (and of course a few points lower than a truly 'mobile' society), but the point is, if you want to get off your fat arse and improve your lot there's few better places to do it than Britain. Use the data guys, don't speculate with prejudice.

All the observations made about people who struggle are also well made, but the reality is that the problems suffered by the few hundred in care homes (ie. not all) that get thin end of the stick are not a good premise for making laws that govern sixty million. These are the focus for a few good people.

The suicide rates are silly arguments - you're talking about 1 in 10,000 rising to 1.4 in 10,000. All deaths are a tragedy, but suicide is a plonker's way out. I had a mate who topped himself on whisky and pills, and I continue to disapprove in a nice way, but I would not recommend that you make political decisions based on his frame of mind.

[Huguenot]

Can I add that I haven't laughed so much since I last read *Bob* and alan's face-off between the have and have-not of education.

I'm still crying hard and my tummy hurts.

[Keef]

The fact is, this is far from common, and this was tabloid telly, but so what if people want to get a bit enraged about it.

There are some forumites that I find to be very patronising to people. You are not living in a Lit & Deb society.

Edited: because it was written in haste on the bus, and I'd become so annoyed by some posts, that I skipped a load in order to rant. Huguenot's posts are great, and had I carried on that far, I probably just would have smiled and forgotten about it, or just written the above, rather than the former.

[lozzyloz]

Can I offer you a crate of Strongbow Keef?

[*Bob*]

Keef's more of a Merrydown man, I think.

[Jah Lush]

Grolsh top actually.

[Keef]

Not since the CPT stopped doing Grolsch... Not that I've actually been anywhere near the place recently.

[Jah Lush]

Good grief! What will you do? What's happening to the place? They even have a wine list now.

[Keef]

I know, scary isn't it.

I have talked to the new manager (seems a thoroughly nice chap) about doing some music there. Unfortunately very busy this month, but hopefully we'll get something running next month... He is hoping to get BBQs, and music going ASAP though, maybe this weekend.

To keep on topic, I believe they still sell strongbow.

[NatashaD]

Perhaps we could recommend that "Welsh- inebriated-prolific-breeder" Mike et al come on a jolly down to ED (courtesy of the social, naturally) with the intention of imbibing Strongbow at the CPT.

I, and my sharp pair of scissors, would happily meet him.

He might return to Wales with a slightly higher voice after our encounter though....:-S

[Keef]

I'm not sure that's the clientele the CPT are currently looking for... He might wear dirty work clothes.. Or he would if he ever worked a day in his life!!! >:D

[SeanMacGabhann]

Glad that post on the bus was toned down a bit Keef, but never skip a load. It's bad for the metabolism. Or something

Taking a punt that I'm one of the patronising people, can I disagree? Both on the patronising label and the lit & deb accusation?

Growing up in Ireland (yep, i know I overuse that but it is pertinent) I both knew and was related to enough people who bore more than a passing resemblence to the documentary. Too many kids, major alcohol issues, and chronic state-dependance. I knew enough about where I wanted to be to keep my distance (and was accused of snobbery even then - oh the irony) and yet if anyone else (people outside the family, or a documentary crew for example) had a pop I would come to their defence. Family innit

So if people want to be outraged at the guy in the doocumentary, go ahead. But it's not an academic excercise, or patronising to point out a wider perspective

[Keef]

No it's not, I agree, and all too often the nation rises up in disgust because one bloke did something somewhere, and the press got hold of it.

What gets to me on here (not just this thread, this one just happened to tip me) is the tone of some posts, they come across as patronising, superior, and basically far from any real experience (I believe what you say above, I can also relate, but like I say I am not just talking about this thread, and I certainly am not just talking about you).

I have said to you in person that if I'd not met you and come to like you, I'm not sure what I'd think of you based just on this forum, and the same can be said for several others. I'm also absolutely certain that people would say the same of me!

Sometimes though I see where the "baddie" posters are coming from on here.

I am also just having a really anti everything time at the moment, so please ignore everything I've written / write recently, and I'm sure I'll be sweet, fair Keef again in no time.

Bless you Sean for always having to stand up and and be counted :)

[Moos]

Dear Keef, of course we won't ignore you. Sometimes we all express our 'unfair' selves on here which we would dare say out loud, and hopefully wouldn't have the conscience to follow in the ballot box - so you see the worst side of people's opinions. But I think you can learn hugely from these debates and from comparing one view with another.

Looking forward to your return from anti everything.

*Hugs Keef*

[SeanMacGabhann]

And bless you for same Sir Keef :)-D

I don't count people who disagree as "baddies" tho - well, not always. Clive 3300 is a clearly knowledgeable bloke (to pick one example - there are plenty others!) and sometimes I agree and often I don't - but I'm just disagreeing with him. And if he disagrees with me as much, he may well be casting me in the role of "baddy". Just because I have to post excessively to even try and catch up with you ;-) doesn't mean I'm staking any more of a flag in the "I'm right and thats it" camp than the people I disagree with. I do try and back up my arguments tho

When I go ape with the likes of Spangles or ???? in the past, that's a bit different. ???? respected me more in the morning for eaxmple ;-)

Err - I've overdone the self-justification thing there I think - but gotta dash

[Keef]

I promise I have never, even in most anti-everything times even considered voting anything further right than tory, and 85% of the time, I am left of that (green actually). I like looking at different views, and think it's important. I get frustrated however when a view seems so set in stone that it has no chance of being moved by even the most powerful arguement. (NOT A DIG AT ANYONE!!!)

Aaaaanyway, this is all getting away from the subject.

*wipes tear of frustration from eye, and smiles at kind Moos*

*Decides to go and drink himself stupid until the world makes sense to him again and he makes people laugh again*

[Keef]

Having read Sean's post...

I meant the likes of Louisa who laugh at the "liberals", "yummy mummies" and "middle classes" really. Not that I believe in class, as I've said before, or really use the term "yummy mummy", but you know what I'm mean.

[Moos]

OK, so I'm materialistic and crap. But I've just bought one of these (no, not the baby, stoopid) for our upcoming holiday, and it's making me smile. Beep beep!!

[clive3300]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> if he (clive3300) disagrees with me as much, he may well

> be casting me in the role of "baddy"

Not "baddy", "master of all that is evil" ;-)

I dont take personally at all - its good having my thoughts critically reviewed by my fellow forumers who will surely pick out inconsistencies I might not have noticed.

I have definitely reconsidered some opinions based on yours and other posts! :)-D

[NatashaD]

Who are the 'baddies' Keef?

I can't believe you went 'ape' at Spangles and ???, Sean. Surely not....?

[Keef]

As I said, I was referring to our favourite panto baddy Louisa, but I actually find her funny 9 times out of 10, just rarely she may go a bit far.

[Brendan]

I think sometimes she intentionally goes to far just to rile folk up.

Which has a certain merit to it.

[NatashaD]

Maybe Louisa has been banned - liked poor Spangles was. The forum is a duller place without them...in my opinion....