While I am totally against the cuts (esp with the olympics and wars being paid out for) and I hate the jobcentre with a passion (they are just a joke outfit), I do wonder about the sanity of the individual who did this.

I'm not sure it warrants quite the fanfare it's getting.

If those vile despiccable cunts at Atos had "wondered about the sanity" of this person they wouldn't have had their benefit cut and been driven to this desperate act.

Millions of people work and millions of people are unemployed....
they all seem to get by without self-harm.

I don't think the benefits issue is really a big deal here.
There are plenty of other people who cause themselves self-harm who are in work.

The issue is his mental health, for which he obviously needs help.
Giving him 'money' isn't really solving the problems he has.

"Giving him money is not whats required"
It might not help him reclaim his sanity IF that is the issue but it will keep him fed and housed and clothed while he seeks the help he needs!

You callous right-wing troll, you sound like Norman Tebbit. It's the rich who are bleeding society white, not people like this poor bloke, who was driven to set himself on fire by hard-hearted scum like you.

He is not the first person to suffer through the benefits cuts
 http://iccoventry.icnetwork.co.uk/nuneaton-tribune/bedworth-news/tm_headline=bedworth-couple-found-dead-in-suicide-tragedy&method=full&objectid=29755411&siteid=50003-name_page.html

"Millions of people work and millions of people are unemployed.... they all seem to get by without self-harm."

That's right, self-harm never happens.

Quote from Jackie, above:

"Millions of people work and millions of people are unemployed....
they all seem to get by without self-harm.

I don't think the benefits issue is really a big deal here.
There are plenty of other people who cause themselves self-harm who are in work.

The issue is his mental health, for which he obviously needs help.
Giving him 'money' isn't really solving the problems he has."

* * *

What exactly is your point here? Self-harm happens regardless of employment status, ergo self-immolators are perfectly fit to work? Who do you work for, Jackie, ATOS? Or perhaps you're saying that, by virtue of the extreme nature of the act, we should dismiss this man as 'insane'. It's an isolated incident, nothing to see here, move along. He's not self-harming in a moderate, socially responsible way, i.e. behind closed doors after a hard day's work or whilst complying with his Jobseekers Agreement in a futile job market. Do you realise that the 'millions don't do x so the person that does do x isn't valid' is a logically fallacious argument? It's actually meaningless.

Of course the benefits is the issue, why on Earth do you think he made the poignant decision to make this protest at the Jobcentre? It's an act of desperation. In essence it's a political act too. You say he obviously needs help with his mental health issue, well money for food and shelter IS help, or does that only count when it comes from charity and not the tax-payer? I'm sure this man could do with other help too, perhaps from mental health services, but when you factor in that at the very same time people like him are losing their sickness benefits, the government is forcing councils to slash funding to critical services that act as a lifeline (including those that support people with disabilities back into work), and forcing them into a job market they're not ready to cope with, then you have the perfect storm of desperation that leads someone to self-immolate at a Jobcentre. If desperation is the symptom, Jackie, then the problem is the savaging of the welfare state that causes it. Throwing everyone off sickness benefits (which is effectively what it happening via ATOS barring the most severe cases that have good advocacy) is an exercise in seeing who will sink and who will swim. And fuck those who drown eh? This is a recession, so a policy of Social Darwinism is perfectly permissable. We can't afford to be a progressive society, so let's ride the Tory Express back to the Victorian era.

It's easy to call someone a nutjob and dismiss their despair and fears, but there is no binary either/or definition of SANE/INSANE when it comes to mental health. I can empathise with the man who set himself on fire because I'm in almost exactly the same situation, and I feel desperate too, suicidal even. ATOS don't believe I'm a risk, despite having not done anything approaching a risk assessment. I'm an intelligent person who can certainly present a more cogent and articulate argument than you can Jackie, but I suppose you'd just dismiss me as insane too, and hence my views are rendered immaterial. Ignore the outliers, folks, most people self-harm discretely after watching Emmerdale, and they still go to work the next day, with their sleeves rolled down to hide the scars, like good citizens should. The rest are just loons that need to be locked up.

> most people self-harm discretely after watching Emmerdale

I would too!

> most people self-harm discretely after watching Emmerdale

No they don't - thats bullshit. Any evidence to support this?

I notice that this geezer cost the taxpayer for support, cost the tax payer for hospital and will no doubt cost the tax payer in the future. Sympathy?.......noooooooo. Should give him a job fixing all the potholes in the road.

"> most people self-harm discretely after watching Emmerdale

No they don't - thats bullshit. Any evidence to support this? "

If you had actually read through my post properly it would have been obvious that I was being ironic in reference to Jackie's previous post. Are you really so stupid that you couldn't detect that? Or did you just skim through without paying attention?

Since you obviously need it spelt out to you, it was about this statement by Jackie:

"I don't think the benefits issue is really a big deal here. There are plenty of other people who cause themselves self-harm who are in work. The issue is his mental health, for which he obviously needs help."

Jackie suggests that the fact someone self-immolates in front of a Jobcentre in desperation is irrelevant and that his act is dismissed as being due to mental health issues. Jackie also seems to suggest that because people who work self-harm too, there is no causal link between this man's situation (having his sickness benefits taken away) and his act or that he's an extreme case because he's mentally ill and not functional enough to work, Of course that's the point entirely, he's ill and genuinely in need of support, and, in extremis, he resorts to setting himself on fire as an act of protest. Clearly he has the wherewithal to know the agency that are taking away his lifeline and placing him in such dire straights. Without that sort of pressure he never would've self-immolated. Clearly it wasn't simply the random act of an insane person, but that's what people like Jackie want to believe as they want to avert their eyes from the desperation people are facing.

As for this:

"I notice that this geezer cost the taxpayer for support, cost the tax payer for hospital and will no doubt cost the tax payer in the future. Sympathy?.......noooooooo. Should give him a job fixing all the potholes in the road."

Hmmm, so the criterion for whether someone deserves sympathy or not is based on whether the support they need would come from the state or from their own funds. That's an interesting approach to ethics. What would be a better system, pray tell? Eugenics? Perhaps you'd feel better in a society that ignores the vulnerable and leaves them to starve or freeze on the street. You're a real humanitarian buddy. Oh, and that last sentence, just to be sure you understand it correctly.... I was being ironic.

All the bile you spout really exposes is that you're a heartless wretch. I hope you find a time machine that can take you back to the dark ages, because that's where your thinking belongs. Better still go to the US and join up with the Tea Party.