"Lifestyle choice"?

Apart from in the vivid imaginations of frothing Dally Wail and Torygraqph readers, how many benefit claimants do you really think view welfare dependency as a "lifestyle choice"?

In an experience dealing with them every day, I'd say 30%+

Or 'under two thirds'.

By gum, even assuming you're correct, that doesn't bear out the government lies.

It's still a substantial enough number, in my opinion, and needs sorting out.

There are people posting here on RLFans that claim to be unfit for work that just choose not to, we both know that.

Do you have anything to back up that wild assertion?

Plenty, but it would lead to a lot of insulting PM's and abuse which I don't have time for.

No different to Richard Littlejohn or Iain Duncan Smith then.

Either put up or shut up

Theres only two people that post on here that I know who are ill and posts about it, one is me, the other has been off work for some time and has gone back, so I assume you mean me. A pretty disgusting accusation there Martin which I don't appreciate. I knew you had changed jobs but I didn't realise you worked for ATOS now. I'm not going to say any more to your post as you are not worth it.

I'd hazard a guess that you are not dealing with a true representative cross section of ALL claimants. So I would seriously doubt your claim of 30%. In fact, it seems way higher than what The Joseph Rowntree Foundation estimate

Having worked with JRF, I'd agree, I don't have a pre determined agenda.

You can hazard all of the guesses you want cod'ead, I deal with a very wide cross section and there are plenty that are taking the system for a ride, at the expense of those genuinely in need.

How may RLFans can post all day and night but "aren't fit for work"?

As Steph has posted above, she's the only poster I'm aware of who is a long-term claimant. From her posts, I'd believe that she really does have a genuine, debilitating condition. I can't think of any others.

I do hope though that you are reporting all these people who are gaming the system to the relevant authorities.

You are reporting them aren't you?

Not my place, their own personal conscience should do that. I am not in a position to shop individuals, not my job.

In my experience of dealing with, as you say "them" (I'd say people but hey, I like to empathise with the people I'm working with) I'd say about 5%, but I'm not sure that out of those people, (them) what with many of those people (them) suffering from severely debilitating illnesses and conditions of both mental and physical conditions it sure don't look like a life style choice to me. I've certainly never thought "You know what, I wish I had bi-polar disorder so I didn't have to go to work every day and could just waz it of watching Jezzer Kyle all day".

Feck knows why you do the job you do because you're the last person who should be let loose near vulnerable people.

Cock face.

Then I'd suggest that it is far, very far from your place to be even commenting on the subject

How can you not be in that position? If you know all about their personal circumstances?

Don't expect a rational answer anytime soon, he was doing the hit & run routine long before AjW was weaned off his battery-licking

Probably substantially more than you think.

Next time you are out and about in a large city, might a suggest a visit to the local magistrates' court for some light entertainment?

It's a never-ending procession of people admitting guilt to low-level offences, then asking to pay the fine at £7 a fortnight because they don't work and are on benefits. And 50% of all fines go unpaid.

Your problem there is that like some police officer friends of mine your daily life is immersed in a sub-culture of just one element of real life, so much so that you end up believing that this is normality and lose sight of the fact that you are looking down a microscope into a petri dish full of the crappiest examples of life, lift your head and look around and you'll see that "normality" is VERY different.

Police Officers, court officials, solicitors specialising in criminal law, the Daily Mail and The Express - all guilty of believing that the lowest common denominator is the norm.

While were discussing benefits it's becoming transparently clear that IDS's flagship Universal Credit roll-out is an unmitigated disaster.
No wonder there having to sanction so many claimants.
Trying to recoup some of the financial black-hole he's created.

T0sser with a capital T.

Seems like you got the abuse anyway!

Seriously though I understand this Cod'ed is a bloke in his 60's or 70's. You would have thought he would have grown out of trying to abuse people over the internet by now.

The insults are getting poor coddy, which is a shame.

He received "abuse" after dishing out nasty accusations about people on this forum, which, even when challenged, he cannot and will not then back up, but doubtless has now run away again, as is his wont.

If people cannot take "abuse" they should avoid dishing out what amounts to libel.

I haven't run anywhere, and if people seriously believe that nobody on here is taking the state for a mug then that is up to them.

Stop trying to deflect the question from yourself.

You're the one who has made an accusation. Now either back it up or take it back.