Why Brits are better than Yanks

[Cardinal Fang]

There is no demonstrable causal link between 'Austerity' and homelessness, but there sure as hell is a correlation.

The fact that no one has demonstrated evidentialy a causal link is disgraceful. We know that people are being made homeless by rent rises and bedroom tax, but no one can be bothered to prove it. We know that use of foodbanks has risen due to austerity, but that has not been proven either, so the government can just go on saying that more people love the food handed out by food banks or it's been made fashionable or more people know about them now, or whatever other rubbish they want to use to dupe the voters. I can't stand the lies.

I think it's more that the Government is deliberately avoiding finding the evidence. There was a debate last year in Parliament, asking the Government to investigate why use of foodbanks is increasing. The Tories imposed a 3-line whip on voting against it (if you're not familiar with this terminology, it means they made it mandatory for all of their MPs to vote against it). In the end 296 MPs voted against the motion, nearly all from the Tory side (names listed on the "A Girl Called Jack" website, if you're interested). When Oxfam, or the Tressell Trust (who run 100s of food banks the length and bredth of the UK) report that clients are reporting that it is Government policies that is pushing them into hardship, the Government just dismiss it as "political" nad still claim there is no evidence.

Parental volunteers at a food bank. Comes back with stories every single week about new clients who end up using a food bank because they've had their benefits sanctions for dumbass reasons (I remember a couple of weeks ago being told of someone who had benefits removed for 3 months for not attending a Job Centre interview - because they were at their child's funeral). It seems that it takes conscious amount of "not looking" to fail to see connections between Government austerity cuts and the rises in homelessness, poverty, inequality and food bank use.

CF

[Roy Hunter]

I have probably posted this elsewhere, but West Dunbartonshire Citizens Advice Bureau published a report called Unjust and Uncaring, which is worth a read. Real, documented cases of the abuse being handed out by unwilling and unhappy Jobcentre Plus staff, who are compelled to do so.

[Cardinal Fang]

I have probably posted this elsewhere, but West Dunbartonshire Citizens Advice Bureau published a report called Unjust and Uncaring, which is worth a read. Real, documented cases of the abuse being handed out by unwilling and unhappy Jobcentre Plus staff, who are compelled to do so.

Cheers for that. Have forwarded it to parental as well

CF

[Griffin]

Thanks for the link Roy.

On further stoires of horrors. My personal current one is that there's a nice chap in my father's care home who is very ill with cancer and can't cope at home. He's been told they have no more treatments for him. He got turned down for benefits and appealed and then went to Tribunal last week and....... they turned him down again, upholding the decision. I don't know which benefit it was - ESA or PIP, but I suspect PIP. {that's unable to work ESA, or extra costs of being disabled/sick PIP}. Yes, they really do turn down terminal illness cases. Or people die waiting for a decision. You couldn't make it up.

And it is going to get worse. I doubt, whichever govt.is in power, they will stop until the whole welfare state is destroyed. After all, we are just scum.

Oh and disability hate crime figures are going up (should have a reference for that but too lazy to source it).

[bonsaiherb]

Griffin, I think this is an issue that needs improvement in both countries.

In the US, we do not (or have made it very difficult to) provide proper mental or physical care for our returning Vets. As for the elderly suffering from chronic long term health problems such as Alzheimer's one has to wait for 3-6 months even to find a room in a care facility and these may be 100 miles away.

Finally when so placed the cost is some 8-10,000 dollars a month. Having home care givers is also an expensive reality as we grow older and need assistance. Most of that funding comes from turning your home equity and personal property over to the state.

Those that have neither, simply are screwed. I happen to be in a middle position and have some surgery needs that are NOT guaranteed to work. With SS (disability) Medicare, I am responsible for twenty percent of the procedure which is 30,000. So 6,000 would come out of pocket, which I do not have. Worse yet my income level prevents me from taking out a second mortgage. Some hospitals do offer payment plans, most do not.

Worse yet, one needs to find a doctor who will even deal with Medicare and I suspect Obama Care is about the same. Most have opted out of the system and opened up pay as you go clinics. In my county only TWO physicians would take on new Medicare patients.!

[Griffin]

Most have opted out of the system and opened up pay as you go clinics.

I somehow don't think you mean paying up after death

Actually the govt. here are considering some scheme where you get to keep the home you own while you are in care, and then re-pay the care from the sale of the property when you die. I've lost track of where they've got to with this one. It doesn't sound austerity enough to me. ;)

Sorry you are in such a position with your health.

[bonsaiherb]

Sorry you are in such a position with your health.

Thank you Griffin,

Still beats the alternative! When I turn 65 yrs. I will be able to do a 'reverse mortgage' and deal with some of this stuff. Nothing critical, but damn debilitating, painful and awksome to make up a word.

Trouble is, even when spent, there is no guarantee. Sorta like hip replacements. Warranties suck. Knee replacements are better and I also have a permanent shoulder neurological problem that leaves me one armed. Thankfully it was the left arm.

So much about personal crap. That and worse will happen to most of us and for that I am prepared.

Less so for the abysmal failure of the American medical community to provide care for the elderly and the handicapped. (Homeless people??? Go and die under an underpass.) Now that would be a great line to snatch for that despicable quotes out of context thread. By that I mean ... well they are disposable as far as the Oligarchs that rule us are concerned and 'Soylent Green' will be the future for us old farts who had forgotten to accumulate enough wealth.

More and more single mothers and children are joining the homeless ranks every day and the people who are still financially afloat simply do not realize that it could be their turn next. They simply flip up their shades and ignore this part of their own community ... Silicon Valley is a good example of this bipolar society.

I hope Europe is doing better on this, and should all else go ass backwards I still have my German citizenship to reclaim. I would be a Euro then.

[Griffin]

.............. the people who are still financially afloat simply do not realize that it could be their turn next.

This is equally true here. I find it very disturbing. It's incredibly unintelligent.

[bonsaiherb]

Back to the lighter topic of Yanks and Brits.

Although we have a King Obama (with many other given names) we are still not as obsessed with the ‘Royals’ as the English seem to be. According to the British press, “Prince Charles does not want to be like his mother.” As I read it she does not want to be like him either. Queen Elizabeth has been on the throne this long for a good reason. He's assuming he'll live long enough to be king. She’s still gambling on another to years and as I remember her mother lived to be 101. So longevity is something in that bloodline.

Will there be a King Charles III? How absurd. The first 2 Charles were Stuarts and one of them ended up executed. so I assume he would have to pick one of his other names. He'll be an Edward or George like the others in his family. Most Americans look with disfavor with the King George memories.
Sometimes I feel sorry for "Prince" Charles as he has been waiting for an awful long time, and most of the Public would prefer William, his son. It can be argued that he has nothing more than the lifetime guarantee of wealth and privilege that the Royals enjoy. Nevertheless, we have many in the US aristocracy who were born into a lifetime of wealth as well and some became political dynasties.

I personally like the idea of bringing back the pagan ritual of sacrificing the king after a year (hey stretch it to four) then fertilize the Fields with his blood. This should be down with Presidents as well.

An aside: I am a collector of Silver Coins and so far have avoided all Canadian or British coins because of the homely Queen Elizabeth face. Horseface, King Charles will do nothing to change that. Give me a Silver Eagle, Panda or Australian Koala any day. YANKS WIN! in the coin competition!

Returning to horsefaces, will Camilla be recognized as a Queen? Or would she would be the Kings consort? Considering their long affair while he was married to Diana this would be appropriate. Much prefer William and Kate! Boy that must burn.
Getting political again. Prince George THIS guy is far worse than Obama. When he found out he couldn't be divorced and be king, she conveniently had an accident. The Royal family did not seem to shed many tears.
Then he married the whorse he'd been cheating on the dead ex-wife with for years. I think he should do the honorable thing and hand the scepter over William.

IMO The Yanks win this one as well. We tend to get rid of Royalty every eight years of even in four. Mind you we also try to kill them off every now and then.

[Cardinal Fang]

Will there be a King Charles III? How absurd. The first 2 Charles were Stuarts and one of them ended up executed. so I assume he would have to pick one of his other names. He'll be an Edward or George like the others in his family. Most Americans look with disfavor with the King George memories.

Charlie boy has already announced that if he ascends to the throne he'll be a George. I hope if he makes it he'll remember that the monarch is supposed to be totally neutral in politics, so he'll butt out - just like he doesn't do now.

Returning to horsefaces, will Camilla be recognized as a Queen? Or would she would be the Kings consort? Considering their long affair while he was married to Diana this would be appropriate. Much prefer William and Kate! Boy that must burn.

Camilla would be a consort - only those of royal blood would become a queen if they were married to a king (see Prince Phillip - he's not King Phillip)

Getting political again. Prince George THIS guy is far worse than Obama. When he found out he couldn't be divorced and be king, she conveniently had an accident. The Royal family did not seem to shed many tears.
Then he married the whorse he'd been cheating on the dead ex-wife with for years.

Unfortunately for that conspiracy theory, the crash was caused by a combination of speeding to evade paparazzi and the driver drinking too much alcohol. And don't forget that Diana confessed to committing adultery during her marriage as well, with Major James Hewitt. So she can't be called squeaky clean either - and BTW he was divorced and still in line to ascend the throne.

And finally question - is the current almost herditary nature of the Presidency any better than the UK system? A Bush, followed by a Clinton, followed by a Bush. Should have been followed by another Clinton, but Obama ruined that one. Next time, will likely be another Clinton increasingly looking like facing off against yet another Bush.

At least out heriditary head of state is constitutionally bound to be apolitical - and hence the police and military swear allegiance to something removed from politics. Can the same be true of the US where the C-in-C is a politician?

CF

[gronank]

Unfortunately for that conspiracy theory, the crash was caused by a combination of speeding to evade paparazzi and the driver drinking too much alcohol.

Eloquently expressed by Mitchell and Webb, (I'll throw in the one about the moon landing because it is just that good)

[bonsaiherb]

Why Yanks are better than Brits.

Cardinal Fang wrote:

At least out hereditary head of state is constitutionally bound to be apolitical - and hence the police and military swear allegiance to something removed from politics. Can the same be true of the US where the C-in-C is a politician?

Ah, I have to agree with many of your points. Never did hear of his renaming himself to King George though. UUGH. Still have a few King George coins though. Guess you ceded the coin comparison issue. As for him being a more neutral or laid back monarch, that is to be seen. I also doubt that Queen Elizabeth was asleep at the switch during many of your political upheavals. She had to deal with some powerful Prime Ministers post Churchill to Thatcher and beyond.

I am sure she put in her two pence worth upon occasion! Blair to Cameron who knows? BTW is not the latter a Scottish name? Guess she missed Churchill, but then came Eden and a whole bunch of wankers. John Majors to Gorden Brown who sold off your gold reserve.

Guess she did stay out of the Parliamentary fray. To your loss, I might add.

Returning to America, we need to work to stop the Oligarchy that is rapidly consuming the working class. We have already lost our democracy. Gore Vidal said many years ago that the US was in effect a one-party state. A monolithic party with two wings. Coming from the elite, he should know!

http://sweetgeodes.com/senft/?page_id=3348



BTW, the Scottish attempt to secede totally shows how corporate banks, media, businesses and the overwhelming power of England continues to dominate your so called U.K. The Queen must have been so relieved to have continued use of her Feudal and Victorian fantasy world at Balmoral Castle.

Nope, the YANKS have not had anything like that since the Rockefeller, DuPont era. We now have the VERY NEW Internet tycoons like the Zuckerman's, Bezos and Gates. Financially speaking, watch out for the Chinese and the Alibaba's yet to come.

Europe's time with the Swiss trolls, the Rothschild s and Monarchies including the Dutch is beginning to fade ... fade and fade away.

[Cardinal Fang]

Interesting article related to the earlier poverty/ food bank derail earlier - bonsaiherb, you might find this up your street.

The City that eliminated poverty, then nearly forgot about it

Basically, it's about a city in Manitoba who ran a trial in the 1970s whereby all residents were guaranteed a minimum income. Monthly checks were delivered to the poorest - no strings attached. The study was to see if doing such a thing would kill people’s motivation to work. It didn’t. Instead they found that there was better nutrition, healthcare, kids stayed in school (so better life propects), and people improved their own prospects by using that extra cash for training and the like. The study was ended when a Conservative Government was elected.

Some Conservatives are coming out in favour of reintroducing the scheme, as it could (ironically) save the welfare budget millions of dollars. The current Canadian welfare system means that you have to be basically destitute to get any help, and once you recieve it, you stay destitute as people have no means to absorb setbacks in income or unexpected costs, and can’t afford to move to where jobs might be or upgrade their skills. Stopping people getting in that state in the first place would cost less than picking up the pieces afterwards.

CF

[gronank]

It shouldn't be forgotten that Britain has fought twice as many wars on drugs as the US. Of course, Britain sided with the drugs.

[Roy Hunter]

It shouldn't be forgotten that Britain has fought twice as many wars on drugs as the US. Of course, Britain sided with the drugs.

Of course! What, you think we're crazy or something? Drugs always win! Always back a winner, even if it's morally reprehensible and ethically indefensible, that's the British way!