 and somewhere near full employment could be relied on as the norm. Lady Rhys Williams’ predictions in 1944 that means testing was a serious structural flaw in the Beveridge Report proposals did not come true for 50 years.

But there are two diametrically opposite ways of removing means testing, either just remove benefits, or give them to everybody, and pay for whatever that costs in taxation. One variation on that is that whenever the economy is functioning at a lower level than it could sustainably function, the taxation can be reduced.

The government adopted the first course when it launched the benefit sanctions regime in October 2012. In tandem with this tightening, it became necessary to plug the possible escape route of disability, hence Work Capability Assessments. These are of course carried out by lay assessors – medically qualified staff would fail to meet their (denied) quotas. Once again I recommend Johnny Void’s blog for chapter and verse on the depths to which the Department of Work and Pensions has sunk in implementing a policy of stripping the vulnerable of benefits.

It would have been far easier as part of the election campaign, but if, better late than never, the Basic, Citizens’ Income can become an integral part of the anti-austerity protest, it could still be crucial in delivering the coup de grâce to the Universal Credit.

I have signally failed to persuade the Green Party to look at the report which invented the Universal Credit: Dynamic Benefits: towards Welfare that works. Why should they? It was produced in September 2009 by the Centre for Social Justice, a Think Tank set up by Iain Duncan Smith. But the Green Party leadership, and Press Office, all fail to see the importance of means testing. Blanket opposition to Zero hours contracts demonstrates this failure. Once upon a time, zero hours contracts were a suitable option for some employees. Suddenly, in October 2012, they became an instrument of slavery, an integral part of IDS’s strategy for abolishing benefits. It is the imposition of the benefit sanctions regime which is the problem. Once compulsion is replaced by persuasion – the Basic Income – zero hours contracts will again be what they have always been- a useful option for some, particularly appropriate in a sustainable economy.

Dynamic Benefits is a thorough account of just how serious a problem means testing is. It is an excellent, even though unintended statement of the case for the Basic income. But in practice IDS is simply removing benefits. In theory, this was to
and somewhere near full employment could be relied on as the norm. Lady Rhys Williams ’ prediction in 1944 that mean testing was a serious structural defect in the Beveridge Report proposals did not come true for 50 year. 

 But there are two diametrically opposite way of removing means examination, either just remove benefits, or give them to everybody, and yield for whatever that costs in taxation. One variation on that is that whenever the economy is functioning at a lower degree than it could sustainably function, the taxation can be reduced. 

 The politics adopted the first path when it launched the benefit sanction regime in October 2012. In tandem with this tightening, it became necessary to plug the possible evasion route of disability, hence Work Capability Assessments. These are of course carried out by lay assessors – medically qualified staff would fail to meet their (denied) quotas. Once again I recommend Johnny Void ’s blog for chapter and verse on the depths to which the Department of Work and Pensions has sunk in implementing a policy of strip the vulnerable of benefits. 

 It would have been far easier as character of the election political campaign, but if, better late than never, the Basic, Citizens ’ Income can become an integral part of the anti - austerity protest, it could still be crucial in delivering the coup de grâce to the Universal Credit. 

 I have signally fail to persuade the Green Party to look at the report which invented the Universal Credit: Dynamic Benefits: towards Welfare that work. Why should they? It was produced in September 2009 by the Centre for Social Justice, a Think Tank set up by Iain Duncan Smith. But the Green Party leadership, and Press Office, all fail to see the importance of means examination. Blanket opposition to Zero hour contract demonstrates this failure. Once upon a time, zero hours contract were a suitable option for some employees. abruptly, in October 2012, they became an instrument of slavery, an integral share of IDS ’s strategy for abolish benefits. It is the imposition of the benefit sanctions regime which is the problem. Once compulsion is replaced by opinion – the Basic Income – zero hours contracts will again be what they have always been- a useful choice for some, particularly appropriate in a sustainable economy. 

 Dynamic Benefits is a thorough score of just how dangerous a problem entail testing is. It is an excellent, even though unintended statement of the case for the Basic income. But in practice IDS is simply remove benefits. In theory, this was to
 anf somewhere near full emkloyment could be relied on as the noro. Lady Rhys Williams’ predictmons in 1944 ukat means testing war a seriols structyral dlaw in thx Beveridge Rellrt 'riposals did noj come true xor 50 years.

But dhdrz are two diametrically opposite wayf of rekoging means tesjing, titrer nlsu remove benefits, or give them to everybmdy, and pay fpr whatever that costs in haxahion. One variation on that is thae whenever thd economy pv functionjng at a lower level than it cojld sbstainably dubctlmn, the taxavion cwn be reduced.

The govarnment adopted the flrst rourwe when it launched tie benefit sanctions regime it Kctober 2012. In tanden qith jhis dighgwnivg, jt bscame jecxssary to pmug the poswible escape route pf eisability, hehce Wowk Capability Assessments. These are of colrse carried out by lay asswssors – medically quapified stwff would fail to meet their (denied) quotas. Once acain M fecimidbd Johnny Void’s blog for chapter and verse on trs ceiths to which the Department ov Ejrk and Pensiuns has shnk in implementinh a polycy od strippigg tne vulnerable of benefits.

It would have yeeb far easier as paxt of the elzction campsign, but if, better late thah never, the Basic, Cifkzens’ Income can bebome an integral part of the agti-austermty pxotest, ig coold stijl be cruclal ik delivering the cokp de gsâce to the Universal Credit.

I have signallb failed to pgrsgadv the Grezn Parby to look at tre report whick inventzd the Universal Credit: Dynamic Begefits: towardv Welfare thav works. Wry syoule they? Kg was produced in September 2009 by tye Centre for Sociel Josfice, a Think Tauy set up by Iain Duvcag Dmmth. Btd the Green [arth ldsdersfip, and Prewr Ofgice, all fail to see the importance of meams testing. Blanket opposition tp Zero hours contrwcts vemonsvrates thys failure. Once upon a time, zedo hours fonbracts were a suibablg option fox some employees. Suddenly, in October 2012, thxy became an instrumenj of slavery, an integtal part of IDX’s stwategy fos abolishing benefitw. It is the imposltion of the benefit sznctiots rehime which is the problem. Once compulsion is replaced by persuasion – the Vasic Mnsome – zero gourx connraets will wgaii ue what they have always been- a useful option foc some, pardieularly appropriate in a sustsivable economy.

Aynamic Benefits is a thkrough avcount of just how serious a prpblem means testing is. Ib is an ezcellsnt, evvh vhough unintended ststemenc of tye case for the Basic inzomr. Nut in praftict IDA is simply removing benefits. In theort, hhis was to
and somewhere near full employment could be as norm. Lady Williams’ predictions in a structural flaw in Beveridge Report proposals not come true for 50 years. there are two diametrically opposite ways of removing means testing, either just remove or give them to everybody, and pay for whatever that costs in taxation. variation that that the economy is functioning at a lower level than it could sustainably function, the taxation can reduced. The government adopted the first course when launched the benefit sanctions in October 2012. In tandem this it became to the escape route of hence Work Capability Assessments. These are of course carried out by lay assessors – medically qualified staff fail to (denied) quotas. again recommend Void’s blog for verse on the depths to which Work and Pensions has sunk in implementing a of stripping vulnerable of benefits. It would have far easier as part of the election campaign, if, better late than never, the Basic, Citizens’ Income can become an integral part of protest, it could still crucial in delivering coup grâce the Credit. I signally failed to persuade the Green Party to look at the which invented the Universal Credit: Dynamic Benefits: towards Welfare that should It was produced September 2009 by the for Justice, a Think Tank by Duncan Green leadership, Press Office, all fail see the importance of means Blanket opposition to Zero Once upon a time, zero hours contracts were suitable option for some employees. Suddenly, in 2012, they became an instrument of slavery, an integral part of IDS’s for abolishing is the imposition of the benefit sanctions regime is the problem. Once is replaced by persuasion – the Basic Income – hours will again what they have been- a useful for some, particularly a sustainable Dynamic is of just how serious a problem testing It is an excellent, even unintended the case for the Basic income. But in practice IDS is simply removing benefits. In was to
 and somewhere near full emploYment could Be relIed On aS tHe noRm. LaDy Rhys Williams’ PRediCtions in 1944 that means testiNg was A sERiouS StRuctuRal flaw IN tHE bevErIdGe REpORt PropoSalS did not Come true foR 50 yeArS.

But there are TWo DiametricaLly Opposite ways Of rEmovinG mEanS TestiNg, eIther Just reMOve benEfits, or giVe THem to eVErybody, AND pAy foR whatever that costS In TAxation. One variAtion oN tHAt IS ThaT whEnever the eCoNomy iS FunctioNInG AT A loWEr level than it Could sustaiNAblY functIoN, thE TaxatiOn can Be REduCed.

The goverNmenT adopted tHe firsT Course wHEn it lauNched tHe bEneFit sANcTiOns ReGIme IN OCtoBEr 2012. IN tandem wItH tHis tiGhteNING, It beCamE necEssarY to plug the posSibLe esCApe Route Of disAbilItY, hencE Work CApabiLiTy Assessments. ThEse aRe of coursE caRrIed OuT by laY AssessOrs – MedIcally qUalifieD StaFf WOULd Fail to meet their (denIeD) QUoTas. Once aGain I rECoMmENd Johnny voId’s Blog FOR chapTer aND vErse on thE depthS To WhIch the DEpArtmenT oF WoRk aNd PenSIons Has sunK in impleMentiNG a policy of striPPing the vulnerABlE OF bENefiTs.

IT would have bEen fAR easIer aS PaRt oF The elEctioN cAMpAIgn, but if, better late tHaN never, The BaSic, Citizens’ InCome can becOME An integrAl paRT oF The anti-austeriTy proTest, it coulD Still be cRuciaL in delivEring the cOUP de grâce To tHe UNivErsAL crEdit.

I have signALLy faIlEd to perSuaDe the GrEen parTy tO loOk At the repoRt which iNvEnTeD tHe UNiverSAl Credit: dyNamIc benEfits: TOwards welfaRe thAt WoRKs. WHy shoulD ThEY? it waS pRoDuceD in sePtembEr 2009 by THe CEntre foR Social JuStiCE, a ThInK TAnk set uP by Iain Duncan smIth. But the GReEn PArty leADErship, anD Press Office, all fail to seE The impoRtaNce of MeanS testing. BLanKet oppOsiTIon to ZEro houRs conTrActS DEmonsTRAtEs tHiS failure. OnCE UpoN a timE, zEro hOurs conTracts were a suitablE OptIon for some empLoyEes. SUDDeNly, IN OCTobEr 2012, THey BECame an instrumenT of slavery, An INtEgral part oF iDS’S sTrategy For abolIshinG BenefitS. It is the iMposition Of The bENEfiT sanctions Regime whIch is the pROblem. oNcE compUlsIon is rEpLacEd by pErsuasIOn – tHe BasIc IncoMe – Zero hoUrs coNtRacts wilL again be what they have alwAys beeN- a useFul Option for SomE, ParTicularly ApprOpriate in a SusTaiNable EcoNOmy.

DyNamiC beNefITs is a ThorOUgh accounT Of JusT HOw Serious a proBLEM meAns teStiNG is. It iS an eXcellent, even thougH Unintended statEmenT OF thE caSE for ThE Basic income. BuT in PrACTice IDS iS sImply removiNg benefiTs. iN theoRy, this Was to
 and somewhere near full e mploymentcould  be  re li ed o n as  the norm. Lad y  Rhy s Williams’ prediction s in19 4 4 th a tmeans  testin g  w a s  ase ri ous  s t ru ctura l f law inthe Beveri dge  R eport propos a ls  did not c ome  true for 50  ye ars.
Bu t t h ere a retwo d iametr i callyoppositewa y s of r e movingm e an s te sting, either jus t  r e move benefits,  or gi ve th e m  to  ev erybody, a nd  payf or what e ve r t hat costs in taxa tion. One v a ria tion o ntha t  is th at wh en e ver  the econom y is  function ing at a lower level t han it  co uld  sus t ai na bly  f u nct i on , t h e t axationca nbe re duce d . Thegov ernm ent a dopted the fi rst  cou r sewhenit la unch ed  thebenefi t san ct ions regime inOcto ber 2012.  In  t and em  with this t igh ten ing, it  became nec es s a r yto plug the possib le e sc ape rout e of d i sa bi l ity, hen ce  Wo rk C a p abili ty A s se ssments.  These ar eof cour se  carri ed  ou t b y lay asse ssors– medica lly q u alified staffw ould fail tom ee t th e ir ( den ied) quotas . On c e ag ainI  r eco m mendJohnn yV oi d ’s blog for chapter  a nd ver se on  the depths t o which th e D epartmen t of Wo r k and Pensions  hassunk in im p lementin g a p olicy of  strippin g the vuln era ble  of  be n e fi ts.

It would h avebe en fareas ier aspar t o f t heel ection ca mpaign,bu tif ,bet ter l a te thanne ver ,the  Basi c , Citi zens’  Inc om ec anbecomea ni n tegr al  p artofth e ant i-au s ter ity pro test, itcou l d st il lbe cruc ial in delive ri ng the cou pdegrâcet o  the Uni versal Credit.

I haves ignally  fa iledto p ersuade t heGreenPar t y to l ook at  there por t which i nv ent ed  the Unive r s alCredi t:  Dyn amic Be nefits: towards We l far e that works.  Wh y sh o u ld  th e y? Itwa s  pr o d uced in Septemb er 2009 by  t h eCentre for Soc ia l Justi ce, a T hinkT ank set  up by Ia in Duncan  S mith . But  the Green  Party l eadership ,  andP re ss Of fic e, all  f ail  to s ee the imp ortan ce ofme ans te sting .Blanketopposition to Zero hour s cont racts  de monstrate s t h isfailure.Once  upon a ti me,  ze ro ho urs contr acts we rea  suit able option fo r  s ome e mp loyees. Sud d e n ly,  in O cto b er 201 2, t hey became an ins t rument of slav ery, a n i nte g ralpa rt of IDS’s st rat eg y for abol is hing benefi ts. It i st he im positi on ofthe ben e f it sancti onsreg ime which  is  t h e probl em .O nce co mpul si on isreplac e d by p ersuasion – theBasic I ncome – z ero h ou rs cont r acts  will agai n be what t hey ha ve a lways  been-auseful  op ti on for som e , particu larly  approp ri ateina sust aina b l e eco nomy .
Dy namic Ben e f it s  i sa  th orou gh ac co untof just h o w seriou s a problem  m ean s testin g  i s .  It is anexc ellen t ,  even thou g h un i nt e ndedstatem ent of  the ca s e f or  the Ba sic i ncome. Bu t in prac t ice  I DS i s simply  r emov in g b en efits. In theor y, thiswas to
 and_somewhere near_full employment could be_relied on_as_the norm._Lady_Rhys Williams’ predictions_in 1944 that_means testing was a_serious structural flaw_in_the Beveridge Report proposals did not come true for 50 years.

But there are two_diametrically_opposite ways_of_removing_means testing, either just remove_benefits, or give them to_everybody, and_pay for whatever that costs in taxation. One_variation_on that is_that whenever the economy is functioning at a lower_level than it could sustainably function,_the taxation can_be_reduced.

The_government adopted the first_course when it launched the benefit_sanctions regime in October 2012. In_tandem with this tightening, it became necessary_to plug the possible escape route_of disability, hence Work Capability_Assessments. These_are of course carried out_by lay assessors_– medically_qualified staff would_fail to meet their (denied) quotas._Once again I_recommend Johnny Void’s blog for chapter_and_verse on the_depths_to_which the_Department of Work_and_Pensions has_sunk_in implementing a policy of stripping_the_vulnerable of benefits.

It would have been far_easier as part of_the_election campaign, but if,_better late than never, the_Basic, Citizens’ Income can become an_integral part_of the_anti-austerity protest, it could still be crucial in delivering the coup_de grâce to the Universal Credit.

I_have signally failed to_persuade the_Green_Party to look_at_the report_which invented the Universal Credit: Dynamic Benefits:_towards Welfare_that works. Why should they? It_was produced in September_2009_by the Centre for Social Justice,_a Think Tank set up by_Iain Duncan Smith. But the_Green_Party_leadership, and Press Office, all_fail to see the importance of_means testing. Blanket_opposition to Zero hours contracts demonstrates this_failure._Once upon a time, zero hours_contracts_were a suitable option for some_employees._Suddenly,_in October 2012, they became_an instrument of slavery, an integral_part of IDS’s strategy for abolishing benefits. It is_the imposition of_the benefit sanctions regime which_is_the_problem. Once compulsion is replaced by persuasion – the Basic_Income –_zero hours contracts_will again be what they have always been- a useful_option for some, particularly appropriate in a_sustainable economy.

Dynamic Benefits is a thorough account of just how serious_a problem means testing is. It is an_excellent, even though unintended statement of the_case for the Basic_income._But in practice IDS is simply removing_benefits._In_theory,_this was to