To think people should be able to discuss and debate how public money is used for disability and otuher benefits

The IFS says it is impossible to state categorically that wealthy non doms are leaving the UK in droves.

Or maybe you don’t understand basic fiscal reality. You could change that if you tried.

From that well known bastion of leftism, the FT:

https://archive.ph/QkwNp

In short: you're catastrophising. Probably because there's an agenda at play.

What about it?

Well, we could start with the triple lock...

I do not have the answers as I am not a politician or someone that has the first clue about economics.
But I am someone on UC, and I can tell you that people like me are terrified as to what might come... and we are also fed up of the rhetoric on here about how we are scamming the system, are workshy, are somehow getting more money than someone working. It is all bull. I was told on here, by someone on over £100k, that I had more disposable income than them. I mean, that is bullshit.
But if the gov cut benefits, by how much.. who knows... I would be on the street and be a body you step over on the way to Waitrose.

I think that what needs reform is the entire system. The world needs to be more accessible for disabled people. The idea of flexible working, home working and job sharing needs to become completely mainstream. Employers need to be given tax breaks for employing people who are disabled so that they can have some flex in the system when someone is more frequently off ill than a non disabled person - but they also need to be rigorously checked to ensure they aren't being tokenist about it. Then we need to get a lot better at prevention in the health system - right now, people get ill, they end up on an NHS waiting list for months and years and get worse and there's long term and more serious damage. I'm not ideologically wedded to the NHS, I'm from a country with an insurance based system (not the US!).

Endless cuts, demonising disabled people and checking up on every last penny they spend gets us nowhere.

Whats your point? What do you suppose will happen as tax take keeps reducing? How will benefits be paid without a £1 trillion national debt, £20b monthly interest, and gilt yields in worryingly high territory. The country is almost broke.

How is math adding up on this Romantic notion that benefit bill is all well and good and there is not problem here.

It is not about feelings. Many posts on here about how benefits should be cut with no regard to how that looks like in real life.
It looks like poverty, starvation, homelessness, suicide.
But if you are a net contributor, you are cushioned from that reality. Your loss is a bit more tax. Not poverty and destitution.

Again, it doesn’t matter what people are advocating for. No one can make anyone do anything.

People vote with their feet. This paying into the system are reducing in numbers in staggeringly worrying numbers. That’s has nothing to do with ‘advocacy’.

If the money for benefits isn’t there, it’s not there, no amount of advocating for or against will change that outcome. Cold, hard, cash doesn’t care about people’s feelings.

Advocating cuts in benefits where they don't actually care what the outcome is for those people who have found their money cut.

The issue I have with “debates” on this subject is that many people on here who have strong opinions on PIP and DLA don’t have a fucking clue what they’re talking about. They just spout a load of hateful cobblers which misinforms more people and their nonsense spreads further. Not only on here btw. MPs and the like do it too. <Helen fucking Whately I’m looking at you>

Advocating what?

Never read a post on MN where someone has advocated for people to do this.

Yes that could be a likely outcome. That’s how it works.

If there are aren’t enough people left to pay, then there isn’t enough money for benefits.

They end up in debt, homeless and some will kill themselves.
And some people are advocating this.

Well, people die, actually, if they don't have the means to eat or somewhere to live.

They live without benefits. Happens all over the world where the economy is mismanaged and the state runs out of taxpayer cash because taxpayers leave the country, or tax take goes down or people start avoiding taxes to the max. All of this is happening in this country before our very eyes.

This is not a moral question. It’s a financial and mathematical one.

And what happens to the people on benefits who find they can no longer eat or pay their bills?

How you feel is how you feel.

But feelings and facts don’t always run parallel. Ultimately the numbers have to add up and someone has to pay.

If everyone gets something for free, eventually no one gets it for free. And with the benefits bill so high and the number of people paying for it reducing, eventually the money will run out. The benefits bill has to reduce or there will be no welfare state left.

No, am just fed up with people who claim to have some moral high ground for earning over a certain amount, and stating how they think the people below them should be able to spend money.... to the point they state that it should not be spent on a "luxury" like a fridge (from a recent thread).
It is none of their business. If I blow all my UC on drugs, it does not affect you at all (not that I do).

The only one ranting (and swearing) is you.

The rest of what you wrote is just some blah blah which misses the point spectacularly. But do carry on….

Bearing in mind that my local big Sainsbury's is manually processing vouchers because the fraud rate has shot up, so they're having to check them carefully, it would probably cost far more than it saved. These changes are always ideological rather than genuinely cost saving.

People like to think that they are nice. That they can have a sensible discussion about disability benefits. When in reality, they have a real bias about what they classify as truly deserving of these payments. And for the most part that means people who really look disabled. Like it's obvious from a mile away. Anything less, they deem as undeserving. At the very least there should be a vote on what these payments should be spent on. And it definitely shouldn't be anything to ease the burden on the family of the disabled person. It's a waste of time debating with these people. It's like banging your head against a brick wall.

How do you reform benefits without hurting the people who claim them?