Thousands of people could be pushed into poverty by changes to incapacity benefit, a charity has warned.

But Iain Duncan Smith, Work and Pensions Secretary, says his reforms could be the biggest change to the welfare state since it was founded.

Disability Alliance has said up to a million people with long term sickness or disability could be affected.

The government says getting people back into work is a priority, but there would always be a safety net.

Meanwhile Douglas Alexander, the shadow work and pensions secretary, has said that Labour could support testing the availability for work of incapacity benefit claimants.

Under the plans, claimants face a new 12-month cap on their benefits, if ruled able to work. People who cannot work, for example the terminally ill, would be given support with no time limit.

Mr Duncan Smith, in an interview with the Daily Telegraph, said his reforms - which are expected to be outlined in a White Paper next week - were "the biggest change since Beveridge introduced the welfare system".

He plans to introduce a simplified benefits system, where as many as 30 different schemes are replaced with a single universal credit.

It is changes to Housing Benefit which are among the most controversial, though. Mr Alexander, in comments given to the Guardian, said Labour "could consider" a proposal to reduce housing benefit payments, if the changes were phased in and reduced in scope.

He said housing benefit had been used to take too much of the strain "for generation-long failures in the housing market, principally the the lack of affordable homes to rent and buy".

Sounds like what we can expect from our new house of reps, but along with tax cuts for the rich

In Canada, if you have job and work for a semi-large or large company, chances are you will have a dental plan and have everything (or a high %) paid for you by the company.
If you don't have a job, or struggling with finding short contract work, you probably don't have dental benefits paid for, and you pay out of your own pocket.

So the rich..who can afford going to the dentist, don't have to pay.
The poor and lower middle class, who can't afford dentists, have to pay out of their own pocket.
This makes sense.  ::)

In Canada, if you have job and work for a semi-large or large company, chances are you will have a dental plan and have everything (or a high %) paid for you by the company.
If you don't have a job, or struggling with finding short contract work, you probably don't have dental benefits paid for, and you pay out of your own pocket.

So the rich..who can afford going to the dentist, don't have to pay.
The poor and lower middle class, who can't afford dentists, have to pay out of their own pocket.
This makes sense.  ::)




Having a job with a semi-large or large company doesn't make you rich.  It just makes you lucky.

Sounds like what we can expect from our new house of reps, but along with tax cuts for the rich


Very interesting.

When the "Bush Tax Cuts" were passed, all the Libs could do was to deny that they offered huge tax reductions for the middle and low income taxpayers, and screamed bloody murder that they were "tax cuts for the rich".

Now that the tax law is set to expire, Libs want to pose themselves as the defender of the working man, trying to take credit for extending the Bush Tax cuts.  Note that an extension of the "Bush Tax Cuts" is essentially no tax cut for anybody.  It is simply keeping tax rates where they presently are... and have been since whenever the BTC's were passed.

And yes lets hope that our government starts cutting spending all-around.  It is desperately needed.

Sounds like what we can expect from our new house of reps, but along with tax cuts for the rich
You guys on the left always say tax cuts for the rich but then Obama's Press Guy Robert Gibbs says we want to extend the middle class portion of the Bush Tax  Cuts. So why say tax cuts for the rich then?

In Canada, if you have job and work for a semi-large or large company, chances are you will have a dental plan and have everything (or a high %) paid for you by the company.
If you don't have a job, or struggling with finding short contract work, you probably don't have dental benefits paid for, and you pay out of your own pocket.

So the rich..who can afford going to the dentist, don't have to pay.
The poor and lower middle class, who can't afford dentists, have to pay out of their own pocket.
This makes sense.  ::)


What do you mean the rich don't have to pay? Of course they have to pay money out of their pocket if they don't have dental insurance. What do you think its just free to go the dentist if you are rich?

What do you mean the rich don't have to pay? Of course they have to pay money out of their pocket if they don't have dental insurance. What do you think its just free to go the dentist if you are rich?

Oh that wasn't what I meant. Perhaps I should clarify.

"In Canada, if you have job and work for a semi-large or large company, chances are you will have a dental plan and have everything (or a high %) paid for you by the company." So you are lucky, have a job, get a salary, make $'s and then you can afford dental insurance, but the company pays for you even though at this point, you can probably afford it.

On the flip side. The poor and lower middle class, who can't afford dentists, who don't have jobs or poor paying ones, aren't covered by a plan & have to pay out of their own pocket, when they can't afford it.
Sorry if I was unclear.

You guys on the left always say tax cuts for the rich but then Obama's Press Guy Robert Gibbs says we want to extend the middle class portion of the Bush Tax  Cuts. So why say tax cuts for the rich then?


Obama wanted to keep the cuts for those making less than $200K ($250K for couples) and let the others expire.  Since all the cuts are to expire it is legit to say that he favors middle class cuts and increases for the wealthy (or as repubs say on "small business???)

Obama wanted to keep the cuts for those making less than $200K ($250K for couples) and let the others expire.  Since all the cuts are to expire it is legit to say that he favors middle class cuts and increases for the wealthy (or as repubs say on "small business???)



Small like the Chicago Tribune, Fidelity, Bechtel, L.A. Lakers, & anything owned by the Koch brothers, plus many, many more.



Cat

Small like the Chicago Tribune, Fidelity, Bechtel, L.A. Lakers, & anything owned by the Koch brothers, plus many, many more.



Cat
I didn't know the Republicans were basketball fans with the LA Lakers.

I didn't know the Republicans were basketball fans with the LA Lakers.




  ::) You don't have to like the Lakers to like their money.

The government says getting people back into work is a priority, but there would always be a safety net.




That's what Ronnie Reagan sold us (via his brain, Peggy Noonan).  Get your fat lazy butts off of welfare, get a job, and do an honest day's work for a change.  Of course there will be a social safety net for the truly needy.  They learned a bunch of this garbage from Maggie Thatcher, BTW.

Of course, this was stone bullshift and remains so 30 years later.  Social safety net?  Sure, right!  Those guys don't care if you go homeless and hungry.  If you say, hey, I don't want to be on welfare.  I want a job so I can support myself and my family, private business tells you can go f**k yourself.  If you want government benefits, you're a spoiled brat with a sense of entitlement.  If you want a job with decent pay...you're a spoiled brat with a sense of entitlement.  

"Austerity" is a euphemism for: If we could liquidate the working classes for pills and soap, we would.

Don't believe the corporate greedheads for a second...not even a microsecond.

I know it's tempting to want to set fire to the stock exchange and make the gutters run with Oxford toff blood, but I can't really endorse that course of action either.
:-\\