I've never read so much pap in all my life. It's about time the people in Government started to look at the real problems in this country instead of focusing on looking for cheap labour.
The minimum wage is a joke as it is, without suggesting disabled people should be paid even less.
I hope he is suitably ashamed of himself for his insensitive suggestion. Another useless cretin

 

Usually a combination of genes and in the case of the disabled, the fact that they are unable to take the exercise that would burn off the excess weight. Not too difficult to work out TDW!

I think that the disabled should certainly be encouraged to work if they are able to and that they should be paid commensurate with their abilities. Very important to have a sense of independence if you have been dealt with that kind of bad luck in life.

Those "elitists" should put themselves in that position with all the restrictions on life and look at the problem from that point of view.

Les

 

the minimum wage is a joke, so the pople who make my burgers at maccy's should be on 18k a year then?


the minimum wage supports role with minimum responsibility, why should a cleaner get 9 quid an hour when a skillded cnc machinist only gets 8.50, and thats with a hnc after their name too?



6 quid an hour is right if you cant achieve anything!

 

one thing that pi55es me off is the motability cars, im sick of seeing "disabled" folk getting a 300 quid a month car allowance and swanning roung in brand new astra sri's and focus tdci's.

These are even advertised in the local rag as motability specials with nil down payment and a set monthly rate.


I work nearly 50 hours a week and cant afford a new astra sri, so why is some one else who claims to be disabled but can walk fromm car to cash machine as if they are perfectly ok get a brand new car off the tax payer, and then get a better deal than i could get on the same car?



like benefit cheats it needs clamping down on big style, as does the use of blue badges, they get abused rouind here something rotten, and with maccs over zealous traffic wardens killing the town centre, the blue badges are almost a right to park where ever the **** they want, ive seen blue badge holders park on double yellow lines blocking a busy junction at 5.30 on a fri night and causing traffic chaos for an hour, then the person who got in the car must have beent he owners daughter cos she could move perfectly well and was laughing and joking with her son i think!


she didnt enjoy the abuse she got from the traffic queue, but i doubt it will stop her doing it again!



a crack down is needed!

 

I neither said nor implied that

 

From today's Sunday Times:

Luxury cars intended for the disabled are being driven by relatives and friends in a widespread abuse of the welfare system.
A scheme costing taxpayers £1.4 billion a year to provide the severely disabled with a new car every three years is being abused to provide tax-free motoring for friends and families, say Whitehall sources.
The cars, including Mercedes-Benzes, BMWs and Saabs, are provided to claimants with minimal checks on how they are used. All 580,000 cars, of which about 11,000 are BMWs and Mercedes, are exempt from road tax and Vat.
Almost 200,000 are used by the disabled’s friends or relatives. It is estimated this accounts for at least £500m of the taxpayers’ bill. “What is going on here is a disgrace,” a Whitehall source said this weekend. “These cars are incredible deals but they are often not being used for the benefit of the disabled person.”
A Sunday Times investigation found that car dealers are promoting the scheme to claimants’ relatives, assuring them that they can keep the car at a separate address and use it for personal commuting, family trips and holidays abroad. This breaches rules on zero-rated road tax which state that the vehicle should be used “solely” for the benefit of the disabled person.
Someone receiving the disability living allowance higher rate can use the weekly payment of £51.40 for impaired mobility to lease a car, such as a £12,140 Ford Zetec. Under the scheme, a typical lease runs for three or five years.
Those willing to pay a deposit of £2,000 can secure a more expensive car. A £22,695 BMW 3-series saloon can be leased for three years for a £1,999 deposit and the weekly disability benefit.
Insurance, servicing and breakdown assistance are free. The scheme is operated by a non-profit company, Motability Operations, which leases the cars to claimants. It has become the biggest fleet operator in Britain, with nearly one in 10 new cars registered under the scheme. Mike Betts, the chief executive, earned more than £1.17m last year.
Paul Slowey, who investigates misuse of disabled parking badges, said he had found Motability cars were being abused by friends and relatives. “We have got cases where the person has a zero-rated tax disc, they have their relative’s [disabled parking] badge and they have a Motability car,” he said. Entitlement is meant only for the severely disabled. They must be virtually unable to walk, yet many are not medically checked.

 

It is worth remembering that there are many who also use disabled parking slots when they are not eligible to do so thus forcing many badly disabled people to have to walk further than necessary. This can be very hard for a disabled person. The parking slots are there to reduce the distance they have to walk.

When it comes to parking on double yellows and also causing an obstruction, the person concerned is risking the withdrawal of the blue badge. As far as the motablity scheme goes, it is designed to aid those who could not afford to run a car and their disability allowance is used to pay for it. It means that the allowance is not available for any other way to help that person with their other extra living expenses. That is the choice of the person concerned. It is the only way that a badly disabled person can get around of course.

Yes no doubt there are many dishonest people who are not in any way disabled but who are prepared to use a relative's blue badge and even a motability car when the disabled person is not in the car. This is a disgraceful and selfish act, and once again if discovered will lead to the loss of the blue badge and the motability car. The blue badge has a photo of the holder on the back and it is easy enough for the authorities to check on the person using it. Easy for someone to use these if they belong to an elderly relative who does not actually know they are doing it, and very selfish to risk the loss of those facilities to the genuine owner.

Before blaming the disabled, you should bear in mind that it may be possible for them to walk a short distance but that they will rapidly become tired or in pain from doing so. They may even suffer from a bad heart etc. The ones you see striding out are probably not entitled to use the badge anyway.

Before getting into a frenzy and running the genuinely disabled down, it is worth bearing in mind the facts as they stand.

Even if it does seem unfair as a fit person that you are not able to get a motability car or blue badge parking facilities but it is worth remembering that the scheme is basically there for genuine reasons.

Les

 

how about no work no benefit, but if they work for say 75% of the minimum wage they can claim 25% in benefits, or 50% pay 50% benefits etc etc.

i dont believe anyone is totaly incapable of work of some sort, just because you loose an arm or legs doesn't mean you can't think, talk etc etc.

yes there will be exceptions to this as a rule, but would stop alot of fraud because they would have to work anyway.

 

Most disabled people want to live as normal a life as possible. If they are unable to work then they can't be castigated for that.

If they can work, then they should be paid what they are worth depending on the restrictions caused by their disability. If they can do the same as an able bodied person in a particular kind of job then they should be paid a full salary.

If they are restricted in what they can do then they should get at least the minimum wage as it was designed in the first place regardless of who was paid it and why.

Les

 

Excellent article by Dominic Lawson in today's Independent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...k-2300336.html

which ends:

My 16-year-old daughter, who has Down's Syndrome, lives with the family. Recently she has been attending a wonderful place in Sussex called Chalk Farm, a small hotel whose staff all have mental disabilities of varying degrees of severity, and which trains such people for similar work elsewhere.
When one thinks of what a transformation in their lives such work can bring – not just a sense of having a purpose and a role, but also an end to what can be profound loneliness – the cruelty lies in not giving employers the maximum incentive to take them on. Yesterday I asked my daughter what she felt about getting just tips for waitressing at a place such as Chalk Farm. Her reply was firm, and to the point: "It's not about money. It's about work."

 

I think the min wage should be the bare minimum regardless of who you are. As long as you can do the job you get paid. If you can't do the job then they should let you go.

Above the min wage it makes sense to scale your pay based on ability. It happens in other industries. If I was disabled I couldn't claim to be on higher pay, I'm being paid what I'm worth. It's business not personal.

 

So what is the genetic mutation that allows people to be a net producer of energy? These people should be able to solve the global warming if we farm them properly.


p.s. - There is no known genetic or physical issue that will allow you to gain weight unless you eat too much.

 

Not completely true. My own disability means that I am unable to take any significant physical activity as I used to in the normal way of my life before my problem occurred. I certainly don't eat large amounts but initially I did put on weight which was distressing to me. I do restrict my food intake and you are quite right to say that excessive eating will cause weight gain. I have settled to a reasonable weight now although as most people say, I would be happier if I was a bit lighter.

Your genes do make a difference and if you do have such genes you will tend to put on weight more easily than others. My old school mate eats good size meals but his body burns off weight easily and he is quite skinny without taking any kind of specific exercise.

As ever, it is down to the cards you were dealt in the first place.

Les

 

but you can't gain weight unless you eat more than you burn. I could probably benefit from losing a few pounds (6ft, 12 stone 5, 34 inch waist, 34B bra for the moobs) but with no additional exercise, I could lose the moobs if I had a bit less food and a bit less beer.

However, I enjoy food and beer. I don't ever put it down to genetics or circumstance. I ingest more calories than I need. I am greedy. That is the only reason.

 

So your matabolic rate is locked into your genes Les ?

 

Yes it is. Overweight people often run in the same family and you can often see the signs for the future in children at a young age.

The friend I mentioned above eats more than I do but is pretty skinny as was the rest of his family. It is certainly down to the way that your body handles the food you eat and if you overeat then the problem will of course get worse.

Les

 

No - Some people can eat more and not gain weight. This is more than likely genetic, but most fat parents have fat kids as they don't educate them on the benefits of a healthy diet. There is no involvement from genetics or medical condition. An individual can't create energy. Some can burn more doing nothing. Many eat more than they need.

Looks at it this way. Imagine you have a Scoob giving 30 MPG and an infinite petrol tank and I have a Toyota Aygo, giving 60MPG, also with an infinite petrol tank. We both do 30 miles a day, and every day, we put in a gallon of fuel. What happens to the Scoob? It stays the same. What happens to the Aygo? It gains weight at a rate of half a gallon a day. Eventually it will be too heavy too move. It has had the same amount of fuel as the Scoob. It just burns it "less" efficiently. (although when we consider fuel cost v's fatness, the perception would be that it burns it 'more' efficiently)

 

I don't have any specific evidence to say one way or the other as far as fat parents and their children are concerned. You may well be right and the parents who do not have the genetic advantage that you mention over their metabolism allow their children to overeat. Maybe the fact that those children too don't have the genes of a fast metabolism via their parents will just become fat anyway. It may or not be genetic, I can't prove it but I go by what I see. Of course the amount you eat will affect your weight, whatever your genetics. As you agree however-some people can eat for England and still remain at a normal weight.

When Mrs Leslie and I have a morning coffee in Brixham, we often see enormously large people order the full English breakfast which is a plate of just about everything you can think of plus toast etc.etc. The meal disappears incredibly quickly and there are times I am surprised the plate is not licked clean! We would not be able to finish a meal like that between the pair of us. The person concerned is certainly remaining well topped up.

This seems to point in that direction anyway... http://www.weightawareness.com/topic...l?doc_id=1187&

Les