Iain Duncan Smith proves total moron

I wasn’t going to post today, I have an essay to write, but I have been incensed by Iain Duncan Smith’s Welfare Reform interview in the Guardian. I cannot return to the essay of doom until I have released this poisonous rage trickling through my body.

All the politicians love to jump on the beating on the poor bandwagon. It seems to me they have absurd stereotypes of the working classes. It is as if they studied a textbook definition at Oxbridge, perhaps taken from Charles Murray’s (completely crap) Underclass thesis, where he stipulated that the poor were ‘thieving, idle, bastards’. Let’s face it, with the top ten richest members of cabinet’s combined wealth totalling 440 million, they aren’t going to have any firsthand experience of engaging with this group in the population.

Duncan Smith said this:

In families where unemployment was widespread, those who did try get a job were often seen as "total morons" he added. "Socially, everyone says: 'You are a bloody moron – why are you doing this? You don't have to do this.' So taking responsibility is a real risk for you."

I have to say, in my experience (and yes I do have some thanks) this is not the attitude people have towards those trying to find work. Work is often seen as the Holy Grail; the route out of poverty, getting the hell away from their shit lives, a way to respect.

The fundamental mistake politicians make when dealing with employment and benefits policy is presuming the problem of unemployment originates with ‘idleness’. I think you will find, with even a slight bit of amateur research, that the problem is in fact LACK OF JOBS coupled with SHIT WAGES.

Is it just me who finds it humorous that this politician is talking about “encouraging a willingness to work” in juxtaposition with a “the biggest” recession “our country has ever seen”? Let’s face it, industrial jobs are gone, service sector jobs are going, even public service jobs are insecure. Nowhere does he mention how instable and challenging the job market is!

Furthermore, Duncan Smith problematises incapacity benefit:

"People basically get parked on [incapacity] benefit and forgotten about. If you have been on this benefit for more than two years, you are likely to die on it."

Back to reality, incapacity benefit is constantly reviewed by the government, claimants are certainly not ‘forgotten about’. Instead they are continually assessed via a link between GPs and DWP and every now and again are dragged into terrifying and humiliating interview centres to confirm they are still indeed incapacitated.

I have been to one of these centres. It was one of the most depressing places I have visited. Picture the scene: people unfortunate to have to rely on the notoriously difficult to claim incapacity benefit, having to plead for the continuation of financial support for their miserable life. You could almost smell the misery and the fear...and the urine (no joke).

Indeed Duncan Smith, people do often claim for years and die on the benefit! That is because they have a very difficult physical or mental disability which is likely to lead to premature death.

Seriously, removing this benefit is likely to send some claimants over the edge. Even if they do manage to work, what is their chance of getting a job in this job market with a disability or long term mental health problem? I don’t think reforming this benefit is a ‘National Priority’ right now.

A final problem with Duncan Smith’s reforms is removing child tax credits for households with £30,000. Duncan Smith has some good ideas about removing disincentives to work for people on benefits, such as not stopping assistance for people who work part time, and continuting benefits for a short period when first start work. However, when asked how he will fund this, he replies that he will remove child tax credits for middle incomes, households earning over £30,000.

The thing is… do the maths here, a household of £30,000… that’s two people earning £15,000 each right? I almost wish my maths was wrong. It doesn’t make sense to take tax credits away from people earning in the lower bracket. If they had children, these people would probably earn about the same on benefits! Redistributing from the barely comfortable to the slightly uncomfortable. This has the hallmark of the conservative brand of ‘Social Justice’ all over it.

My final thoughts for the day. What about the super rich Iain Duncan Smith? What about tax evasion? What about exploitation?

Duncan Smith clearly doesn’t give a damn. He is even changing the poverty measure so that it does not include inequality.

"You get this constant juddering adjustment with poverty figures going up when, for instance, upper incomes rise."

Indeed, poverty measures in Britain capture ‘relative poverty’ not 'absolute poverty'. This is because most analysts of poverty define it as ‘not being able to take part in the normal activities of society’. If you encounter polarisation of wealth, the groups left behind are going to feel poor relative to the average standard of living. No one is claiming we have absolute poverty, but Britain has one of the highest % of relative child poverty in Europe. Our income distrubution is grossly unfair and inequality derives from exploitation, not idleness.

Duncan Smith is not going to address this growth in the super rich. He is going to remove the tax credits for the average earner and continue to stereotype the ‘idle’ who can’t get a job in today’s shitty market. Long live inequality.

Brilliant.