AIBU to be angry about the benefits system

As you can see from my previous comments, other posters and the OP we think the system is not working properly, in the way that people that don't need them are claiming and have enough for luxuries, some people decide to work part time then get a top up via benefits , and in the meantime time people with disabilities do not get enough.

Spot on.

How is the benefit system "rigged"? If anything, it seems rigged against people who are trying to claim it.

Apply some critical thinking and work it out for yourself. Do you really believe anything the Tories say after they’ve shown us what they really are ?

Yea there are loopholes for the Uber rich, company tax avoidance but that doesn't mean the benefits system is not rigged , how are these different statements mutually exclusive?

She isn’t being subsidised for things that are not needs, PIP covers the extra costs of needs that disabled people have over and above the costs of needs of a regular abled person. In fact, numerous IFS studies have shown that PIP only covers around HALF the extra costs incurred for needs, not wants like holidays and eating out, but needs like extra therapy not provided by the NHS, medical aids not provided by the NHS, extra electricity for medical equipment, wheelchairs or scooters, extra gas to keep a house warm as turning down the thermostat isn’t an option when it could kill you, extra transportation costs, higher food costs as many can’t chop vegetables or cook so need pre-made foods they reheat, funds to cover unpaid sick days off work because being disabled can often mean higher rates of absence from work.

The money spent on holidays and eating out is gotten the SAME way as an abled person, either by working or by general out of work benefits. In fact, disabled people have LESS money than an abled person for this as they are the demographic most likely to be destitute and in poverty.

FFS. If this is how you see it, then you clearly don’t have a clue as to how the benefit system works.

You know that lots of benefit claimants are tax payers, right ? You also know that lots of benefit claimants have contributed to the system while working ? And presumably you know that, with the possible exception of UC, benefits are in the main awarded as set amounts and not tailored to your exact circumstances ? And you know that there’s no facility for paying back what you don’t use ?

Do you really believe that just because you’re claiming benefit you’re not allowed to have some luxuries from time to time ? Why do you think that if claimants can afford to eat out or have their hair done every now and then they’re being paid too much ? There’s tax evasion and exploitation of loopholes going on on an industrial scale. We’ve all seen energy companies allowed to make obscene profits while we’re scared to put the heating on, snd we’ve seen this government wasting vast amounts of tax payers money on absolute crap. But on MN all of that pales in comparison to - god forbid - a benefit claimant actually having the temerity not to want to live in the dark and eat gruel.

I think the ignorance of these comments mostly comes from not understanding how the benefit system works. Different benefits are paid for different reasons and some people clearly don’t apply any critical thinking before commenting. As I said upthread, some people would have benefit claimants standing in a corner in the dark, waiting quietly to die so as not to inconvenience ‘the tax payer’ - conveniently overlooking that very many benefit claimants are taxpayers and have also contributed via NI to the benefits they claim. I was a benefit adviser and it’s depressing how often l came across this attitude - people feeling superior and somehow qualified to pass judgement on others, not only on whether or not they should be claiming benefits, but what they should snd shouldn’t be spending them on.

I know. It is fucking depressing that some people think that way.

You not allowed to, according to some people on here.

I need some nice things in my life, otherwise what is the point? Or am I meant to sit and stare at the same walls all day, eat only gruel, and dress in rags?

I get a certain amount in UC. That amount is determined by DWP, not me. I can't say "just give me enough to pay for bills and food, I don't need the rest". It does not happen like that. I do need UC to live. I sometimes have a bit to spare. That does not mean I am not entitled to it, or should not be getting it. It is nothing like politicians claiming for food at all.

Do you feel comfortable knowing you are subsidized for stuff that are not needs? Like eating out, or holidays, etc. there are obviously no rules or laws about it at the moment. But it's about personal responsibility and ethics. To me it's like politicians claiming for their food when they don't need to be subsidized for that, why take it?

The benefits I receive pays my bills, and means I can eat. If I also spend a bit on nice things, then how does that mean that I should not be receiving any at all? You make no sense.

No one "deserves" anything you either earn it or not. But yeah people think they can choose a certain lifestyle AND wholeheartedly believe they are entitled to life luxuries regardless of who pays for them...the magic money tree, "the government" 🤣

You can't really give the money back. But I am suggesting, if you have money left over for luxuries because of benefits claim, then you shouldn't be claiming benefits. At least I know I would feel like a scammer if I knew I am having take aways, holidays and hair/nail treatments if I am claiming benefits, I mean surely that's not what the benefits system is? So people can have nice things? It should be like good banks a matter of last recourse. Of course you are entitled to your opinion though.

Good job it's nowt to do with you then really.

Again, people can spend their benefits on what they want.

If I generally live frugally, and have spare after bills etc are paid, am I meant to give any extra money back? Is that what you are suggesting?

No, but equally I don't believe people should finance frivolous lifestyles with benefits

Well ..they won't be able now would they because of all the invasive measues the government is now taking...

So the taxpayer should subsidize people's ability to have nice things?

Not all benefits are means-tested... PIP for starters. You can be a millionaire and still be entitled to PIP.

Anyway, what people spend their benefit on is up to them. There are no rules about it, and neither should there be. I get the occasional take away, and even go on holiday. Does that mean I should not be on benefits? Are people on benefits only allowed the absolute bare minimum to survive? Because the people given the bare minimum are those that are temporarily out of work. People unable to work are allowed to have nice things.

Depends how you define ‘whatever they want’ doesn’t it ?

How is it misuse ? The state assesses your entitlement and pays benefit accordingly. If you can save a bit for some of life’s luxuries it doesn’t mean you’re doing anything wrong. Or do you think all benefit claimants should just stand in a corner somewhere and wait to die, in case they’re a burden on the rest of us ?

So basically everyone on benefits - whether too sick or disabled to work or not, should be forced to live a miserable life with no comforts ? Ever stopped to think that some benefits claimants will have other allowable income such as small workplace pensions, UC claimants actually work. Instead of blaming the claimant for their circumstances perhaps look at why they are on benefits in the first place. Anyone who manages to scrimp and save from benefit entitlement deserves whatever they’re saving for. And as has been stated numerous times on MN benefit claimants are tax payers too.

But if they have enough money to spend on whatever they want, they don't really need benefits...