To ask what's the beef with benefits?

wow - this thread is an eye opener. I had always believed that the benefit system was unfit for purpose due to the payments being too low, that fraud was such a tiny problem in monetary terms that it was more expensive to fix than leave, and that if there was anyone at all who actually chose to engage with a 'benefits life style' then society owed them its guilt for not encouraging them to set their sights higher, and not its hatred.

I feel this position I have held on little evidence is now rock solidly supported by the links and evidence put forward here.

Conversely, I've yet to hear of someone who needs their income topped up with HB or Tax Credits or an unemployed individual who would inspire envy in any sane person.

BTL investors have done well, Fat cat employers have done well. BOTH groups lavishly subsidised by benefits.

it's not difficult to understand that there is only a finite amount of income for the government

Fine. Let's get the tax take up then.

We can start by increasing the NMW to Living wage levels (with an initial exemption and phased introduction for employers who are SMEs) and legislate to cap private rents.

That will get the tax take up, reduce the bill for 'in work' benefits and give people a smidgen more in their pockets to spend on the things they need, thereby stimulating the economy.

Win, win, win.

I've said (many times now) that I'm in complete understanding with you, and I fully agree that carers (both full and part time) Should be paid more, because this is after all a real job, (and if you weren't there to do it then a carer would be provided that got paid a shed load more than that anyway!) and that respite care should be available to carers, (not just an hour to go get your hair done or some other trivial thing, but actual "time off".)

However, what I am also saying is that it's not difficult to understand that there is only a finite amount of income for the government, that endless borrowing isn't a solution for government, and that practically everybody pays more tax than they can comfortably afford. (there are only a few people who don't have a hard time.)

'I can't see anyone who purports to receive benefits showing that they feel any empathy for anyone working struggling to survive and paying tax to provide the very welfare system that they are reliant on.

Are you aware how very many people on benefits DO work?

Something like 90% of all new applications to housing benefits (not sure if 2013 or 2014) were made by working people. Working tax credits are a benefit, some carers work as do many disabled people.

Husband works: self employed and very long hours. The hire company was only set up last year so it's early days but he does make a profit; I don't think he has had a day off though in that time, even if we are away he disappears off and works online. Away is a week in a tent: I am grateful for that, indeed I booked a week today and am excited, but it's far cost wise (£190 in fact) from the holidays we used to have. That's OK by me, but I swear some people see the word holiday and think we're off to the Med for an all inclusive for a fortnight or something.

And we paid more than enough over our lives so far to have the right to complain so that one can get stuffed as a concept;

I don't think an opinion gained from purely reading is as valid as an experientially derived one, though it has it's place as there are many things not everyone can experience. it's important though to listen to people in the system as well.

I DO think the system is flawed but a lot of that comes from recent changes, especially to the disability system. It would also be cheaper to run the welfare system if there were more social housing options rather than paying private landlords higher rents than in the social sector. I know many landlords are lovely and so won't criticise or generalise about that, but it's true that a social home saves money that way and remains a council / HA asset, where private rent covered by LHA is just dead money as far as the system is concerned.

Benefits are clearly way too high. Obviously I did the sensible thing when I was pregnant, making sure I drank and ate soft cheese and pate* and everything to ensure a maximum benefit payout but even then I hadn't known that i'd get the really high amount of £61 a week in Carer's Allowance- it's a luxurious lifestyle I wish I'd adopted before my degree, I regularly berate myself for not making the wise choices in life sooner.

• If you need clarifying that that's crap, then you have issues. They have a genetic disorder (form of autism) that we didn't know DH carried until last year, youngest is six.

LMAO at the distinction between rich and poor: yeah OK. We were doing very nicely indeed until everything went tits up- it took the boy's needs and a redundancy to knock us back down. At no point has this ever been a work free household, but it's far from a well off one now.

Dawndonna- hugs. Eldest turns 16 in the inter and dreading the whole PIP thing. Luckily although he needs a lot of care he's quite bright and wants to study social policy so hopefully will be able to help turn things around for us carers X

Do you know what, unique I really couldn't give a damn. If you look at my posts, one of them was around three o' clock this morning. Those poor, poor fuckers who may or may not have had tax cuts were being paid a site more than the 65 quid a week carer's allowance I get for what at the moment is a 23 hour day. I'm close to tears, I have to take dd for her PiP assessment later today, I have organised care for dh who is currently the main person disrupting my sleep. When I have lifted a 5'7", 11 stone woman in and out of the car, pushed her around somewhere that doesn't actually have disabled parking on site, sorted out her PiP stuff, I will come home, sort dh out and then cook for a family. I may get to sit down for an hour around nine. May. So, petty little arguments with those who somehow feel that they are in some way, superior, on the internet really don't interest me at present. If you've got something to say about benefits, I suggest you do so, however, try to do so with clear sentence structure, punctuation, capital letters et al, because your posts are a tad difficult to work out in their current layout.

Have some further info, though.

ok, then let me state the obvious. in the context of the discussion, with the evidence provided that is true.

that is not to say that "the rich" haven't had tax cuts (the removal of the 50p rate shows that "they" have had tax cuts. -and specifically in income tax!)
but the figures show that combined with said cuts have been tax rises as well.

Overall, "the rich" are currently paying more in income taxes than they did under previous governments. (I've linked figures that show this to be true over a number of years)

Notice I didn't say that they hadn't

like this coalition government haven't cut taxes for the rich

?

Notaunique I doubt your factual info re Hitler came from curtain twitching and the Daily Mail.

Written before I became disabled I had peace of mind knowing I could hop on the 86 bus! Can you really not see the difference between want and need?
Also I hope to keep leasing my car for five years. Many people do not want a new car every three years. The advance payments and adaptations can run into thousands.

not

Of course you can

That comment was directed at those on the thread who were telling claimants that they could not complain about the system and then were complaining about the system themselves

I don't think you did that

So let me make sure I've got this straight
It's not ok for people in receipt of benefits (whether it be DLA, pensions,
in work benefits) and have experience of benefits to complain about
the benefits system and say it's not fit for purpose
But it's fine for people not in receipt of benefits (YET) and have
no experience of the benefits system to complain about the benefits
system and say it's not fit for purpose

I've got an opinion about Hitler based only on what I've read also, is this wrong?

Is it impossible to read about a system, and decide that it is broken?
Is it impossible to agree with people who are in receipt of benefits that the system is flawed? (even though I've no real personal experience?)

And yeah I get why 'sainted taxpayer' is going to rile.
I don't it's clearly a joke,

notaunique it's a bloody nonsense, this government has cut taxes for the rich.
Notice I didn't say that they hadn't, what I said was that of the total income tax bill collected, under a previous government the poor had contributed more and the rich contributed less (as expressed as a percentage of the total bill) than they do now.
and gave a link to a table that was released by the ONS to show that:
<a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121106103415/www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/income_tax/table2-4.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121106103415/www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/income_tax/table2-4.pdf

It's not nonsense or stories, it's an inconvenient "fact" about income tax if you have a particular political agenda.
Of course there are plenty of ways that the government have done the opposite of this also.

All works are usually carried out the same day, not so easy when perhaps parts are required for an older car.
Companies like GSF, EuroCarparts, Allparts etc do same day delivery on all parts ordered that day before midday. There is not a big stock of car parts waiting sat about ready to be used at most garages?

Does any one really support "food vouchers"? with the obvious problems? that even the "most law abiding citizen" would happily send someone with food vouchers to pick up some chicken, and in return they'd pick up some beer when they shopped. -food vouchers couldn't possibly work, even if they were tied to people via their finger prints. people could (and would) find a way to get what they want in life.
(was that comment aimed at me? I'm the only one to openly admit that I don't understand how benefits work?)

A pp suggested a thread on how to produce cheap meals - what a grand idea. That's never been done before on MN.

Show the poor benefits claimants how to cook, since they can't cope with anything other than oven chips.

written I'm aware of that, but most people are able to get a bus or a train if necessary, many of those in receipt of higher rate mobility (which is what you need to be able to access motability) would be unable to do so. Hence the scheme.

The main point, other than easy access to transport for the many reasons listed, is security, peace of mind.

ok, so it's not that it's a false economy to a second hand vehicle, it's that you get peace of mind and security. that's different. I understand that somebody with mobility issues may find that security is much more of a necessity, but keep in mind that's something that most people don't get as they can't afford it.

Thanks eat

I now understand where I have been going wrong

I've been assuming that people who receive benefits (including DLA and other in work benefits and pensions, child benefit etc) know how the system works and can see the flaws

Really what I should have been doing is making up what ever I like based on the fact a friend of mine saw someone she used to know 10 years ago and who is on benefits getting her hair cut...obvs benefits are dead easy to get, pay out too much and allow you to live the life of Riley. What do all these people need with medicine and heat anyway

Silly me!!

I'm off to check out my new lifestyle choice

And by the way, I absolutley believe that there are some people out there receiving benefits who are taking the mick, but very few!!! And probably proportional to this tax payers who are taking the mick as well. But I assume that the vast, vast amount of people claiming all the many forms of benefit there are out there (child benefit anyone? Pension? Or are you going to be handing that back?) are doing so because they need to

So let me make sure I've got this straight

It's not ok for people in receipt of benefits (whether it be DLA, pensions, in work benefits) and have experience of benefits to complain about the benefits system and say it's not fit for purpose

But it's fine for people not in receipt of benefits (YET) and have no experience of the benefits system to complain about the benefits system and say it's not fit for purpose

written We don't always purchase on the mobility scheme. Many cars are leased via the scheme giving the person options that may not be available to them otherwise. The main point, other than easy access to transport for the many reasons listed, is security, peace of mind. There may be a 'sweet spot', there may be cars that are good for five to ten years and I'm sure an allowance would be good, but for three years, total peace of mind is guaranteed. The only problem I have ever had is that I can rarely get a loan car (when car is being serviced) big enough to carry a wheelchair. Fine if dd is at school and staying there, but a problem otherwise. All works are usually carried out the same day, not so easy when perhaps parts are required for an older car. The peace of mind is very important.
Oh, and the mobility allowance is used to cover all of this. The government is doing nothing more than allowing us to use our benefit as a loan. Motability is a business.

How have I got the choice and others haven't, it's not all just luck is it?

Sheesh. No handcream that'll be your innate superiority, magically protecting you from mishap and serious illness.

What a nasty thread.

Also housing - right to buy being extended to people in employment.

I beg your pardon?

Who do you think has the RTB OP?