One in 10 people stripped of the £15-a-week payout in what critics call the "bedroom tax" have come off benefits altogether, according to new figures.

Data obtained under Freedom of Information laws shows tens of thousands of claimants affected by the welfare reform have been encouraged to find work.

This has doubled the saving predicted by ministers from the move, up from £500m-a-year to around £1bn.

news.sky.com/story/1157481/bedroom-tax-p...aimants-off-benefits

You won't find anyone on these boards accepting 'official information' if it doesn't fit their argument

More likely they will still tell you it is wrong and immoral and then make up their own interpretation based on non official information from their own politically persuasive media or organisation.....just like they latch onto the moniker of 'bedroom tax'

Its a bit like a parliamentary debate :0)

Mr Reason wrote:
You won't find anyone on these boards accepting 'official information' if it doesn't fit their argument

More likely they will still tell you it is wrong and immoral and then make up their own interpretation based on non official information from their own politically persuasive media or organisation.....just like they latch onto the moniker of 'bedroom tax'

Quite right, Mr Reason.

What gets me is that they would sooner put their trust and faith into the people who mismanaged the economy (for 13 years !) and hope, against hope, that they DON'T cock it all up again !

Every time there has been a Labour government we have had a financial disaster.

One one occasion we had to devalue the currency (making everyone 20% worse off overnight !); on another, call in the IMF (on a Greek-style bailout). Last time we had debt coming out of our ears - and these people STILL think that money grows on trees !!!!!

only a dill would accept the "official" information (remember WMD ?) but of course they will when it confirms their pre-existing prejudices whether it be about "dole scroungers" or invading Iraq and killing tens of thousands of innocents.

I forced myself to read that bit of ghastly Murdoch drivel and it really demonstrates the paucity of ITK's arguments and how Mr "Reason" is anything but. And also that ITK blatantly lies to make a point.

The article merely reports a Conservative claim but even then makes the point that it is not certain that the "one in ten" (meaning 9 out of ten didn't come of welfare-a miserable failure)found a job.

They could be living on the streets for all Mr Reason and ITK knows (or cares).

And far from proving anything such as "saving money", the usual patheric Tory claim : we'd have to wait for about 5 years of this experiment to see how many people turn to crime, live rough and end up beign cared for in hostels , hospitals, jail at ten times the so-called 'savings'...and so on.

By all means have a philosophy or even a 'policy' but back it up with real research or facts. Not idealogy.

and go and read more at the source such as this :
www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/20...-modern-britain.html

"A persistent failing of official statistics is that they tell a national story, not a human one.


Thanks to the ONS we can find out how many people are unemployed, for example, at a given time, and compare it with the snapshot of the same numbers for a different period. That’s a useful insight into the state of the nation and how it may be changing.

But it doesn’t tell us the true experiences of those involved."

Still got your head in the sand, eh, hedda ?

When are official figures not official figures?
When they are published on a conservative blog (and hedda doesn't like them).

It is utterly absurd to suggest that paying the under-occupancy rate would make someone homeless.
No one is paying a penny out of their own pocket - they are paying out of the money that we have already given them !

It's a minute amount - esp when compared to the hundreds and hundreds of pounds that some people are getting. Perhaps (only a suggestion LOL !) they should consider giving up the flat screen TV, the mobile phone, Sky, the ciggies and the boose first?

You are all deluding yourselves - Silliband may say that he will repeal it (but IS keeping most of the cuts as he knows he has no choice). He will, though, find an alternative "tax" to replace the under occupancy rate. So, in typical Labour style, he will give away with one hand and take back even more with the other.

...... and what about the five million who are on waiting lists?

Do you, the dolers, or Silliband give a toss about them?

You are not allowed to mention 'neccessities of life' like Flat Screen Tellys and subscription channels......i tried in the past, and I have seen TV shows were the point is made that savings to a welfare families budgets can be made by stopping these things....guess what....and this fact because I have been told it and the TV footage exists..........

....we are told, 'I can spend 'my money' how I like, you can't tell me what to do with it, its nothing to do with you if I have sky or a big telly.........'......

and then of course, they claim to be in poverty, they can't feed their kids or afford luxuries?

Honestly, we need a re-set between welfare and its purpose and the perception of how a life should be lived......

Mr Reason wrote:
and then of course, they claim to be in poverty, they can't feed their kids or afford luxuries?

Honestly, we need a re-set between welfare and its purpose and the perception of how a life should be lived......

Indeed.

Some say that the kncrease in so-called food-banks is proof of "inequality" ... I say its just the opposite.

If someone is daft enough to give away free food (or free anything !!!) people will queue up for it - then they can spend the money they would have spent on food, on scratchcards instead !

Mr Reason wrote:
You are not allowed to mention 'neccessities of life' like Flat Screen Tellys and subscription channels......i tried in the past, and I have seen TV shows were the point is made that savings to a welfare families budgets can be made by stopping these things....guess what....and this fact because I have been told it and the TV footage exists..........

....we are told, 'I can spend 'my money' how I like, you can't tell me what to do with it, its nothing to do with you if I have sky or a big telly.........'......

and then of course, they claim to be in poverty, they can't feed their kids or afford luxuries?

Honestly, we need a re-set between welfare and its purpose and the perception of how a life should be lived......

Well, we have a generation raised to think that everything they do is "their choice" rather than right or wrong.

Regarding the bedroom "tax", while I have no wish to subside people living in mansions I think it is unfair to take money from those willing to move and are waiting for a smaller property.

I know someone in a two bed-roomed house, one for her and one for her teenager.
She donated a kidney and slept in the dining room (room for a table or bed but nothing else) while she recovered. Now they are calling it a bedroom and she has to move.

Food Banks you need proof of benefits to use them, and can mainly be used when you been sanctioned by the Job Centre, my partner and U had to use when were sanctioned due to their mistakes. The food is never great and they choose it for you, we were grateful for them.

Hardly any one used them when Labour were in power, the only thing were available normally was anorak jackets more of them than food.


yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/28/update-labour-lead-7/

In The Know wrote:
Mr Reason wrote:
and then of course, they claim to be in poverty, they can't feed their kids or afford luxuries?

Honestly, we need a re-set between welfare and its purpose and the perception of how a life should be lived......

Indeed.

Some say that the kncrease in so-called food-banks is proof of "inequality" ... I say its just the opposite.

If someone is daft enough to give away free food (or free anything !!!) people will queue up for it - then they can spend the money they would have spent on food, on scratchcards instead !

Of course some would given half a chance, but You have to prove that you are destitute before being referred by an official. You cant just turn up and fill a wheelbarrow with Fray Bentos pies.

andrew wrote:
Food Banks you need proof of benefits to use them, and can mainly be used when you been sanctioned by the Job Centre, my partner and U had to use when were sanctioned due to their mistakes. The food is never great and they choose it for you, we were grateful for them.

Hardly any one used them when Labour were in power, the only thing were available normally was anorak jackets more of them than food.


yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/28/update-labour-lead-7/

I don't know if food banks existed, but we gave out a lot of food through the church before and during the Blair reign.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Regarding the bedroom "tax", while I have no wish to subside people living in mansions I think it is unfair to take money from those willing to move and are waiting for a smaller property.

There are MILLIONS of smaller properties !
What you mean is that these people are SO IDLE that they are waiting for someone else to find one for them !

The "under occupancy" levy was announced 3 years before it came into use - the dolers did what they always do - ignored it and hope it would go away.

Fray Bentos pies always break my can openers. Yes Honey you do need to call them explain your circumstances etc and tell them what your allergic to or what you don't like.

They will bag your food, they got mainly pasta and rice, most food banks only get a government donation of £30 a week and you need to think about how many people they get through their doors. :

Of course ITK is ignorant Tory has no idea about the DWP and thinks whatever the Tories do is a great idea, Honey would make a excellent minister for DWP.

Sanctions must be stop and counter payments must return in Job Centre's.

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Regarding the bedroom "tax", while I have no wish to subside people living in mansions I think it is unfair to take money from those willing to move and are waiting for a smaller property.

There are MILLIONS of smaller properties !
What you mean is that these people are SO IDLE that they are waiting for someone else to find one for them !

The "under occupancy" levy was announced 3 years before it came into use - the dolers did what they always do - ignored it and hope it would go away.

To be fair to "Kidney woman" she didn't know she was over-occupied until someone snitched about the dining room, and there are few smaller houses available nearby.
I would be more sympathetic if she hadn't told me about duping the medical examiners into declaring her unfit for work. Now she needs a job, and nobody will employ her because of her imaginary health issues.

andrew wrote:
Fray Bentos pies always break my can openers. Yes Honey you do need to call them explain your circumstances etc and tell them what your allergic to or what you don't like.

They will bag your food, they got mainly pasta and rice, most food banks only get a government donation of £30 a week and you need to think about how many people they get through their doors. :

Of course ITK is ignorant Tory has no idea about the DWP and thinks whatever the Tories do is a great idea, Honey would make a excellent minister for DWP.

Sanctions must be stop and counter payments must return in Job Centre's.







Thank you Andrew. Yes, I think I would be a great minister too, apart from my lack of interest or knowledge about politics.

Your sympathetic and caring when comes to people on benefits, you don't put everyone in the same category.

IDS is a parasite who lives on misery.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
To be fair to "Kidney woman" she didn't know she was over-occupied until someone snitched about the dining room, and there are few smaller houses available nearby.
I would be more sympathetic if she hadn't told me about duping the medical examiners into declaring her unfit for work. Now she needs a job, and nobody will employ her because of her imaginary health issues.

All self-inflicted, as I've always said, honey!

Just like all those riding around in mobility scooters who don't use their legs for six months and then suddenly find that they don't work (and they've got very fat !)

People on mobility scooters who don't need them should be banned, they go on roads without a care in the world, get in your way and if you have dog they don't stop let you go past, dogs like to sniff and piss every 30 seconds.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
andrew wrote:
Food Banks you need proof of benefits to use them, and can mainly be used when you been sanctioned by the Job Centre, my partner and U had to use when were sanctioned due to their mistakes. The food is never great and they choose it for you, we were grateful for them.

Hardly any one used them when Labour were in power, the only thing were available normally was anorak jackets more of them than food.


yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/28/update-labour-lead-7/

I don't know if food banks existed, but we gave out a lot of food through the church before and during the Blair reign.

Food donation at churches goes to homeless shelters and soup kitchens, food donations at food banks will go to people who are sanctioned or got kids they can't afford.