To think the level of state involvement many posters expect is bonkers?

So it's cheap to process asylum seekers but too expensive to means test state pensions or free prescriptions or winter fuel allowances for OAPs as you've have said several times in other threads. Can't quite work out how the cost can be so different when it's a virtually identical admin task.

@usernamealreadytaken 24m work FT, 8m work PT.

People in FT employment but on a lower wage may well be claiming benefits of one type or another inc child benefit.
Many jobs are PT, the employer doesn't need a FT worker.

If the UK paid its workers more, they'd pay more tax but many UK companies would rather hike prices but keep wages low.

Why shouldn't the wealthy pay more tax? unearned income attracts just 20%, yet the investor could be earning v large amounts of money.

Low growth under this Govt is a huge problem, as i said, half the rates as our competitors in the EU but lets blame the migrant instead.

But then how do you provide care for your elderly relatives, which is also apparently expected - and pressure to do so will only increase with our aging population?

I didn’t say it was easy or cheap. I said would cost less than the government’s current solution. Means testing and processing asylum seekers are two completely different things, you’re comparing chalk and cheese.

ChishiyaBat · Yesterday 23:05
@Noras Underclass? What the fuck?! Who do you mean by that?

It's a term which translates Marx's category 'lumpenproletariat', denoting people (emphatically NOT the working class) who are frequently unemployed, or have never been employed, may be semi-criminal and indulge in habitual anti-social behaviour: drug abuse, theft, vandalism, aggression towards people in the community etc etc. It's always been a headache for governments...oh, and the people they live amongst.

It may have been 'cancelled' as a sociological term, but it was definitely once used by academics trying to describe this phenomenon. You can check this if you don't believe me. People can virtue-signal all they like, but to deny the existence of this societal group would be very difficult indeed! By all means, find a trendier label!

Well ok? It's still cheaper rent than private renting. I'm buying shared ownership soon btw and the other percent is owned by a housing association so the rent percent is cheaper. I'm very happy with this I know there's people out there with shared ownership and the other percent is owned by a private company and they're getting massively screwed over.

I think a lot of council tenants don't realise how chea their rent is compared to private renting I was talking to a friend a few months ago who was moaning about their council rent going up on their three bed house and it was still cheaper than the rent on my current one bed apartment 😂😭 (I have kids and i sleep on the sofa btw)

And before we get in to the "process them quicker and let them work" argument; how many staff do you think it would take to process several hundred applications a day? Oh look, another bloated government department...

How much is it costing to send a few of them to Rwanda? Many times more than processing applications I bet.

We may have record numbers of people in work, but a significant proportion of them are either not paying tax (part time) or claiming benefits which negate their tax contribution. Direct tax receipts are largely paid by higher quantile earners
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/

Nearly half of all the money raised by income tax is paid out in benefits (excl pensions). Even if we assume that approx £45bn paid in disability benefits is all for genuine claimants, that still leaves nearly £90bn being paid to people who aren't working or are working part time. And then everyone wants the government (otherwise known as those taxpayers) to pay for more and more and more.

And let's not even mention the several hundred people arriving here every day being supported by those self-same taxpayers. And before we get in to the "process them quicker and let them work" argument; how many staff do you think it would take to process several hundred applications a day? Oh look, another bloated government department...

Because you’re one of the few using benefits etc as help when it’s genuinely needed and wanting to then regain independence financially

No. @MistressoftheDarkSide is one of the majority "using benefits etc as help when it’s genuinely needed". Most benefit claimants are genuine.

We ve record numbers of people IN work.

NHS (and all the other services you mention) of course is getting more than ever but its not when inflation is taken into account plus its even worse than this because medical inflation runs much higher than CPI.

Councils? Business rates have been cut and council tax has risen by 5% p.a or less in most areas, inflation has been 11% at times over the last 2 years.

Govt support has been cut to councils, its so bad now that my local uk council cannot fill some pot holes even when they are dangerous, yet when i go back to France, i have smooth roads and mtce is still being done.

Yes more people than ever, driven by a disastrous migration policy, where dependants of workers are higher than worker visas given out, we have a situation where migration is 3x higher than in 2010 but we still have worker shortages.....

Another problem is since Covid our economy has hardly grown, 1.8%, EU area has grown 3.7%, hence we have far less money.

Economic inactivity has been pretty stable for the last 30 years. Statistically the proportion of tax payers is the same.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/economicinactivity/timeseries/lf2s/lms

Government provision hasn't shrunk though, it's just spread more thinly. There are more people but fewer taxpayers, which means we pay more, the services are spread thinly and nobody feels they have value for money. The NHS is getting more money than ever before, schools have adequate funding, councils receive money from three streams - government, council tax and business rates. Social care perhaps is the one failing, but everything else receives higher funding than ever before, but the downfall is that there are fewer people paying for it and more using it so it feels like a poorer service. Facts don't seem to matter over feelings these days.

@MistressoftheDarkSide 100%

My mum was a victim of DV, eventually left him, 3 very young kids, social security, selling family heirlooms, abject poverty really, got Social Security, that was it, doubtless many on here would have had her stoned and thrown into the workhouse, her kids set up to clean chimneys.

A good friend of mine has also been beaten black n blue, even got arrested when she dared to fight back :( when she went for help after her parents died and she was suicidal, any respite help was refused "wasn't serious enough"
Has 2 children who despite her doing the very best for them haven't turned out as she'd have wished, so lets sterilise them them both.

People have no clue as to the backstories of the poor, how they got there and cruelty the inadequate benefits system inflicts on them.

Well thank you for that, but actually I'm in the position I'm in due to cumulative poor life choices by the standards of most.

I've escaped criminality and addiction, but could easily become an alcoholic. Have always "lived in the moment". Never really used my education or qualifications because they were creative and I fell pregnant at 25 early in a relationship and couldn't face another termination. So low paid jobs, worked around family. My 14 year marriage was abusive and it took a Jeremy Kyle style incident to end it. I've been sectioned. My last relationship was 11 years with my soul mate. During that I cared for his Mum with Alzheimers, worked around it founding a business, my Mum died of cancer and then the love of my life died.

I'm writing this because I can see how I've "failed" by the standards expected on here. There are hundreds of thousands of me. I've turned our a decent DS by more good luck than good judgement. His life hasn't been perfect but I jokingly tell him to regard me as more of a terrible warning than a good example.

I've done my best, but in those moments where things have gone sideways yet again, I could easily give up.

Have I just been unlucky? Sometimes. But often, personal fubars have been massively compounded by the system that does exist failing, delaying, or obstructing a resolution due to bureaucracy or attitudes of those administering things.

Either there is a safety net that works efficiently or there isn't - the institutional gas-lighting around the deserving and undeserving is what drives people to the darkest places and worst behaviours. The current system creates its own monsters, and enjoys punishing them.

Everyone is, we all pay VAT, most people on benefits will pay council tax or a proportion of it, HB rarely covers the full rent.

Its all very well saying this is unsustainable etc etc but whats the alternative?

Unfortunately, we have to accept that some people ( a relatively small minority) will abuse the system but when these women who have a child to get property are asked why? many will say it was to escape abuse, from family or an ex partner.
Plus if you asked them if they'd prefer a decent job instead of staring at 4 walls, screaming children & no money, they'll go for the job every time.

So why dont we do more to help people who messed up their schooling to be mature students? we used too, free O level evening classes, free technical college courses and employment schemes, delivered by skill centres and manpower services.... now all we have have is SEETEC who will help someone fill out a CV.

As for asking the rich to pay more, why on earth not? do you think Rishi Sunak should pay more than 20% tax on his recent US investment earnings of £4m ? as he isn't paying NI on that either, he is paying less tax than a teaching assistant or a nurse.

Taxes on unearned income are ridiculously low and its the rich that benefit from these the most & fight the hardest to keep them low.

Nearly 19 billion!!! In benefits goes unclaimed.

Everyone is a taxpayer, and investing in decent SH is one of the best investments we could do

“everyone is a taxpayer” is an insane way of looking at things.

@MistressoftheDarkSide your situation is awful and I’m sorry for you and what you are going through, but your situation is also exactly NOT what is being discussed/ its peak MN for people to get defensive (understandably I suppose) feeling attacked for a situation which isnt what’s being discussed at all. It’s not a “gotcha!” Because you’re one of the few using benefits etc as help when it’s genuinely needed and wanting to then regain independence financially.

benefits should be a temporary measure to help people who cannot help themselves, as in your situation. Or permanent for those who are disabled etc. and they should be far better than they are. Support should be better.

but support can’t be better because of people milking the system dry.

“wealth redistribution” a PP mentioned? What? Take away more from higher contributors to pay those who don’t? No thanks.

I had no idea people were having children just to get benefits and housing; until I read the housing comments on this thread. It’s obscene that children are being used in this way.

We can always have a look at all the empty dwellings (around 1 mil, taking out second homes) first.

@ChishiyaBat it will take as long to build that many houses as it takes to allow Eastern European labourers back to do it. Brickies are commanding £200 a day in the South East at present such is the shortage of labour.

How long do you think it takes to build 700,000 houses? It would take more than a year for 1 lot I reckon.
I also have no clue about available land, but I don't think it'd take long to fill what ever there is, if 700k a year is the amount needed.

@Bushtika Your points are relevant and it's perhaps the elephant in the room. It's not easy to discuss because it's a difficult debate especially if wanting to avoid knee jerk reactions and hostility towards migrants (or any other vulnerable group), but ignoring it doesn't help. We need to discuss the impact on people and communities especially disadvantaged ones.

I understand people with more knowledge on this than me say there's room and money to build enough homes for everyone already here and for everyone coming here. If that's true, great and let's get on with it.

I'm not an expert on available land (not needed for farming, flood defences and other uses) so I genuinely don't know. Perhaps if spread out evenly across the UK? If it's not possible or realistic then a solution that's compassionate to migrants, but also takes into account the needs of people already here needs to be discussed.

Edited to add. Not every migrant will need SH. One of my neighbours came over here a few years ago. They're in a relatively well paid job and they have a mortgage.

Nope sorry, It still sounds offensive, as if disabled or people struggling are beneath everyone else!

It’s not meant as a derogatory term. It means people who will struggle to escape poverty and have fewer life opportunities. Those who are disabled might be in this class if they are job limited.