Working families £18k worse off than benefits claimants after budget

Why are they getting a double payment this week ?

Same where I live.

And they're getting a double payment this week for just sitting on their arses.

To expand on my comment below…

People always counter this with saying “well what about the big corporations who are dodging UK tax? They are much more of a problem than people on benefits?”

Well, yes, the government absolutely needs to be addressing this. 100%. These companies should not have the option of declaring their profits in Luxembourg etc so they pay no UK tax.

Doing this would result in millions and millions of tax revenue. Yes, probably more than cutting spurious benefit claims.

But it’s not all about that. It’s about people’s lives. And at the moment it just seems like a race to the bottom. There’s a certain demographic of people who would rather not work. They are poorly educated, they are often in bad health, and they are languishing in these existences, and bringing children into it who are doomed to just repeat the cycle.

It’s no way to live and it needs to stop.

But we really need to get to the true root of the problem. And it’s a deep rooted issue. Why are these people making these decisions and choosing this lifestyle?

Growing up in poverty, poor education / access to education, lack of opportunity to see other options. Lack of confidence. Abuse, neglect. In short, things that aren’t solved simply by letting them live their lives on benefits.

Kids and parents need better support and education.

Labour just trying to buy votes by bankrupting the country

PP is correct as well though, many people also won't be able to afford to buy and renting isn't a choice.

I have no hope of ever affording to buy.

Average number of hours worked is 20. This is much less than most working families I know.

If I was one of the people with a £2 million council house that was exempt from the Mansion Tax I wood absolutely stay 'renting' for the rest of my life.

Sure, but I was specifically responding to a PP who said:
**
People who rent are not doing it on purpose to claim benefits. They are people who can not afford to buy.

These people could afford to buy, but decided to continue renting, with the encouragement of the majority of the thread, so that they could claim benefits if anything went wrong.

I know.

Not the majority though. 34% as of May 2025.

Weren't they in social housing? Very different to renting in the private sector.

I agree with pp about where does it end?

Someone with dcs in paid-for housing. Each of those dcs is probably going to apply for social housing too. Why wouldn’t they? But they’re not going to get housed if they have a job. But if they have children…

Build more social housing! But the numbers on waiting lists is huge. The only way to begin to address the problem would be to build swathes of tower blocks with shared facilities a la soviet Russia.

No, but people become landlords for lots of different reasons, including moving for work and renting out their place while they rent another.

The poster you replied to was clearly saying that renting out a property has an element of risk attached.

I’m starting to think it would be more beneficial in the long term for the Government to just give people benefits towards their mortgage given the amount of money being handed to landlords to pay off their own mortgage.

People who rent are not doing it on purpose to claim benefits. They are people who can not afford to buy. Even if you have your rent paid, if you are renting in the private sector, you are not in secure housing.

This just isn’t true.

There was a thread on here a couple of days ago. The OP and her partner were planning on starting a family and she didn’t know whether she should buy a property now, or continue renting and buy a property later when her children had started school.

The overwhelming majority of posters advised her to continue renting because what if she or her husband had an accident and couldn’t pay the mortgage. They wouldn’t be entitled to benefits etc. It was “safer” to stay renting than to buy. Buying was more expensive. She would need to maintain her home at her own expense etc.

YANBU.

I am all for eradicating child poverty. But this isn’t the way to do it.

people don’t want to hear it, but there are large swathes of the population on benefits who are working the system. They don’t want to work, have no intention to ever work, they have comfortable lives with secure income and they just piss it away. And they are raising kids with no intention or incentive to work. It’s a vicious cycle. Why would kids grow up wanting to work when they see that their parents can get money handed to them just for sitting on their arse.

Yes, this is not all people on benefits. But people are deluded if they think this doesn’t happen. And it’s not a small amount of people, either.

I see them daily. I know some of them fairly well. Most are ok people, some are quite nice. But they absolutely are scamming the system.

They live in secure social housing. They claim
benefits. They have unhealthy lifestyles and all kind of health conditions, real and exaggerated for which they rake in benefits. They claim carers allowance for each other, when really they should just be caring for themselves - but of course the government doesn’t pay them for that.

The kids are growing up, applying for council houses and claiming benefits and popping out their own kids. It’s incredibly depressing and I really feel for a lot of the young people. They genuinely don’t know any different. It’s just what people in their world do.

the latest figures I could find show that 38% of UC claimants are working. 15% full time. The remainder part time.

What do you mean?

It's nuts really as it just pays for the asset of a private landlord instead.

I dont think many peoole are getting social housing in London.

I'm one of the 66% and don't have 3+ children. Not all benefit claimants are the same.

I refuse to pay for the Torygraph, so I cannot read the article, but I would be very surprised if no one in social housing is working in London. I would not be surprised if most people in social housing in London are entitled to benefits, but that's down to high rent costs and low wages, not lack of will to work.

London still needs cleaners, child care workers, care home staff, shop staff, etc, and those people deserve a home.

I think people are starting to get angry. My dc said that young people in his workplace (deemed necessary by even the most anti-working MNetter) are despairing. A room to rent is upwards of £800 a month. Ds’s room is the conservatory in a not great area.

Meanwhile people are getting taxpayer-funded flats in London. If you don’t intend to work, you can go and live somewhere where there is no work, imo.

@frequency - they have waited years? Methinks not.

What I think is shocking is the figure I saw for no one working in social housing properties in London. It was a huge percentage, so not all disabled and unable to work. There is no excuse for not having a job in London. It is not Great Yarmouth fgs.

Probably a good portion of that. Some of us only have one child because we can’t afford another despite working full time and in a professional job.