oaksoft Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 I can see it now. The Natzis will produce a publicity film which talks about lovely accommodation for old people where they will have their own flat or small house and they will have their own little patch of a communal garden where they will get help to grow vegetables and herbs and there will be leisure facilities and classes where they can do basket weaving and knitting. Everyone will think that it is just the place for their elderly relatives to live and encourage them to sell their homes in order to "fund the move" to this ideal world for the elderly and the infirm. Then when little Johnny wants to go and visit Granny he will be told that Granny is fine on her own and enjoying herself. Little Johnny will decide to jump on the bus to go and visit Granny himself and when he gets there...poor little Johnny can't find his Granny anywhere and there is no communal garden with herbs and vegetables. There are no leisure facilities or basket weaving classes...In fact there are no elderly people there at all... I can see it now. The Natzis will produce a publicity film which talks about lovely accommodation for old people where they will have their own flat or small house and they will have their own little patch of a communal garden where they will get help to grow vegetables and herbs and there will be leisure facilities and classes where they can do basket weaving and knitting. Everyone will think that it is just the place for their elderly relatives to live and encourage them to sell their homes in order to "fund the move" to this ideal world for the elderly and the infirm. Then when little Johnny wants to go and visit Granny he will be told that Granny is fine on her own and enjoying herself. Little Johnny will decide to jump on the bus to go and visit Granny himself and when he gets there...poor little Johnny can't find his Granny anywhere and there is no communal garden with herbs and vegetables. There are no leisure facilities or basket weaving classes...In fact there are no elderly people there at all... As regards to putting people on ignore I'm very tolerant. Only one person was one my list until I read this puerile infantile shite. Congrats Maxi you've finally got me. I'm regrettably at two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 I am not sure of all the ins and outs and thats why I was asking for clarification it what i posted was still the case. I had a conversation today about benefits etc and it isn't always about cutting benefits it is about making sure the right people get them when needed, that they have to stop being a 'career' choice and the level between 1.sitting in the house with your rent, council tax paid and your jsa and 2. working for minimum wage, not guaranteed hours etc is enough to make it worth your while to work otherwise some people will continue to sit on their arses. The only way to solve that is to taper off benefits as you earn more. OR you could force employers to do the decent thing and pay a living wage rather than allowing the tax payer to subsidise salaries in that way. Either way you should never earn more for being out of work than someone who is working. What I can't understand is why politicians think the only way to solve this is to cut benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 They're not mutually exclusive, you know, "both" is another option. I can only assume he's trolling because TBH if he's genuinely done this to his gran then I'm utterly disgusted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Saint Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 The only way to solve that is to taper off benefits as you earn more. OR you could force employers to do the decent thing and pay a living wage rather than allowing the tax payer to subsidise salaries in that way. Either way you should never earn more for being out of work than someone who is working. What I can't understand is why politicians think the only way to solve this is to cut benefits. Yeah exactly. I work for an agency at present and there are plenty like me and at times there just aren't shifts there but you take whats going. Without going into actual finances, at times we are only slightly better off than what we would be if we signed on and had our rent and council tax paid for us. I have a mortgage so its not an option for me but i can see why some people think there is no point in working unless its for a great wage. Others of course just have no bloody interest in working. And I totally agree with the living wage rather than it coming out the tax pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 I can only assume he's trolling because TBH if he's genuinely done this to his gran then I'm utterly disgusted. Go with that bit and you won't be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 The only person anyone on here is blaming is you personally because you swanned half way around the globe boasting of your numerous expensive holidays whilst you left your gran to suffer in a system you believe to be dreadful. So you are either a troll or an appalling grandson. Either way, not someone to have a drink with. To be fair he was an appalling son too. At least he's consistent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Is there any advance yet on the 3 people in the whole country affected by this "outrage" & "broken promise". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 I can see it now. The Natzis will produce a publicity film which talks about lovely accommodation for old people where they will have their own flat or small house and they will have their own little patch of a communal garden where they will get help to grow vegetables and herbs and there will be leisure facilities and classes where they can do basket weaving and knitting. Everyone will think that it is just the place for their elderly relatives to live and encourage them to sell their homes in order to "fund the move" to this ideal world for the elderly and the infirm. Then when little Johnny wants to go and visit Granny he will be told that Granny is fine on her own and enjoying herself. Little Johnny will decide to jump on the bus to go and visit Granny himself and when he gets there...poor little Johnny can't find his Granny anywhere and there is no communal garden with herbs and vegetables. There are no leisure facilities or basket weaving classes...In fact there are no elderly people there at all... Drug induced paranoia or just a twat... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Once again, "both" is the missing option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Calling me names and suggesting I'm on drugs - Heinrich Himmler and Doctor Mengele would be proud. FFS! Where's that irony photie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 What are you Natsi Boys like? Abuse, abuse, abuse!Only 2 things wrong with this post,You're equating being a Scottish nationalist with being a nazi and you think that the posts are abusive. Now that is propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 Calling folk "twats" and suggesting they're on mind-influencing substances is a form of verbal abuse I'd say! If you think I've done a decent job on the propaganda front maybe I should ask Herr Salmond and Frau Sturgeon for a job! It wasn't verbal abuse, it was me trying to find reasons as to why you would post what you did. However, if you are so easily offended maybe you shouldn't troll on here.Oh look, another reference to nationalists being Natzis... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 I put SD on ignore due to the fact my brain couldn't handle the infantile, purile, scaremongering, nonsensical sheeite that he spouted on this topic only to find he either has a twin or an alias. Given the fact he heralded that he was open enough to use his own name I can only assume the former. Maxi seems even mor intent on gaining a reaction from worthless and ill informed garbage than his sibling. Before I delete him from my wishlist I feel I must point out that, to have a debate at least two things must be present. Both sides must have a reasonable argument and both sides must be able to relay those facts in a controlled manner. 0 out of 2 for Maxi/SD aint bad though. Ignore it is then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 I wasn't exactly offended by it, I was just merely pointing out how those comments could have been construed. As for "another reference to nationalists being Natzis" - "Herr" simply means "Mr" and "Frau" can be used to say "Madam" - they weren't words exclusive to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei - a fact that I am sure you are perfectly aware of. This is nonsense that is just looking for a reaction. Troll off! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted January 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 I am not sure of all the ins and outs and thats why I was asking for clarification it what i posted was still the case. I had a conversation today about benefits etc and it isn't always about cutting benefits it is about making sure the right people get them when needed, that they have to stop being a 'career' choice and the level between 1.sitting in the house with your rent, council tax paid and your jsa and 2. working for minimum wage, not guaranteed hours etc is enough to make it worth your while to work otherwise some people will continue to sit on their arses. Miss Saint - what the articles confirm is that yes you will still have your home sold if you happen to have assets in order to meet your care needs in your old age. That wasn't supposed to be the case and this is where the SNP have been less than honest. When the SNP got in to power they had pledged that everyone, regardless of financial situation, would get free prescriptions, free personal care, free nursing care and a large contribution from local authorities towards the cost of residential care. In practice this meant that if you were assessed as needing "personal care" in a care home the local authority would contribute £241 per week and when you add in the state pension on top of that cost were supposed to be being met. What was less than honest of the SNP is that the criteria put in place for these assessments is far more stringent than as happens across the rest of the UK and when you factor in the reality that local authorities were struggling to meet their current liabilities for the cost of existing services and were having to deal with the imposition from the Scottish Government of a Council Tax freeze. Over the subsequent years this led to increased conflict between the local authorities and the Scottish Government and in 2012 the SNP finally agreed to remove the onus on local authorities and to fund the policy from within the NHS budget instead. Now we are seeing the effect of this as the "assessments" are denying free personal care to those who are even in a vegetative state and it's gone beyond parity with the rest of the UK as the BBC have discovered as these three highlighted cases would have qualified for free personal care in a care home across the rest of the UK regardless of assets. What I am saying is it's time the SNP stopped lying to the electorate. It cannot afford to meet its current liabilities, never mind the panacea that they are promising of maintaining benefit and welfare payments whilst providing free nursery places for all kids whilst not raising taxes. If Scotland votes "Yes" in this referendum the consequences are irreversible - whilst a no vote clearly isn't - and yet the SNP are playing fast and loose with our futures by failing to be honest about what shape an Independent Scotland would take. That is unforgivable in my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Saint Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 Miss Saint - what the articles confirm is that yes you will still have your home sold if you happen to have assets in order to meet your care needs in your old age. That wasn't supposed to be the case and this is where the SNP have been less than honest. When the SNP got in to power they had pledged that everyone, regardless of financial situation, would get free prescriptions, free personal care, free nursing care and a large contribution from local authorities towards the cost of residential care. In practice this meant that if you were assessed as needing "personal care" in a care home the local authority would contribute £241 per week and when you add in the state pension on top of that cost were supposed to be being met. What was less than honest of the SNP is that the criteria put in place for these assessments is far more stringent than as happens across the rest of the UK and when you factor in the reality that local authorities were struggling to meet their current liabilities for the cost of existing services and were having to deal with the imposition from the Scottish Government of a Council Tax freeze. Over the subsequent years this led to increased conflict between the local authorities and the Scottish Government and in 2012 the SNP finally agreed to remove the onus on local authorities and to fund the policy from within the NHS budget instead. Now we are seeing the effect of this as the "assessments" are denying free personal care to those who are even in a vegetative state and it's gone beyond parity with the rest of the UK as the BBC have discovered as these three highlighted cases would have qualified for free personal care in a care home across the rest of the UK regardless of assets. What I am saying is it's time the SNP stopped lying to the electorate. It cannot afford to meet its current liabilities, never mind the panacea that they are promising of maintaining benefit and welfare payments whilst providing free nursery places for all kids whilst not raising taxes. If Scotland votes "Yes" in this referendum the consequences are irreversible - whilst a no vote clearly isn't - and yet the SNP are playing fast and loose with our futures by failing to be honest about what shape an Independent Scotland would take. That is unforgivable in my mind. £241 a week plus pension well unless the state pension is around £500 the costs certainly won't be met! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 Is Dickson seriously complaining that personal care is means tested after whining about universal benefits last month and then complaining about the Council Tax being too low after whining that high taxes are a bad thing ????? Odd. He must feel guilty as hell for what he did to his gran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 Has this still only affected 3, that's three, people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted January 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Has this still only affected 3, that's three, people? No it hasn't. It just three people who the press are reporting on. There's loads of other people who have been affected but who don't seek publicity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 No it hasn't. It just three people who the press are reporting on. There's loads of other people who have been affected but who don't seek publicity. So that'll be 3 people that the indepth BBC investigation uncovered. Unfortunately "loads" is not really quantifiable in this instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.