First Suicide Due To Bedroom Tax Reported

Look I'm not out to argue with you but I'm more interested in discussing what might be a good or better policy than the current one rather than wading though what appears to be left wing rants about current policy. You come across as left wing or at least anti-coalition/anti-tory.

I agree that political commentary is going to be political, however, I prefer less apparent bias, that's all. I see little point in debating topics from a purely dogmatic standpoint because the dogma gets in the way. As it happens my own political bias (we all have it) is probably further to the right than yours - possibly much further.

I never accused anyone of lying (to make the government look bad or any other reason), you're comments above are as fatuous as suggesting that the government implemented the "bedroom tax" in order to push people to commit suicide - clearly a preposterous position.

Evidence from suicide notes used to support an anti-policy argument are unconvincing as (almost by definition) those leaving suicide notes are probably not thinking rationally. My only criticism of you (and those who link policy and suicide) was one of taste which is very much an opinion - these things are subjective.

As far as CAB goes, CAB is funded by local authorities so has a vested interest in promoting how austerity (and by inference other local funding cuts) makes them all the more necessary. From my politically-right perspective I see them freeloading rent-seekers so I'm suspicious of their motives when they make emotive missives regarding cuts and suicide. (I once went to the CAB for help and did not get anything useful form them... but maybe my issue was outside their remit. They certainly didn't give me any advice I could act on).

Do you have any comment on my bolded sentence about fairness to tax payers and those who need larger social houses or do you believe that the state should just provide oversized houses to those deemed needy at any cost?

 

I agree with you. They are blaming 31,000 'extra' deaths on the 'big six' now.

 

True.

 

That point has been adressed, hasn't it ? Lack of affordable smaller social housing properties is stopping people down-sizing, even if they desperately want to. Private rents are escalating, making that option unaffordable too.

Should people - generally the poorest in society - be hit with a tax just because they are the poorest ? Do you really wonder that people get suicidal - and yes, I do believe that they do.

Since when did it become a law that the amount of space a person is allowed to live in was governed by their income, or lack of ?

Fairness to tax payers - we are all tax payers. I personally may currently be unemployed at present but I still pay Council Tax and VAT, the latter of course increases with every price rise. Energy prices rise by 10%, the VAT charged on it also rises as a percentage.

Further, I've payed out plenty of Income Tax and National Insurance over the years, partly on the understanding that should I require unemployment benefit I would be able to claim it, but also - and this is important - it would also go to help those in less fortunate circumstances at times when I was doing well.

Personally I'd like the government to go after all those high income tax evaders, rather than the soft targets they prefer.

I realise that Hip Forums, especially the UK section, has become increasingly right wing over the last few years, so I dont really expect these points to find much favour here. Which is all the more reason for posting them.

 

I'm sure Boris would feel quite at home here these days.

But I fear it's not only the forums which have become more right wing. We obviously have in this country a large number of people who are quite happy to be ruled over by the sneering and contemptuous ultra rich.
And increasingly there's a lack of any basic compassion for those at the bottom of the pile.

 

To some degree I think you're probably right. Children of Thatcher and all that.

On the other hand, there is a large and probably growing grassroots opposition to what's going on.

Of course it doesn't get reported (except in negative terms) by the mass medias... but if we pause to consider who actually owns those mass medias, it shouldn't come as any suprise.

If anyone is actually interested in alternative points of view on these subjects, follow any of the links to reposts of articles from The Void, read through the comments and follow some of the links.

It might be uncomfortable reading for some, but it is views & comment unfiltered by the likes of the Daily Mail, etc. And for many of us, a true reflection of what life in Britain today is actually like.


What's missing is co-ordination, organization... but maybe that will evolve organically. Certainly none of the main political parties are likely to challenge the status quo... why would they ? They're doing very nicely out of it.

 

And just to annoy the usual suspects....

Second Suicide Linked To Welfare Reform Reported This Week: RIP Victor Cuff

The Void http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/201...-linked-to-welfare-reform-reported-this-week/


Another tragic suicide has been reported which appears to be linked to the brutal Work Capability Assessments used to strip people of benefits by declaring them ‘fit for work’.

According to South East London newspaper, the News Shopper, Victor Cuff, aged 59, hung himself in May after his sickness benefits were cut. The newspaper reports that Mr Cuff had previously had suffered from depression and an inquest into his death heard that he had been “feeling down” and was having money problems after his sickness benefits were reduced.

This is the second suicide linked to withdrawal of sickness benefits which has been reported in just one week. On Monday the Bristol Post featured the story of Jacqueline Harris who took her own life after being found ‘fit for work’ resulting in her benefits being slashed.

Anyone who claims these suicides are not linked to welfare reforms has probably never been poor. The trauma of poverty can be devastating and perhaps the worst part is looking to the future and seeing little way out. For those suffering from depression – and many people without any money end up suffering from depression – the feelings of hopelessness can be even more acute. People on sickness benefits were poor already. To make them even poorer, via a system of inhuman and crude computer based tests, is breathtaking cruelty.

Attitudes towards mental health are hopefully slowly changing. Several high profile people have spoken out about their own experiences and been well received by most of the public. There is no doubt that this has helped remove some of the stigma associated with mental health. But sadly this seems to only apply to the rich or famous. The same newspapers who praise the bravery of well known personalities like Stephen Fry and Alistair Campbell accuse poor people with mental health conditions of being scroungers and benefit scum.

Few people are depressed enough to qualify for sickness benefits anymore. The vicious regime run by French IT firm Atos has declared hundreds of thousands of people with mental health conditions ‘fit for work’, often even against the advice of their own doctors.

One of the most serious symptoms of depression is suicidal thoughts and behaviour. Not everyone will report these to the Jobcentre, and even if they do they are unlikely to receive any real support. They certainly are unlikely to get their benefits back, which is what they need.

It is hard to imagine a more callous system than one which requires people who claim they are feeling suicidal to prove it, often at a series of repeated assessments. Yet that is the way people with no money now face being treated if they expect to be able to eat whilst they manage their condition.

These deaths are far from the first tragic events linked to welfare reform and sadly they will not be the last.

 

You're right there Mr.F. The main parties have little to choose between them. They are in effect the status quo.

What worries me though is that whilst there's very little sign of organized resistance or protest from what we might call the 'left', far right parties like UKIP seem to be gaining ground. If the boat were to be seriously rocked in this country, I think they'd be the ones to gain.

But lets not loose hope yet. Maybe as you suggest, some opposition will evolve.

 

yes, organically is how i'm experiencing it… some areas are well organised and co-ordinated… but it's great that it cannot be pinned down… one of it's strengths is in it's participants coming from so many different places/backgrounds etc…

it is in local communities now… people are rising up… local people… it's great to see… even school children are talking about it… many of them seem to know what's what...

but yes, it IS organic… mummy is not in Iceland anymore but on her way back home where she fuckin' belongs

Mummy and Daddy will be together again, yay!

 

The trouble amongst many of the further-left parties in the past often seemed to be that they were more interested in fighting each other over what would seem to most reasonable people to be very minor differences, rather than offering alternatives. Same thing with anarchist groups - I recall some very nasty incidents back in the 1980s !

And there's always the problem of even if they did get together a viable, working alternative, they'll still come up against the media and other vested interests.


The Greens ? Might be a viable alternative come the next election, always assuming they stand in your constituency. Although they don't seem to be making political capital out of current situations, which I'm suprised about.

Respect ? Thought for a while they might offer an alternative, but they seem to have become a one-trick pony.

Sadly, as the present system stands, to launch an effective electoral campaign you've got to have big money backers. Which means you'll be in thrall to someone.

Although, with Labour constantly working to alienate the trade unions... but sadly most unions don't seem very radical these days either.

 

Lots of local inititives, independent of each other and very locally focused, but able to unite behind issues of mutual interest.

Organization of co-ops and similar schemes, again on a very local level ? That seems a viable way forward. Local Credit Unions instead of banks, etc.

What it needs, of course, is the biggest and most difficult to achieve revolution - the one inside people's heads. Quite how you achieve that is the big problem, but the way that the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer might encourage those getting poked by the shitty end of the stick to start asking some hard questions.

 

I don't think so.
Well, not adequately, imho.
(carry on here if you can cope with life outside the UK Forum )http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=474259 )
You mentioned London, but nowhere else in the country (I don't think).
Stephanie Bottrill, lived in a three bedroomed council property in Solihull.
She, for e.g, seems to have been offered two alternatives.
However, she seems to have deemed them not suitable [too far from friends and family].
What is the situation like, regarding social housing (not 'affordable homes') in Solihull?

People on £33,000 a year are 'toffs' lol
My brother is on something like £30,000 - is he a 'toff'?
The average wage is supposed to be around the £26,000 (with 'Londoners' skewed toward £32,000) mark - are people on that 'toffs'?

The post also was mentioning families not single people such as Stephanie Bottrill.

Stephanie Bottrill was in a home that would have been ideal for a family.
But she blocked that by - rightly or wrongly - not wishing to move out.

I think it was 7 April 2008:

Local Housing Allowance (LHA) was introduced on 7 April 2008 to provide Housing Benefit entitlement for tenants renting private sector accommodation in England, Scotland and Wales. The LHA system introduced significant changes to the way Housing Benefit (HB) levels are restricted and how benefit is paid.

It does not replace Housing Benefit - it is just a different way of calculating entitlement under the existing Housing Benefit scheme.
Its aim is to improve levels of transparency when calculating Housing Benefit. Under LHA, a flat allowance is used to decide the eligible rent of all claimants with similar sized households living in a broad rental market area, rather than tying the level of benefit to the individual property. This is supposed to provide an incentive for those on Housing Benefit to find cheaper accommodation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Housing_Allowance

There is currently little reason for Housing Benefit claimants in the social rented sector to move from accommodation which is too large for their needs.

The match between the size of accommodation and the household is irrelevant for calculating Housing Benefit entitlement for the vast majority of these Housing Benefit claimants.

This could be seen as inequitable when compared with the operation of Housing Benefit in the private rented sector.

It is unfair to allow Housing Benefit to pay for more rooms for claimants in the social rented sector than it would pay for if the claimants were in the private rented sector. In these circumstances it would be reasonable for under occupying claimants in the social rented sector to make some contribution towards more generously sized accommodation or to move.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...al-sector-housing-under-occupation-wr2011.pdf

Proof, please.

(this is from a 'left' wing source, btw)



Is it 'right-wing' of me to mention that she also said:

(this is from a 'right-wing' source, btw)



She mentions that she can't cope, and that she wasn't a strong person.

In the article it seems to give the impression she seems to have been slightly left in the lurch by her family.
Not having any food or electricity etc.
Her daughter leaving even though she knew that this would mean more rent having to be found.

Generally, in a pretty bad predicament - emotionally and financially (and this could have been the case regardless of the last issue she had).

I'm not blaming her family.

I'm just saying that she seems to have been in a pretty bad way - emotionally - and the last straw MIGHT have been this last hurdle.
I would not say that It was the ONLY reason she commited suicide.

I don't think suicide is 'weak' and I do have sympathy for her.
But, I do think she could have helped herself (more) and her family could have helped her more, too.
If that makes me 'right-wing' - ok, fair enough.

 

that is kinda what's going on here… but people are uniting… of course Labour and Socialists are trying to co-opt stuff and join in with conservative-slagging, but people seem to be wise to it in general, and as we inform more local populace about stuff they need to know, they just run with it…

yeah, revolution inside people's head is hardest… even within activist groups you see the same old fascist behaviour and thought rising… the women in these groups seem to be talking a lot about this… it's like everything is becoming transparent to everyone else… it's fuckin' great… but there is still a long way to go…. thousands walk by sometimes, in parliament square, say…. and they just look at it all like the tourists that they are… but there is hope… as it goes local, because local people from all walks are being affected, so it grows…

having people like Brand has been bloody good too tbh… even if he is a complete trollop… or was…. love 'im! He's bloody fantastic. An inspiration i hope to many.

 

You knew her then?
It makes you sound right-wing because you are using right-wing rhetoric.

 

What, that I think she could have helped herself more?
[claiming disability allowance, and actually moving further away - even for a short period]
And her family leaving her in a house with no electricity or food, and should have helped her more?
I don't need to have known her to have that opinion (and it is only my opinion)...
I wasn't in exactly that predicament, but I've been close to it.
I did have to help myself.

I've just dealt with some BS at the jobcentre only yesterday.
They are starting to use (they say 'piloting') new forms to show what you are doing to look for work, and I foresee many more people being sanctioned/having their benefits claim closed (I was going to scan it and post it, but forgot to).
I told them I didn't want to be used as a guinea pig.
(I am working - long boring story)

Imho, being 'right' isn't necessarily wrong and being 'left' doesn't necessarily mean that you are right (if that makes sense).

 

Revolution then.

But I don't see how it can be done, as they have all the guns.

 

look at the community getting involved here at a Public Meeting outside MikeFreerMPs office…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3JnOf4GVVo&list=PLLChTyiKgGnTUckSw3PD--GhjblOBsjyo&index=1

it's worth watching the whole playlist...

 

even if you had been in her exact predicament, and i am by the way, you may well have been able to help yourself, as i have/do, but it's a constant struggle, both physically, emotionally, spiritually and mentally,… but she obviously was incapable of that…. she had met the end of her particular tether… i can relate to that. my point is that just because you were able to make it, doesn't mean that everyone can. How on earth can she even afford to move if she hasn't even got £20 to spare for her Bedroom Tax payments? You don't know what her relationship with her family is like mate…. you haven't a clue of her particular family dynamics, so to say that she could have is, based only on your own experience of this shit… And besides, why the fuck should people move from their homes that they have lived in for years, brought up their children in because of approx 60,000 people at the top creaming it ALL from the rest of us!

 

lillallyloukins

I do appreciate that certain policies do not take every single person and every single person's emotional and financial state into consideration.
That, being completely impossible.
It's easy for me to say that she had this [a chance to move] and she could of done that [claimed disability], and why didn't they do this [her daughter not move out] or that [make sure she was ok day to day, and not leave her hunrgy and in the dark with no electricity or food].
But, it is even easier to say it was one one thing that drove her to suicide.
All she really says is: it was the government.
And I did say earlier you can't really question that.
Even if other details are glaringly obvious.
At the end of the day she was let down.
We just disagree who let her down.

Because, ultimately, it isn't their property.
A couple of reports [one posted earlier] points to the stagnation of tenants staying put - regardless of circumstances - being a factor in all of this.
As I am sure you can appreciate, it's a little more complicated than: build more houses.
If it was that simple, I'd ask them to build me a one bed flat just up the road.
Nothing too flashy.

 

I understand bedroom tax. I don't live in the UK but I do find its importance. Here in New York, we have people living in public housing for 20+ years. They pay 300 a month for 3 bedroom flats, while sporting Gucci and Louis Vuitton. Clearly, if you can afford a Tom Ford, you shouldn't be living in public housing. A lot of these people never leave public housing either. I think it should be a temporary (1-5 years) place for people to stay while going to school or finding means to advance their lives somehow. Otherwise its just taking advantage of the system.