ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Don't cap my benefits - BBC1(265 Posts)
Anyone notice that woman's baby was wearing polarn clothes. Quite pricey aren't they? Just sayin...
My husband made the point that we are moving 150 miles away from our current lovely, lovely location and house and friends for his job. Moving because you have to for the sake of your family is not new...
But I so get not wanting to move your family away from family and friends. It's heartbreaking for us to have to do it, but do it we must. Sob.
Also, I have to say, we're not able to afford to have more children so we're not going to - I believe people have to take responsibilities for their reproductive choices, surely that's not beyond the wit of man?!
Some of the stories are heartbreaking though.
I hate this fucking government.
We have two children and would love another. Can't afford it though.
I think the man was spot on when he said if you choose to have 7 kids you can't afford to live in London. So true. They made their choice.
I chose not to have any more children because I felt guilty enough as I survive on benefits. DS is profoundly disabled. I do not want to be further burden. I feel very guilty.
I watched this. Its an absolute shambles, this cap has been introduced and people didnt think it would affect them, then lo and behold it does, quite drastically.
I do feel that the government/housing authority have handled things badly while introducing this cap. But on the flip side; people need to take personal responsibility for their lifestyle choices, and that includes number of children in a family.
I do feel for people who have to move away from family, friends and schools but this isnt a new thing.
I don't know how the benefits cap is worked out. Does seem very unfair.
You do know these programmes are made to induce exactly what the government wants you to believe about 'people on benefits'
My next door neighbour wants another baby as it will mean more benefits. She actually told me this.
The system seems ridiculously complicated.
And the last words by David Cameron 'The purpose of Welfare is to help people into work'
NO DAVID it's to help and support those out of work
So Annie tell me how it really is then?
From what I understand (am very prepared to be wrong) if you work a minimum of 16 hours the cap doesn't apply.
There is a life outside london, there are schools in more reasonably priced area's if someone doesn't/won't/can't work what is wrong with suggesting they should live in a more resonably priced area?
Equally why do people have 5 / 6 / 7 children with no job or means to support them??
While I did feel some people could make better life choices I appreciate not everyone has the education to appreciate that. The main thing that horrified me was the rents - it's not like the claimants get the money, it goes to the landlords. They all have an 'income' on pair with my husbands and he's a higher rate tax payer. Mind you we move out of London to an area where we knew no one because we couldn't afford the life we wanted in London. If Neither of us were working I like to think I would just be grateful to live in a country which would provide a roof over my head and finance to allow me and DCs not to starve.
I have also assumed (may be wrong) that if it is the case that you are unable to work due to disability that the cap doesn't apply?
It doe not apply to us as DS is disabled. Thank God. I do feel for the families it has effected. I have to pay bedroom tax now. £12.00 per week. I do struggle financially but rules is rules.
I don't live in London because I can't afford to. I don't see why other people should live there at the taxpayer's expense. I also find it hard to be sympathetic to people who have 7 or 9 children and then complain that they can't afford to house them. There are plenty of working people who deliberately don't have more children because they can't afford to. What about that Ethiopian British citizen who despite having children who were blatantly secondary school age had never worked in the 12 years she has been in Britain - how can that be right?
I did feel sorry for the children, but that woman who ended up in the hostel was just mad. They made it clear that if she worked 16 hours she could keep her house and be better off, but she refused to listen. She has time to volunteer. She must have childcare while at college, therefore in theory (without knowing the details) she should have time and childcare to enable her to work.
Utterly amazing the amounts sone people are getting in benefits £800-£1000 a week!! You need to be earning a high salary to take that home.
As for the woman at college she could have helped herself and worked instead of volunteering but chose not to and now her kids are living in a hostel. Why would she make that choice?
There is something very wrong with a system where people in work can't afford to have more than two children but people claiming benefit get more money the more children they have.
like all these programmes, i strongly suspect lack of the full story in some cases.
what happened to all the social housing? It got sold off.
the landlords are not renewing benefits tenancies because they can get more money from non-benefits tenants. This is because everyone wants to live in London. Before we al scream 'dirty landlords', what would YOU do if you ran a business and could make it more profitable?(or even profitable at all - thereby keeping YOUR family housed and fed)
the programme could not be made in other parts of the country where market forces work and rents are not limitless. I guess that the grand idea is to make London sensible like the rest of the country - but this is not the way to do it.
but I have NO sympathy for those refusing to move for financial reasons, nor for those who have had large families in circumstances where finance is very limited. Neither of these choices are afforded to those who fund themselves.
Does the government offer financial support for childcare if someone decided they did want to work the 16 hours?
i saw the programme today. i felt like some of those benefits officers needed retraining on a bit of compassion, that emotion humans are supposed to have, a heart maybe? sure they are simply doing their jobs but they seemed aloof almost desensitized to human emotions. I thought it was normal when someone near by is crying and telling you of their dire situation to maybe put a hand over their shoulder. Say you are sorry even though it is not your fault, show you bloody care.
where are the men in these situations the dads? i saw several lone mothers with small children. one lady had 5 kids. now unless she went to a sperm bank there is a man out there responsble for these kids. why is the council not chasing them for money? im sure that would help these women to use that money on rent arrears and food instead?
also i think society has a problem with people having kids and people who have lots of kids are looked down upon as the scum of the earth. ie that man with 7 kids, people are sure to mention him. but one thing he was doing which all failed to mention is work. the other parents not one was working. he was commuting miles away with no money for the commute, and commuting kids to school. in the end his perseverance paid off didnt it, they rehoused him in the borough he wanted to be in.
the single mothers with small children were being hounded to work. one was told she was a tiny amount short of her rent each month? they said if she worked up to 16 hrs she would make the rent and have extra. but would she really? how would her childcare costs be covered? she had 3 small kids would government vouchers cover the costs or would she be forking out again hence in arrears with rent again?Again why is the father not paying for the upkeep of the kids im sure that would help her.
Not for children over a certain age Never. Finding childcare for a disabled child ie child-minder is impossible.
Having a Father in the Army meant I attended 13 Schools, the longest was for four years, and the shortest was for two weeks; so I have little sympathy for someone who has to move and their children change schools.
Anyone who has 7 children under the age of 9, who works and earns £150 a week and then receives £800 a week in benefits, who is moved to a house thirty miles away, should perhaps be thinking about contraception and a stair gate, rather than complain that the stairs at the new house are dangerous, (looked like a normal flight of stairs to me). It was interesting to see that he was driving his children back to their old school each day.
It was also interesting to see that most families featured, had young babies.
I've often said that benefit recipients should not get extra benefit for children born whilst the parents are on benefit. After all, I wouldn't get a pay rise at work if I had another child.
Join the discussion
Please login first.