TBH I didn't think I'd need to provide a comprehensive list of linked facts considering that there have been plenty of articles in the main stream media upon the subject of increased hate crimes against the disabled etc and if anyone had any issue with what I was saying it is VERY simple to 'google'.
I suppose it's also because that is simply how I converse and conduct myself, that being the high importance of being honest and truthful as I hold my word as sacrosanct. I don't lie or mislead to gain material or status advantage because trust in my word is too valuable to me to lose.
I'm not naive enough to believe either that I should take everything everyone else says as true, nor that I should expect people to automatically respect my word. However, what I do hope is that my record overtime, especially with continued interactions with individuals and communities is clear evidence of my honesty and the high value I place on the truth - having been a member of this forum community for around 20yrs.
Again, I don't expect it, but I endeavor to maintain those values.
Yes, I do tend to make long winded posts that are not to everyone's taste or appreciation, especially those that are ideologically opposed to what I have to say.
As you have stated you are a big believe in 'choice', you could say that it's my choice to post that way, just as, it's your 'choice' whether you bother to read and respond to it.
Yeah, it's only a few more disabled people getting beaten up and abused, not like it really matters in the scheme of things.
Just because there is a corellation between what the government and ministers say about groups in our society and the way the public attitudes change towards those groups doesn't mean we should automatically challenge the government or those attitudes.
We should first take into account whether we give a toss about those particular groups, whether having to think about or address those issues might challenge our ideological world views and our own self worth - we certainly don't want to have to deal with guilt or struggle with whether we are a good person or not simply because we hold over simplistic and negative opinions about those groups that can't stand up to scrutiny.
Much better that we measure the impact on our economy and whether it will effect us or not before deciding on if it matters.
Even if it ends up leading to actual losses of money, wastage and suffering, as long as our own suffering is minimal and we can carry on as normal in our beliefs, then fair enough.

And yet you used it in a discussion about the government demonising the sick and disabled.
You think pointing to what even scope said were important legislative changes to address discrimination towards the disabled is cherry picking?
It's direct evidence of the government helping disabled people.
As is helping 600k more of them get into work.
It's not that long ago people were attacking the Tories for closing remploy (ignoring that labour started that process) as the disabled needed a route into work. Well 600k additional jobs for the disabled later, well done Tories.
Anyone speak louder than words. Especially when after asking multiple times, the only words you guys can come up with are those from people not in the government.
What have government and ministers said? I keep asking for examples of this demonisation.
Meanwhile here are more examples of the positive things the government has done or is doing for the disabled.
Theresa May just unveiled her plan to get one million more disabled people into work
Equality Act 2010: guidance - GOV.UK
Here are some speeches where they affirm their support for the sick and disabled
The shared society: Prime Minister's speech at the Charity Commission annual meeting - GOV.UK
Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP: speech on work, health and disability | Reform
It's evidence of disabled people being physically attacked and harassed.
There are 13 million disabled people in the UK, 7% are children and 44% are pensioners.
That means there are 6.37 million people of working age that are disabled.
Even if we take the increase of 600K disabled people working as direct evidence of the government helping disabled people - which I dispute for the reasons further down, that doesn't mean they are also not harming disabled people as a result of their policies and messages.
If I give 10% of pensioners a bonus to their pensions but at the same time start randomly punching pensioners in the face, it still means I am punching pensioners in the face.
To help justify the cuts to disability benefits and get the public on board, the government chose to emphasise the cheats and shirkers as well as over play the costs and numbers of both.
While the government is not directly punching the disable in the face, their polices and messages have contributed to an increase in anger and aggression towards the disabled, which has led to an increase in assaults and harassment against the disabled.
Also, while an increasing number of disabled people may have found work, many including both children and pensioners have suffered financially, physically and emotionally from the governments benefits policies and implementation.
Just how many reports, court cases and failures of the system that have shown just how badly and in some cases illegally the government have treated the disabled do you have to ignore and stick your fingers in your ears about in order to convince yourself the government are 'helping' the disabled ?
Interesting yet more words that aren’t related to what I said. Nobody is questioning your integrity. But please do not think that opinion is the same as fact or disagreeing with someone’s opinion is the same as calling them a liar.
To me that comes across like a rant where someone is too closely involved in the subject matter with loads of exaggerations and dramatic expressions. In my experience it then doesn’t matter what response comes back as there will always be disagreement.
I’ve just opened my post for today, and it is actually relevant. My annual indexation for a private policy was included listing the renewed figures for my annual income in case I die or will become disabled. Two different figures in our case as death is also covered by other policies and linked to a decreasing term mortgage.
Anyhow; why don’t more people take care of their own private insurance in the event of disability? Why rely on others, the government, with changing policies. If you don’t want to rely on what others think the reasonable amount should be then why not invest in your own policy to ensure you stick to your own standards?
Personal responsibility I call it. That then can also leave more for those who have been disabled from birth and never got this opportunity. I think it is kinder that way.
Oh it's a rant, that bit you got right.
The same argument for pensions, privatised medical care instead of the NHS etc.
That is not the system we have because a percentage of the population will either through neglect or hardship find themselves in a situation where they are in trouble and have no access to help otherwise - and we as a society consider that to be wrong.
As someone who has been disabled from birth - because my condition is neuropsychiatric I would technically benefit from your suggested policy, but I still disagree.
I would rather not have more money and support if it is at the cost of someone who gets sick or disabled later in life and doesn't get any money and support because they didn't foresee it or didn't have a large enough income to believe it made sense.
Public opinion is in favor of public healthcare, state pensions and benefits for the disabled, so you most certainly are in a minority with your opinions and at odds with the general societal consensus of the UK.