Founder of award winning @Income_Max | CEO of HumanKIND AI | Creator of #MAX šŸ¤–| STRONGER THAN THE SYSTEM podcast host with Steph

UK
Joined February 2009
šŸ‘£ ā€˜This is a huge first step, but it can't be the only one’ Our conditional scenarios work for #UKPoverty2026 shows how scrapping the two-child limit is expected to benefit 500k families from April. But a more comprehensive plan is needed, says Lead Analyst @Sam_Tims šŸ‘‡
1
28
39
1,403
Is runaway welfare spending to blame for the country's fiscal challenges? We dig into the numbersā¤µļø
3
8
1,240
Please watch this from Angela Haggerty She explains how politicians don't have any experience of using the benefit system Then she explains how difficult it is to get benefits in detail At the end the Reform UK person then objects, asking why there are so many more sick people She corrects him and points out we had a pandemic which affected people in different ways Eventually, Fiona Bruce cuts of her off These 4.5 minutes on #BBCQT humanising the disabled, the poor, and whoever else is in receipt of benefits or support
96
1,299
48
3,641
154,952
Out Today: Universal Credit Work Capability Assessment statistics, April 2019 to September 2025 These statistics cover the number of people on Universal Credit with a health condition or disability restricting their ability to work bit.ly/3MDbhHs
1
1
2
271
Out Today: ESA: outcomes of Work Capability Assessments including mandatory reconsiderations and appeals: December 2025 bit.ly/4pYlCMv
1
1
119
Here we go again - independence for disabled people is too much of a cost clearly…
EXCLUSIVE from @Smyth_Chris Rachel Reeves is preparing to save more than a billion pounds by targeting disabled people’s capacity to get cars through the benefits system Tax breaks worth about Ā£1 billion a year are set to be scrapped in the budget, dramatically reducing an exemption by which cars leased under the scheme do not have to pay VAT or insurance premium tax In another change being considered, BMWs, Mercedes and other luxury cars could be removed from a scheme that provides such premium brands to more than 40,000 benefits claimants Reeves is said to be less likely to go further next month and restrict which benefits recipients are eligible for free cars. But such moves are being examined as part of longer-term reforms to reduce incentives to claim, and deal with mounting criticism of the scheme thetimes.com/uk/politics/art…
2
7
6
903
There is no need for a moral panic about the UK's welfare system. Far from perfect but recent discourse is nuts Spending is controlled
135
229
50
770
202,943
Honoured to be appointed today as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Help for those who need it. Getting people into work. Security for pensioners. And increasing skills and opportunity. 🌹
264
65
23
536
43,381
NEW: Is the internet changing our personalities for the worse? Conscientiousness and extroversion are down, neuroticism up, with young adults leading the charge. This is a really consequential shift, and there’s a lot going on here, so let’s get into the weeds 🧵
381
2,767
753
11,450
2,958,304
Privatisation has turned our essential resource into a cash-cow for profiteers. The Government’s long-awaited reform won’t fix it. If you think everyone should have access to clean, accessible, public water, add your name: actionnetwork.org/forms/wate…
57
724
19
1,526
30,077
Replying to @leehealey_
100% agree @leehealey_
1
1
73
Earlier today, Richard Hughes, chair of the OBR, got to the heart of a significant problem with British politics, which is that politicians don’t feel able to be honest about what is achievable. ā€œThe UK public finances are in an unsustainable position in the long run. The UK cannot afford the array of promises that it has made to the public,ā€ he said. We have an ageing population and a creaking public realm, plus the climate crisis. Yet despite these long-term challenges, for too long people have been led to believe they can have it all.
372
173
167
825
386,571
ā€œBut here’s where it gets interesting. What if BOTH viewpoints - on disabled & sick people being OK and having enough to live on - and work being enough to live on - are RIGHT? Someone working should be able to live… & so should someone with a disability or health issue.ā€ ā¤µļø
ā€œJobless better off on sickness benefits,ā€ scream the headlines this morning. It was inevitable that the next chapter of the sickness and disability benefits debate would move in this direction. It deserves a proper response and I’ll try to provide it in the most balanced way possible, whilst also trying to get into the detail. Let me start by saying that we’re in the middle of one of the most complex and challenging times I’ve ever seen UK society go through. Post-pandemic… high cost of living… poorer health… NHS stretched to the limit… a stuttering economy that’s not quite sure of itself in a modern world stricken by consumist and environmental/climate concerns… wealth inequality… a housing crisis… educational failure for millions… AI and technology… a lack of adequate investment (and vision) by successive Governments including a period of deep austerity… global instability… run-down high streets… millions in debt… millions of people in poverty... millions of people in arrears with rent, energy, water, council tax… councils on the brink of bankruptcy… prisons are full and failing… In short. It’s bleak. And deeply worrying for the future of UK society. You can feel it, everywhere. You know, I know it. There’s uncertainty, there’s anger, and there’s not a lot of hope. ā€œBut Lee,ā€ I hear you ask. ā€œWhat has this got to do with sickness and disability benefits?ā€ EVERYTHING. It’s got everything to do with it. Let me explain why. You can never ever look at the social security system without understanding how society is structured. How it’s SUPPOSED to function. What those ā€˜unspoken’ values and rules are. Society in the UK has always been based on the idea of self-sufficiency through WORK and PENSIONS. There’s even a clue in the name of the Government department. ā€˜Work and Pensions’ is not just a catchy political name. It actually explains how our society is structured, how we’re supposed to look after ourselves and our families, once we become adults. So if we’re supposed to look after ourselves through work and pensions - what’s the point of our social security system? Well, it’s our societal ā€˜safety net.’ Life doesn’t quite work out perfectly for everyone. In fact, as humans we can be vulnerable to A LOT. Our skills and abilities vary. We have disabilities. We get sick. We get unlucky sometimes with our jobs, being made redundant or getting the sack if we don’t perform. We have to care for a loved one. We start a family. We raise kids. We might divorce or separate. Our partner might die. We reach retirement without enough retirement provision. We might suffer an industrial injury or illness. It’s pretty clear then that life doesn’t always run smooth. We need a safety net - an INCOME safety net - for people vulnerable to life’s ups & downs. That’s what our social security system provides. You see, you can’t just look at the headlines this morning without understanding the system AND how we’re supposed to look after ourselves. This is why we need to do better than just shout headlines that inflame and distract. It’s a deeply complex set of problems that requires the deepest understanding of where we’re at as a society. It’s not a new phenomenon that if a disabled or sick person gets EVERYTHING they are entitled to - like UC with the correct health element and housing costs, PIP, council tax support, a blue badge, NHS costs support etc etc… that they will have enough money to live on. It’s not even a headline really. In fact that’s what I’ve spent my entire thirty year career fighting for - as a DWP decision maker at age 19, to a nearly 50 year old Founder and CEO of IncomeMax who now has an army of kind-hearted advisers and super smart AI helping the UK’s most vulnerable people claim everything they are eligible for. That’s a GOOD THING. When someone is disabled or sick I want them to BE OK. I don’t want to see anyone living in poverty, struggling or poor. I don’t want to see anyone cold, hungry, or in debt or living a miserable life. Every single person I’ve ever helped - or that my team has helped - has been genuinely disabled or sick and in need of financial assistance. In fact, so much of my working life has been spent helping disabled and sick people challenge terrible decisions, or appeal against a system that can leave people without the help they need. Disability and sickness is a DRIVER OF POVERTY. It always has been and probably always will be. So now let’s get into the argument. ā€œYou’re better off being sick or disabled than working.ā€ Here we meet the age old problem. The root of the ā€˜scroungers/skivers narrative.’ The headline grabbing, anger inducing, emotion laden narrative which pits humans against humans. ā€œWork is supposed to pay.ā€ ā€œYou shouldn’t be better off not working.ā€ It’s a feeling very few people in UK society would disagree with, and one that makes total sense from a perspective of fairness, responsibility and self-sufficiency. But here’s where it gets interesting. What if BOTH viewpoints - on disabled and sick people being OK and having enough to live on - and work being enough to live on - are RIGHT? Someone working should be able to live… and so should someone with a disability or health issue. Why would we want ANY HUMAN not to be OK? Politics always takes us back here though - dividing lines and divisive rhetoric - human against human, right vs wrong, It’s both infuriating and endlessly frustrating. It’s like politicians can’t and won’t dare to look at the bigger picture. Or perhaps they do, but they don’t dare to want to admit their own failings. It doesn’t have to be like this. With love and kindness there’s a better way. But it takes bravery and courage to take this approach. It means not thinking in terms of right, left or centre. It means seeing things AS THEY ARE. And what MIGHT ACTUALLY BE POSSIBLE. We need a new vision for UK society. One grounded in reality. And LOVE. There’s room for us all as humans. There’s room for us all to thrive. To have purpose. To have enough to live on. To work, volunteer, care, study, work on ourselves, care for our health. To be OK. The first step is to agree that we all have the right to BE OK. Everything can be worked out from there.
1
1
1
4
323
There’s a persistent myth that our government is somehow at the mercy of the financial markets and that it has to dance to their tune. This is most definitely doing the rounds this week, mainly as a result of Labour's mismanagement of its own party, and Rachel Reeves' subsequent very public tears. It’s a myth I have been challenging for years, so let me summarise why. 1. The government creates the money The UK government is the monopoly issuer of the pound. It spends all of that money into existence. Every pound of government spending creates a matching financial asset for someone else. It is only afterwards that the government issues bonds, not because it needs the money, but to provide a safe place for savers to deposit their funds when banks cannot provide this service. This point is critical. The government does not need the markets to ā€˜fund’ its spending. It is simply swapping one form of money (reserves) for another (gilts). Bizarrely, it pays interest to those to whom it provides this service. 2. Gilts are a choice, not a necessity The sale of government bonds, gilts in the UK, is presented as if the government is dependent on the markets to keep spending. This is nonsense. The government issues gilts largely because: It wants to drain reserves from the banking system to help the Bank of England hit its (currently too high) interest rate target. It wants to give pension funds and insurance companies a safe deposit facility to underpin their promises to those who use their services. It believes it must maintain an outdated and now unnecessary City-based financial architecture. None of this means it needs the markets to spend. If no one bought gilts, the government could continue to spend. In fact, as quantitative easing and now quantitative tightening prove, there is no relationship between bond issues and Bank of England market interventions and the capacity of the government to spend: the evidence is all there for anyone to see. 3. The central bank is always the buyer of last resort When financial markets are in turmoil, as happened in the mini-budget fiasco under Liz Truss,Ā  the Bank of England steps in. Its role is to stabilise prices and yields. This is not optional. It is a fundamental part of having a sovereign currency and a central bank that acts as the lender of last resort. This means the financial markets are, in fact, dependent on the government and its central bank. Not the other way around. 4. Interest rates are a policy choice People say, ā€œbut the markets set interest rates, and so they can discipline the government.ā€ Again, this misunderstands monetary operations. The Bank of England sets the base rate. It can cap or control longer-term rates by buying or selling bonds as it chooses. The so-called market rates are policy-contingent. When push comes to shove, the central bank can always enforce the interest rate it wants. 5. What markets really influence is ideology So why the obsession with ā€˜market confidence’? The reality is, politicians and economists often invoke markets to justify austerity. It is easier to say ā€œthe markets demand itā€ than to admit their own ideological choice, which would otherwise be unpalatable to the electorate. Financial markets do, in that case, play a political role, but they do not hold the government hostage. They operate within the monetary framework that the government and its central bank set. We could just as easily choose to run the economy with other priorities, but it does not suit neoliberal politicians to do so. That is because they view politics as the City does, at cost to us all. Summary I keep returning to this issue because it is so fundamental: the UK government is a currency creator, not a currency user. It is not like a household. It does not need to beg or borrow from the markets to spend. Financial markets are accommodated by the government, not the other way around. Understanding this changes everything. It means that economic policy decisions — on public services, investment, climate action, and inequality — are political choices, not technical constraints imposed by bond traders. That is why misinformation on this issue matters so much, and the fact that it is so widespread shows just how strong are the forces that wish to deny that democratic choices can still be made in the UK.
166
982
98
1,695
124,543
We will deliver new Neighbourhood Health Centres across the country to bring care closer to home. Diagnostics, mental health, post-op, rehab, and nursing will all be under one roof. Our Plan for Change is rebuilding the NHS so it’s fit for the future.
562
140
48
505
105,807
I wouldn't ever want to be Chancellor for all the money in the world. Incredibly tough job. Impossible ask. Especially over the last decade. How do you try to piece together the mis-shapen, independent jigsaw pieces of consumer issues, business, the economy, bond markets, stock markets, job markets, world economies, tariffs, and more. People often lambast Chancellors as 'unqualified' but no one is qualified to do such a broad job. Ultimately it is a political role for someone with hopefully some understanding of wider economic, financial and consumer issues. We have to give some respect to those who try, even if we disagree with their decisions. As no one will ever get it all right.
1,609
658
130
8,272
791,242
Cuts to Universal Credit for ill & disabled people that remain in this bill will be deeply harmful, but campaigners & MPs have forced a climbdown on huge swathes of the cuts that were originally proposed. You cannot deliver principled reform to a predetermined savings target
8
99
2
245
7,163
Well…this whole thing could have been avoided if Government consulted properly in the first place. Months of uncertainty and proposals that will make people poorer, only for government to pull and say they will consult. A huge cut to UC health remains so still work to do
7
51
2
245
3,980
(1/2) With a heavy heart, I have written to the Prime Minister to tender my resignation as a whip. Whilst I will continue to support the government in delivering the change the country so desperately needs, I cannot vote in favour of the proposed reforms to disability benefits.
1,487
2,269
548
10,559
1,339,277
We’re told these welfare cuts are the start of ā€œreformā€ But what kind of reform starts by taking billions from those already struggling? If this is the plan - to balance the books by shredding an already ragged safety net - I won’t back it Real reform uplifts. It doesn’t punch-down
251
876
33
2,303
64,562