Likewise, there are experts in neurology and psychology who dismiss said assertions, pointing to our progress in understanding and ability to diagnose now what we couldn’t previously.
Many individuals previously labelled “difficult”, “lazy”, and “unmotivated” are now understood to be afflicted with medical problems. We can’t yet do all that much about it, but we know more than we did.
As you can see, it largely depends on how much background knowledge you already have on the subject at hand as to what conclusions can be drawn from the wording.
Perhaps your view might not be the correct one, after all?
Edit: It is worth drawing attention to the fact that it suits no politician to lose the oft derided “lazy do-nothings” supposedly responsible for society’s decline, or at the least a “drain on hard working families”.
The pounds sterling cost of the entire welfare state would fit numerous times over into the unpaid taxes of the likes of Amazon et al.
So who exactly are the politicians really looking out for?
Edit 2: Going forward, Labour under Starmer will continue to be Tories in Red ties. The less well educated voters will, instead of “voting Labour 'cos they always have” will be taken in by “the pretty lie” and vote for Farage’s Fascists instead, you just watch.
Edit 3: took only six days before the announcement that they’re going to give money to US corporations via a tax cut.
Fuck Starmer, fuck the modern “Labour” party, fuck the entire first past the post, two party entitlement that got us here in the first place.
Equally, we shouldn’t label certain patterns of thinking as ‘disordered’ when they’re actually just different. We certainly shouldn’t medicate differences away. Over diagnosing is (almost by definition) not a good thing and we should take seriously the possibility that it’s happening with some disorders. This in no way precludes supporting those who do have disorders.
The problem is not the factual accuracy of what he’s saying but why he would say it.
To anyone who follows politics even remotely, Wes clearly here is doing a dog whistle. He’s signalling to the boomers that labour also thinks people with mental health issues are just lazy. Hes doing reactionary politics on purpose.
However, until the “world of work” accepts those “differences” without needing laws to force them to do so, labelling of differences will remain a requirement for those that require the help.
Taking away some the pittance they get to assist with how the world refuses to service the “different” is bad enough, to justify it with intentionally bent statistics and the medical opinions of “experts” that are actually economists is pure Tory territory.
Starmer’s Labour is as bent as they come, and they’re handing power to Reform at the next election with their disgusting policies. Calling it now for future reference.
Likewise, there are experts in neurology and psychology who dismiss said assertions, pointing to our progress in understanding and ability to diagnose now what we couldn’t previously.
Many individuals previously labelled “difficult”, “lazy”, and “unmotivated” are now understood to be afflicted with medical problems. We can’t yet do all that much about it, but we know more than we did.
As you can see, it largely depends on how much background knowledge you already have on the subject at hand as to what conclusions can be drawn from the wording.
Perhaps your view might not be the correct one, after all?
Edit: It is worth drawing attention to the fact that it suits no politician to lose the oft derided “lazy do-nothings” supposedly responsible for society’s decline, or at the least a “drain on hard working families”.
The pounds sterling cost of the entire welfare state would fit numerous times over into the unpaid taxes of the likes of Amazon et al.
So who exactly are the politicians really looking out for?
Edit 2: Going forward, Labour under Starmer will continue to be Tories in Red ties. The less well educated voters will, instead of “voting Labour 'cos they always have” will be taken in by “the pretty lie” and vote for Farage’s Fascists instead, you just watch.
Edit 3: took only six days before the announcement that they’re going to give money to US corporations via a tax cut.
Fuck Starmer, fuck the modern “Labour” party, fuck the entire first past the post, two party entitlement that got us here in the first place.
Guy Fawkes was onto something.
Equally, we shouldn’t label certain patterns of thinking as ‘disordered’ when they’re actually just different. We certainly shouldn’t medicate differences away. Over diagnosing is (almost by definition) not a good thing and we should take seriously the possibility that it’s happening with some disorders. This in no way precludes supporting those who do have disorders.
The problem is not the factual accuracy of what he’s saying but why he would say it.
To anyone who follows politics even remotely, Wes clearly here is doing a dog whistle. He’s signalling to the boomers that labour also thinks people with mental health issues are just lazy. Hes doing reactionary politics on purpose.
You are correct for the most part.
However, until the “world of work” accepts those “differences” without needing laws to force them to do so, labelling of differences will remain a requirement for those that require the help.
Taking away some the pittance they get to assist with how the world refuses to service the “different” is bad enough, to justify it with intentionally bent statistics and the medical opinions of “experts” that are actually economists is pure Tory territory.
Starmer’s Labour is as bent as they come, and they’re handing power to Reform at the next election with their disgusting policies. Calling it now for future reference.