Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

No wonder Iain Duncan Smith is sceptical about disabled Bedroom Tax victims – look at his own lies
14
Thursday
Aug 2014
Posted by Mike Sivier in Austerity, Benefit

Iain Duncan Smith must reckon he’s pretty fly, casting doubt on figures that show two-thirds of those affected by the Bedroom Tax are disabled by saying they are based on tenants’ self-declarations.

He implied that the figures are doubtful because there is no “check” on them.

Well, as Bono sang in the U2 song quoted above, it is very easy for a liar to doubt what other people say – or, as Ian Hislop stated in a different context in the video clip from Have I Got News For You (about Jeffrey Archer), “Takes one to know one.”

So, in the spirit of the video clip, that covers the life and lies of Lord Archer (up to 1995, when it was recorded), let’s have a look at some of the lies we can attribute to Mr … Smith. There have been so many that this article only covers a few well-known cases, and historical incidents covered by Vox Political up to around March 2013. More will be added in later, and the subject seems worthy of its own separate page on the site. For now, have a look at these facts about the man we call RTU (Returned To Unit) in recognition of his disastrous career in the Army as a bag carrier:

He claimed that he was educated at the Universita di Perugia in Italy, founded by the Pope (of the time) in 1308, but in fact attended the Universita per Stranieri (University for Foreigners) which was founded in 1921 and did not grant degrees when he studied there in 1973. Iain Duncan Smith did not get any qualifications there or even finish his exams.

He also claimed he trained at Dunchurch College of Management, the former staff college for GEC Marconi, for whom he worked (briefly) in the 1980s. He completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to about a month in total. He never earned a recognised qualification there.

He employed a policy special adviser, Philippa Stroud, who was also being paid by the right-wing thinktank he set up – the Centre for Social Justice – that lobbies the DWP, knowing that the special advisers’ code of conduct stipulates that they “should not receive benefits of any kind which others might reasonably see as compromising their personal judgment or integrity”. He seemed to think it was okay for her to take public money on top of her own salary; he seemed to think it was all right for her to have a job as a senior member of a pressure group that tries to influence his department, when her role within that department was to give him advice on what to do; and he seemed to think it was permissible to allow all that and still lecture the nation about what is morally acceptable.

In November 2012, he appeared on the BBC’s Question Time, on which he reeled off inaccurate figures. For example, he told Owen Jones: “I didn’t hear you screaming about two and a half million people who were parked, nobody saw them, for over 10 years, not working, no hope, no aspiration.” In fact, according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, only in two per cent of households had nobody ever worked, and more than half of adults in ‘never-worked’ households were under 25. Two per cent of the population is not two and a half million people, and under-25s cannot have been unemployed for more than 10 years.

His DWP claimed welfare-to-work companies – firms hired by the Department to get people into jobs – weren’t paid until they had found work for a client. In fact, “The WTW [Welfare-to-Work] provider gets a £600 attachment fee. They also get paid fees for ‘providing support’ i.e. bullying her into doing what they want. Later they get an ‘outcome fee’ for making her stay in the minimum wage job of their choice. If she finds something with no help from them, they still pocket the dosh. If she finds training other than their useless ‘courses’ she gets rewarded with a sanction (benefits withheld indefinitely) to ensure compliance.” Iain Duncan Smith was adamant that no payment was made other than by results. He said: “Unlike previous work programmes that the last government did where they paid up to half the money just for taking the person on, we don’t do any of that. what we say is, the company concerned has to get them into work but just not into work; also into a job that is eventually, say, six months – that’s when we pay them.”

He is on record as saying the benefit system is “too generous” but was quick enough to take advantage of it himself: His first job was taxpayer-funded military service, carrying bags for a Major-General. After six years of this, he left the Army and spent six months on the dole. You can guarantee he was getting housing benefit for it. Current plans would give a man that age only as much as if he was renting a single room in a shared house, and one must wonder how well this gentleman would have coped in that situation. He then started a job, using the skills he had gained while being paid by the taxpayer in the Army – as a salesman for arms dealer GEC-Marconi. He moved on to a property firm, but after six months found himself back on the dole (and housing benefit, one presumes). Then he sold gun-related magazines for Jane’s Information Group. Then he got elected to Parliament, in 1992. Every year since then, he has been paid more than most taxpayers earn, and currently receives £134,565 per year. He has had four children and received child benefit for all of them. He currently plans to restrict child benefit, making it payable for only two children per household. He put all of his children through private school – with the help of his MP’s salary which is paid by, you guessed it, the taxpayer. His wife’s record of work, since they married, totals 15 months as his diary secretary – for which the taxpayer gave her £15,000. It has been suggested that she did not, in fact, do any work at all while drawing this paycheck.

At the end of December 2012 he spoke in support of the Universal Jobmatch computer system. Jobseekers were coerced into signing up (they didn’t have to) and into ticking a box which allowed Job Centre staff to view their activities and pass their personal details on to possible employers (again, not a legal requirement. If the adviser did not believe the claimant was looking for work, their benefits would be withdrawn, Iain Duncan Smith said. He said: “I’m a job adviser and I’ve got someone who doesn’t want to do this. I will haul them in a lot. Instead of them going in every two weeks, these job advisers can bring them in every day if they want, if they think they are not getting out of bed in the morning.” Universal Jobmatch very quickly became a second home for pimps, who lured users into the sex industry, and identity thieves, who used complicated ‘application forms’ to steal users’ personal details.

In January 2013, he said the previous Labour government’s tax credit system had been wide open to abuse, with fraud and error costing £10 billion. “Tax credit payments rose by some 58 per cent ahead of the 2005 general election, and in the two years prior to the 2010 election, spending increased by about 20 per cent,” he said in a Telegraph article. Between 2003 and 2010, Labour spent a staggering £171 billion on tax credits, contributing to a 60 per cent rise in the welfare bill. Far too much of that money was wasted, with fraud and error under Labour costing over £10 billion. It will come as no surprise therefore that fraudsters from around the world targeted this benefit for personal gain.” In fact, in 2003-4, £16.4bn was paid, and the following year – the one including the general election to which Mr Duncan Smith referred – £17.7bn. That’s an increase of eight per cent, not 58. The total spent on tax credits between 2003 and 2010 – under Labour – was £147 billion, not £171 billion. During that period, £11.16bn was lost through fraud and error, with only £1.27bn of that due to fraud – 0.7 per cent of the total. The claim that fraudsters around the world targeted tax credits was completely unsubstantiated as the system does not record the nationalities of claimants. However: Everyone claiming Working Tax Credits must have a UK National Insurance number. Everyone claiming Child Tax Credits must be able to show they are on Child Benefit, for which they must produce a birth certificate for each child, thereby proving they were born in the UK – otherwise, they get nothing.

The very next day, he said that benefit payments were increasing faster than wages when this was impossible. His claim that unemployment benefits had risen by 20 per cent in the previous five years, compared with an average 12 per cent rise in private sector pay, was rendered meaningly when the actual amounts of money were used to illustrate this. These showed that, in the five-year period quoted by Mr Duncan Smith, unemployment benefits had risen by just £11.85 per week, while average private sector pay had risen by £49 per week.

A week later, the BBC quoted him as saying the Benefit Uprating Cap was necessary because inaction would leave the UK “bankrupt”, with “huge borrowing costs”. It is impossible for the UK to become bankrupt – as a sovereign nation with its own currency, it can always print enough money to get out from under debt – and in fact this has happened during the course of the current Parliament. It’s called quantitative easing. Also, UK government debt is embodied in bonds which are sold to organisations including foreign governments and pension fund operators, who snap them up as extremely reliable investments. Therefore the level of government debt is in fact an indicator of the balance between public sector and private sector involvement in government spending.

Also in January 2013, he told the House of Commons that “we have better employment figures — there are one million new private sector jobs, which outweighs the public sector jobs we have had to get rid of” – only to have this debunked by Clive Efford, who pointed out: “The argument coming from the Government benches is wholly founded on misinformation, particularly in respect of the claim that the Government have created one million jobs in the private sector… According to the Office for National Statistics, 196,000 of those jobs are due solely to the reclassification of sixth-form colleges and further education colleges.”

In the same debate, discussing Employment and Support Allowance, he said: “By and large, the benefits for those who are disabled and qualified as disabled, and for those in receipt either of support payments in ESA, disability living allowance or the premiums in many other benefits, are being uprated in line with inflation… The only benefit that is not being uprated in line with inflation is ESA for those in the work-related activity group. Some of those with disability will be affected because many in their households will be on other benefits.” This was rebuffed by Fiona O’Donnell, who said: “Disability Rights UK… has said that 1 million disabled people will be affected by the one per cent uprating, and that more disabled people will be living in poverty.”

He said: “Under Labour, public spending spiralled out of control… Labour spent taxpayers’ money like drunks on a Friday night, with no care or concern for how effective it was. Our record on getting people into jobs is better than theirs.” But Liam Byrne responded: “No doubt he, like me, will have looked at the DWP benefit expenditure tables, which show that spending on out-of-work benefits between 1996-97 and 2009-10 did not rise, but fell by £7.5 billion. That is why Lord Freud said that Labour’s record in getting people back to work was ‘remarkable’ and noted that Labour had tackled the long-term dependency on unemployment benefits that it had inherited from the Tories in 1997.” Lisa Nandy added: “Research carried out recently by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that no … culture of worklessness existed, and that in fact there was a strong commitment to work among people throughout the country.”

Told that the Benefit Uprating Cap would push an estimated 200,000 children into poverty, according to figures from The Children’s Society, he said: “I don’t agree that the way to get children out of poverty is to simply keep transferring more and more money to keep them out of work,” revealing a belief that, rather than receiving benefits to support them, poor children should be sent out to work.

That last comment suggests a resemblance to Tories of the Victorian era, who saw working class people of any age as a commodity to be used up as required.

In fact, Iain Duncan Smith is more similar to Mussolini – especially around the eyes. Musso was famously said to have made the trains run on time, but RTU isn’t like that.

Judging by his DWP record, if he was in charge, they’d all be empty.

Haystack - 14 Aug 2014 15:08 - 45005 of 45006
IDS is doing ng an excellent job................................ends.............8,500 people have now started on Universal Credit, we’re over 1% of the way there!
14
Thursday
Aug 2014
Posted by Mike Sivier in Benefits



Some of you might be starting to think I should leave Iain Duncan Smith alone. All I can tell you is, in the words of the late, great Dave Allen when asked if he would stop making up jokes about the Catholic Church (of which Mr… Smith is a member): I would if I could, but I can’t.

This is from alittleecon:

Today the DWP released some statistics that show that during the period of rollout for Universal Credit which began in April 2013 and up to 31st May this year, only 8,500 people had started on the new benefit.

Read the rest on alittleecon!

There is no point in quoting Mike Sivier. He is a raving lefty and spouts nonsense even worse than yours. I read his blog now and then for a good laugh.

POSTED ON AUGUST 13, 2014

Today the DWP released some statistics that show that during the period of rollout for Universal Credit which began in April 2013 and up to 31st May this year, only 8,500 people had started on the new benefit. Universal Credit is supposed to replace 6 existing benefits and tax credits with a single monthly payment. In principal not the worst idea ever; in the hands of Iain Duncan Smith, a total effing disaster. The target is to get 4.5 million households on the new benefit by 2017, but at current rates of rollout, the process should be complete sometime in 2540. It seems unlikely IDS will still be around by then!

Meanwhile, Duncan Smith remains in denial, claiming everything is going to plan, and the glacially slow rollout is due to his own desire to see the programme rolled out gradually. He believes!

UK - ICM/Guardian poll:

LAB 38%
CON 31%
LDEM 12%
UKIP 10%

Wasn't that a few days ago? Yes, it was 11 August. The trend is with Cameron!

I hope there is a surge and he falls off the cliff.

From the 'local to Milton Keynes' rag:

A sharp increase in the number of homelessness interviews has been described as “very unwelcome” by Milton Keynes Council.

The number of people presenting at the councillor homeless interviews jumped by 50 per cent in just one week.

There were also 79 families living in bed and breakfast accommodation at the taxpayers’ expense – a 27 per cent increase as compared to the two weeks prior.

There were 57 families staying in B&B in the final two weeks of December 2013.

Councillor Hannah O’Neill, cabinet member responsible for housing, blamed rising house prices.

She said: “Changes in house prices and interest rates could directly and indirectly lead to increases in numbers of households made homeless as private landlords seek to sell on their properties in an improving market.

“It will continue to be a council priority to prevent homelessness where we can and increase the quality and quantity of housing we can offer to those households who do become homeless.”

Larger families facing eviction from their private rented housing made up a significant part of the increase. But this year’s figures were unexpected because the use of B&B has been reducing, say MK Council.

It claims efforts are being made to resolve the situation with an additional eight hostel rooms arranged and more options being explored. The authority also says a “complex legal situation” has been resolved to bring forward 11 new build housing association homes within the next two weeks.

Plans are also in progress for nine more homes in the Bletchley area.

Roger Harding, director of communications, policy and campaigns at Shelter, said: “The huge rise in the number of homeless families in bed and breakfasts in Milton Keynes is shocking.

“And, as more people struggle to make ends meet against the current backdrop of stagnant wages and sky high housing costs, all it takes is a sudden job loss or illness to tip a family into a spiral that could put their home at risk.

“Sadly, families who do lose their home can often find themselves trapped in unsuitable, temporary accommodation for months on end and this makes it much harder for them to get back on their feet.”

Leader of the Conservatives, Councillor Edith Bald, said: “When the Conservatives were leading the Council, tackling B&B was top priority and a number of initiatives put in place saw B&B levels halve.

“It is disappointing to see that under the new Labour Council, in only a couple of months, B&B levels have risen significantly.

“It will be a tragedy for families if Labour continue to lose the gains which the Conservatives made.

“Some good news to come is that 28 of the 38 houses purchased by the Conservatives from the open market for homeless families will be added to the Councils stock over the next month or so.”

Early evening in the UK, 14 August 2014

Buffett’s $200,000 Berkshire shares are now definitely priced for an elite class of investor

Warren Buffett once wrote, “Shareholder eugenics might appear to be a hopeless undertaking” – but by refusing requests for a stock split at Berkshire Hathaway, its founder believes he has attracted a better class of shareholder.

On Thursday, when Berkshire shares changed hands above $200,000 for the first time, a milestone event occurred which meant Mr Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway conglomerate has the highest priced shares on trading in New York - and by a factor of 150 times.

The BH's company value has risen 12 per cent this year, including a 6 per cent surge since the start of August, as investors have looked beyond Mr Buffett to focus on the earnings power of its collection of industrial, insurance and utility businesses.

“Were we to split the stock or take other actions focusing on stock price rather than business value, we would attract an entering class of buyers inferior to the exiting class of sellers,” Buffett wrote in the 1983 letter to shareholders and which he has also harked back to on occasion since.

Buffett has always argued, that making the stock more expensive has encouraged investors to take a long-term view and locked out those more likely to trade on emotion.

Buffett, now 83, has succession plans which are never far from the surface. Analysts say he has persuaded the market to view Berkshire as a holding company, that will outlive him, rather than just as a strange mixture and collection of investments assembled since he took control of what was then a small textile firm in 1964.

“People are realising that this is a great standalone mix of businesses, available at a reasonable price, with one of the world’s best managers at the helm,” said an analyst at Barclays.

Berkshire’s A class shares at a price of $201,697 at lunchtime in New York compared to $1,288 for the travel website Priceline, the next highest-priced stock.

Many of the A class shareholders have been with the company since its earliest days and are regular attendees at an annual shareholder meeting which has been nicknamed “the Woodstock of capitalism”.

There is a second, cheaper 'B' class of stock with fewer voting rights. Apparently this was created in 1996 to thwart brokers who were slicing and dicing the stock themselves.

These 'B' shares were split and hark back to Berkshire’s cash-and-shares acquisition of Burlington Northern, the rail freight giant, but Mr Buffett has consistently expressed ambivalence about having made it cheaper to invest in Berkshire Hathaway.

After the latest spike up in the share price, which comes after strong second-quarter earnings earlier this month, Berkshire is roughly now valued at $326bn.

Barclays explains it should generate operating income of around $16bn this year.

Families could be forced to keep six separate bins due to EU rules

Families may have to separate rubbish into six separate bins due to European regulations coming into force in January, Britain's biggest waste firm warns



More than two thirds of people do not wish to separate rubbish into more than four bins Photo: Alamy



By Miranda Prynne, News Reporter

9:11AM BST 14 Aug 2014





Households may be forced to put out six separate rubbish bins due to new EU regulations, Britain’s biggest waste company has warned.


Families will need to dispose of glass, paper, tin cans and plastic separately so they can be recycled without the risk of contamination, under the European rules coming into force in January.


The move could force councils to increase the number of bins outside every home to six, waste collection firm Veolia warned as it launched a campaign against “unnecessary bins”.


The company is arguing that the sorting and division of waste materials can be done after collection, removing the need for more bins.


A spokesman said: “From January 2015, EU rules mean households and businesses may need to separate their waste into six separate bins.


More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/businessandecology/recycling/11033122/Families-could-be-forced-to-keep-six-separate-bins-due-to-EU-rules.html

No! Damn it!

ENOUGH!

"The Council" should work for the people (in that area) NOT the other way round!

We should have just one or two bins and "The Council" should do the separating at their "Special Plant".

ENOUGH of this stupidity which is a blight on all of our homes! Most of our homes have not been built with ANY facilities to store bins. That's why they are a visual blight.

There has to be a more Aesthetic way. For Fcuk's Sake there has to be a better way!

Bollocks to the EU!

Yes bollocks to the EU on this daft plan.

It's only a proposal at this time...

But as you know, the tribe of €U lovers at the local councils will run with this...manna from heaven, even more forms to fill in, boxes to tick, and busybodies to employ.


Who said there isn't a God?

How do you say, "For God's sake!" without using the term, "God"?

Aha! Got it!

It's "For Fcuk's sake!"

Have duly edited previous 'bins' post above.

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Don't they have EU rules in Europe?


By Richard Littlejohn

Published: 00:59, 15 August 2014 | Updated: 07:20, 15 August 2014


Our Town Halls have been captured by crazed Guardianistas, all living in their own reality show



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2725482/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Dont-EU-rules-Europe.html

Exec,

Not getting frightened of God's impending wrath?

8-)

How can the average pensioner drag 5 ot 6 bins about, its a crazy idea.

It just won't happen.

We refuse (as in won't, not as in waste) use the Slop Bucket at our house. This means we don't have the small one on the kitchen worktop (or anywhere else in the kitchen) or the slightly bigger one (into which you are supposed to tip the contents of the small one when the small one gets full) elsewhere on our premises.

Neither do we need to purchase (at a ridiculously high cost of 16p per liner!) the biodegradable liners for them either.

For Fcuk's Sake! Are they fcuking serious?

Any other AntiSloppers on MoneyAM or have you been radicalised by the EU's lackey, your Council??

Probably best not to mention any of the above to Tanker....

:o)