To wonder why the UC savings threshold is £6,000?

The poster you’re quoting is disabled and isn’t ’choosing’ not to work. She can’t work because of her disability.

Disabled people come in for some of the worst criticism on benefit threads. They are treated as entitled fakers, who could work if they really wanted to but choose to drive around in ‘free cars’ having a lovely time taking the tax payer for a ride. Everyone on MN seemingly knows a faker who is more than happy to admit fraud.

The attitude is usually reflective of the rhetoric of whatever the government of the day, in order to influence public opinion so that they can slash the benefits of the most vulnerable with no opposition. And MN loves that, it swallows the narrative hook line and sinker with no critical thinking at all. There is little to no understanding of disability from those who have never experienced it themselves, or been a carer for someone disabled.

So forgive me if l don’t agree with your pov, which seems to be that benefit claimants should have no opinion and just accept the biased and ignorant judgement of those who are well off and have no realistic idea of what life on benefits is actually like. @youalright was perfectly correct in their assessment of those doing the moaning. A mortgage on a big house, a flash car, nanny’s for your kids, private schools all add up. Coming onto a benefit thread and moaning that a £100k salary ‘goes nowhere these days’ is obscene when there is so much inequality.

I’m not ‘punching down’. I am a sincere believer in the welfare state. I’m proud we are not like the USA, and I’m happy for taxpayers money to support the most vulnerable.

But the ‘most vulnerable’ are not able bodied people who spend their days very lucidly and happily chatting away on internet forums, every day for many years, with absolute consistency, while claiming to be unable to do any work at all. Put to a vote the majority would agree with me, they just don’t feel able to say it.

I’m one of those modestly paid workers.

I think it’s morally repugnant to punch down on those on benefits as opposed to looking at the serious issues in this country.

Well we just looked at the last ten years, over the course of his lifetime it’s likely even more! The point is “paying in” isn’t a thing. Everyone ends up taking more than they contribute unless they’re extraordinarily wealthy.

You’re missing the point entirely.

Economies actually rely on people working modestly paid, or averagely paid jobs, because these are the ‘grunts’ enabling the very high earners to earn what they do. They also provide virtually all of the in person services you rely on. If suddenly the NMW went up to a ridiculous level so they were ALL net earners, the inflation would be so awful our economy would collapse.

The country cannot survive or even have high earners without people working regular jobs. It can however survive without benefit claimants. Snottily trying to compare the two is morally repugnant frankly, yet here we are.

This isn’t correct cheesewhizz. If you have an account like this for your child, even if it has your name on as the named adult, it is not classed by UC as your money. If you take money in and out of it to use for your needs then it is. But if you just add to it (not excessive amounts to hide money of course!) and are the legal adult then it is not added to your savings amount. Because all kids accounts need that adult name. So do correct that on your savings figures.

Sorry 70 years ago not 570!

I’m not threatening anyone, they’re polling ahead of everyone else. I won’t be voting for them for a myriad of reasons, not in the least because I’m actually a big believer in the welfare state and NHS, and have no desire to see them decimated.

However they will be because they’re being given a terrible name by pee takers who are far too mentally ill to work even a basic admin job but can spend all day chatting lucidly and happily online after a lie in, every day for many years.

Is that adjusted for inflation? I would have thought if a pensioner takes £1.20 for each £1 put in then that is a net contributor over the course of 40/50 years.

as for NHS, not sure how you could work that out. Seems a lot at cost if you are counting from starting 570 years ago.

this attitude is why Reform is so popular and has announced they would lop billions from the out of work bill to retain the triple lock. People are sick of the entitlement.

As you said, over and over again.

Stop threatening people, it's not working.

It’s also growing increasingly rare that someone is a net contributor over the course of their life. Pensioners now, on average, take out £1.20 for every £1 paid in, and that’s just on their pensions. When you take into account NHS services it’ll be much more.

My 73 year old dad will proudly boast about how much tax he’s paid in his lifetime. So we sat down and calculated that since he’s retired, he’s taken nearly £75k in his pension pls about £300k in NHS treatment! That soon made him be quiet. This idea that some people have contributed therefore they deserve it is insane to me.

That poster is disabled.

I don’t think anyone who doesn’t work and is reliant on the state is in a position to look down on people who work hard and earn an average wage. I think this attitude is why Reform is so popular and has announced they would lop billions from the out of work bill to retain the triple lock. People are sick of the entitlement.

Not everyone gets prescriptions and dentist free on UC. I also don't get free school dinners. Soon will though!

Well the council tax saving alone is £125-£300 per month saved.

You also don't need to pay your own national insurance contribution. That's another £79 per month saved.

Not everyone manages to save whilst on UC. Some people do come into small inheritances of over £6000 which they then have todeclare even though they didn't technically save it themselves.

Is not fair for people who inherit money though .

I have £0 savings, enough in the debit account for the month, when something goes wrong unexpectedly, like at present I need a new car, I look into finance options. All my friends and sister are in a similar position. We had savings and better lifestyles 5 years ago, now in the same job (me) and better job (hubby) with all our costs going up but wages not matching it the savings have gone. So yes, £6,000 savings seems steep!

Or how life in general works.

I know she's always on these threads. Yet still hasn't learnt one thing about how benefits actually work.

She is not even a net contributor anyway. All the moaning about people on benefits, and she takes more than she gives anyway. Hypocrite.
Not you.. but the person you are quoting.

I am a working person

No one should need foodbanks. They should not exist.

Yes, sorry. It still stands that there are nurses (and others in professional work) who are using food banks. It's been in the news.

This report is over 3 years old, but if anything has changed, I imagine it's for the worse, not better.

Yes exactly. Say our hypothetical nurse has £10k in savings. That's about the cost of a car that doesn't incur repair expenses so hardly an outlandish amount of money. She'll have £72 knocked off her UC every month, even if her savings are in an account that she can't access for two years. Which is the only kind of account that pays 5% a month. That's a week's food shop, isn't it?