Print

Print
ON DLA, that is my fault and organisations like where I used to work helping people do successful DLA claims!  It is real disabilities and illnesses behind this, the bureaucracies in fact are still causing underclaiming.
Clive Durdle

4 Toronto Road
Ilford
Essex
IG1 4RB

0208 554 5889
0794 198 8846
[log in to unmask]

http://clivedurdlewordpress.com/about/
http://web.me.com/clivedurdle

I wish to develop the Renaissance concept of Opera, where people work together closely to resolve the issues they face, from a participatory, equal, just, sustainable and whole system perspective.

Clive Durdle MSc BA (Econ) FCIH Dip Soc. Studs
Durdle Door Consulting




On 15 Jun, 2010,at 07:10 PM, Paul Spicker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

The Cabinet Office has issued an illuminating report on poverty, The state of the nation: poverty, worklessness and welfare dependency in the UK,  which can be found at http://wwwcabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/410872/web-poverty-report.pdf  (it's a one-megabute download).  A picture is worth a thousand words, and the graphs on page 34 and 35 are models of their kind.  Here's one by way of illustration:

 

<clip_image002.jpg>

 

Perhaps the size of the last disk reflects an alarming increase in obesity among DLA claimants?

 

Quite apart from the creative use of graphics, the report's use of statistics might excite some comment:

  • there is no definition of what an "out of work" benefit is (it's not, it seems, the same as an "earnings replacement" benefit for people of working age, but it does seem to include JSA, IB and Income Support);
  • the figures don't quite tally with figures for Great Britain on NOMIS - my guess is that they relate either to England or to England and Wales;
  • the claim that long term dependency is increasing is a little surprising when the numbers of claimants receiving JSA for over 2 years fell from from 141,000 long-term claimants on JSA in 1999 to  25,000 in 2009, and 
  • I'm not sure that it is "strong evidence" of an intergenerational cycle of disadvantage to claim that 27% of children of multiply disadvantaged parents (deprived on six counts) have at least disadvantages of their own.  That seems to me to imply that 73% don't, that by the third generation the expected continuity will be 27% of 27%, which is 7.3%, and that even if we can't be confident of that calculation, by the fourth generation the dilution of the cohort will leave the pattern indistinguishable from the rest of the population.  Which, of course, is pretty much what long-term cohort studies have told us before.  

 

Paul Spicker

 

****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************
****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************