In hoping the benefits cap may prove to be A Good Thing?

peachy - so would a tesco employee, for example, have over 26k in benefits a year if they lived in london say?

agree i can't imagine people in margate would be happy with big influx of people. I can't imagine the people in london were keen on the large influx they've had over the years either and i can't imagine that people living in really large expensive houses in costly areas are happy about having people living on benefits as neighbours whilst they themselves struggle to make ends meet and work really hard.

life is a shit sometimes.

(although sister's DH's argument is that we should address the deficit by killing dependent disabled people; yep he said that in front of ASD but able to understand ds1. Nice. And people wonder why I keep passports ready and feel scared!)

uite sheep (long time no see!)

Although when nursing home costs and supermarket costs and Nanny costs and nursery costs rie becuase tey cn;t find people who can afford to live in places like London for MW any more, everyone will notice.

Sis employys thirty people at the chain of nurseries she amanges; only herself, her Big Boss and three others are on over MW. This is a costly aplce in Somerst, how many will hang around if tehy have to move? yet she already sztruggles to find qualified people as it is.

There is also the fact that it won't necessarily save any money, given the costs of B&B accom and the shortage of cherap housing that exoists everywhere meaning many people will end up in just that form of home; lus taking carers away from dependent people etc.

Do you know for example that whilst I as a carer for my son would be exempt, someone caring for their elderly Mum who lives in another home but gets daily support just to cope is not? that social services would be amde to pick up the tab for thatc are instead, often a difference of tens of thousand over a year?

face it people. We are fucked.

unless you happen to be earning loads and loads of money and this wont affect you in the slightest (and you have no foresight or imagination to see how its going to be for loads of us plebs)

dreamingof but the majority of people this affects WILL be working or planning to - mwhat makes you think the earnings level is a bigger detrrant than simple lack of jobs in a struggling economy?

80% of people claiming HB are NOT unemployed

people forced to move away are likely to be TAs, carers in nursing homes, childcarers, Tesco employees....

and if you think MW covers commuting- really? Plus where I am tehre isn;t even a bus to one of the closest two cities (Bristol), let alone a train station at all. Even before you look at bridge tolls at £6 per day

So dreaming youa re OK with those already in cheapa reas having to take influxes of large numbers and seeing a cut in their acces to already overstreched serices even if they themselves work yes? because I can;t understand why smeone who is in say MArgate and has worked all their life should be forced to see less access to housing, schools and services- yet with 200000 people armarked for those areas and B&B accom how could it be otherwise?

kitesurfgirl and what planet do you live on?? Good for you if you managed to find 4 jobs side by side.. that doesnt exist where I live. I would happily do a cleaning job if I could find one! or would you suggest my autistic son looks after his sisters then so I could do these jobs

I work p/t in asda for 5 hours a week and had to reduce my hours to care for my son and his sisters being a scrounging single mum and all.

The only hours available to me in asda where I work were evening shifts and I couldnt go on days as no vacancies so what am I supposed to do??

There are relatively few jobs and people will do cleaning, you would be surprised, but when you take into consideration very few school hours jobs (retail is often evenings/weekends, p/t) and no DECENT AFFORDABLE FLEXIBLE CHILDCARE then you have no chance.

oh trickle - you will have me crying in a minute!! you expect someone who works hard every day in a job they don't like to be sympathatic to someone who has to commute for 90 mins!!! many people have to travel and I've had to commute for much more than 90 mins before (though admittedly not every day).

peachy i can see your argument. But if the person isn't working anyway and is deterred from getting a job because they can't earn as much as they get on benefits what difference would moving to an area make in reality to their employment? they are likely to be unemployed either way. At least if they live in a cheap area the taxpayer doesn't have to fork out so much and it perhaps acts as a deterrent for some for long periods of unemployment.

Add to that once your child turns 12 you can be made to take a job 90min communte away also - that's three hours travel a day with a 12 year old at home.

There is also room within the legislation - IDS was very excited about this - to be abel to increase the ammount of hours people had to work (this does include getting a second/third job and the 90 min commute for each) so they could be 'incentivesed' out of UC.

dreamingof perhaps

But who is to say it is once?

private tenancies don;t last very long, espeically cheapest ones; it could well be every six months for ever. The people who move won;t get LHA housing; the places they move to have residency criteria and many will already have exceptionally long lists- here it is around thirty thousand people.

Also if anyone thinks moving lots of people will encourage employment- really? Why do people think the cheap areas became cheap? think Merthyr etc? Becuase there were already no jobs there. It creates ghettos where people are even less likely to find work (feasibly people who ahve worked all their lives, and were amde redundant- staying in Wales where do we think the Peacocks HQ staff will end up?).

Nd yes Trickle is right wrt UC.

Rules are this:

in a two aprent ousehold one aprent must work 36 hours to qualify.

the other parent must also work 36 hours UNLESS

there is a child under 5
someone in family gets HR DLA Care element and parent is carer
parent is disabled

A 20 hour limit will be applied to:

Carers of a child getting MR DLA
parents of a child under 12

Note that at 12 your child is deemed to be able to come home alon; social Services however may well take action. very few palces have chidlcare provision for chidlren over 12/

if you cannot find those hours you will have to be aplced on workfare where finding childcare is your responsibility. if youc an;t do it- for example said disbaled child needs you at home, chidlcare has a six month waiting list, you don't ahve a car and they allocate you somewhere off the bus route or at 3am- bad luck, you lose all entitlement to help. For the entire family.

A fmily income of just under £18k removes the compunction to work those hours, but equally I suspect this is where the TC replacement will cut off as a result. Seems logical.

Personally i'd be OK with a cap but would like to see it awarded excluding HB; HB is already ca;pped and will be cut in April anyway. It will only cover lowest 30% of rentals in an area and nowhere over 3 bedrooms (even if like us you need more becuase you ahve disabled children not because you are anti sahring)- not that we get HB anyway but who knows what lies ahead these days. I want to know someone in London gets as much for food for their child as someone in Newport where i live and where living is cheaper.

We talk endlessly about the £26k cap that very few people get. Why not discuss what happens to those who willf all through the net- a net where the holes are being amde much* wider. most of whome will be the vulnerable. What about the little-known MINIMUM income? Anyone know what that is? £2k. Per family. Per annum.

That's my biggest worry personally*

oblomov - as you say loads of kids of working parents move schools and they manage. whats really needed is a good role model as a parent - ie one that works (obviously families where people are disabled is a different case). that will have more impact on a child i would have thought than changing schools once.

I havent read all the posts on here but surely if housing benefit is capped, (which it is anyway) then it should be at a similar level all over the country. If you can't afford to live in London then move.

The capped rate where I live for a two bedroom house is around £86 a week and is more than adequate for the rents charged.
You cannot be expected to live in luxury if you do not work or earn a small amount. I am currently on housing benefit and have a nice 2 bed house for me and my son. I pay roughly £20 a week for rent above my benefit but I certainly dont complain about it. I am looking forward to getting a job and standing on my own two feet again.

It won't happen OP for one simple reason: those renting at the lowest HB levels and even close to have their pick of tenants.

I live in a cheapa rea; we don;t have the infrastructure to take many people coming in from the cities. the cheap housing simply is not avaialble here. If anything it will push pricves up as in the absence of cheap, cheapest you can find is the best option. Why should those of us living here have to cope with much higher waits for hospital appts, social services support, harder to find schoolaces, over subscribed GPs to abalnce some concerns about an entitlement complex? Sriously? Why should those of us working just as hard here as anyone anywhere else suffer a severe dearth in public services ?

Don;t get me wrong- I am far from a NIMBY and people are welcome, we came here ourselves 8 eyars ago. But it's not JUST about people moving- it will affect the aplces they moe to, and those already there, regardless of whether those peopleare on benefits. We have Europe's largest council estate here apparenlty; but the same people use tha hospital living there as in the affluent and middle class areas. Surely even those who support the idea of the cap can see that plenty of people in no way claiming will be negatively impacted upon?

Mind, you, not that we should be that bothered by this. They are taking the piss? So what. loads of peole do. Vodafone are, not paying their huge tax bill and the Gov letting them off.
MP's take the piss out of us.
Don't see why we should be so bothered about yet another group taking the mick out of us.

I don't agree with any of Hangover's points.
These people seem to feel entitled to live in an area that they can't afford to live in. Thats wrong. 'Living within your means', is drummed into all of us.
And you refer to them as having to move away from their jobs. These people are not working. They are claiming HB and other benefits, and getting more than 26k.
Pay me £35K and I'll live in most places you choose to put me!!!
And you mention the turmoil of forcing these peoples children to move schools. what so bad about moving schools? People do it all the time. People move for jobs. And guess what, their children adapt to moving schools aswell. Really? No kidding. Yes, really, its true.
These pople are taking the mick out of the welfare state and our good nature. They aren't working, they aren't contributing. They are taking more than they are giving. And they seem to have this sense of entitlement, I don't derserve to live in a poorer area.
Ummm. Yes, YOU DO.
And we're not talking about someone who falls on harm times who needs benefits for a bit. These are long term claimants, most likely.
Its just a piss take. And they're taking the piss out of you and me, me and dh who have worked all out lives.

Sorry, I don't get how capping ESA will detect fraud?

bossboggle - the benefit cap is more than my husband and I ever earn't while we were jointly working, it's certainly more than I get now I'm on benefit (though I'll be exempt from the cap).

You do know that if you recieve any tax credits or housing benefit/council tax benefit the plans are that under UC people like you who do recieve them will be expected to go and get a job until they earn enough to not recieve them, that means any money they recieve apart from CB will mean interviews at JCP and work prep - people like you are about to become potential 'scroungers' too.

it seems like common sense that you dont move people looking for work, away from where the jobs are. but have a look at this table:

www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/indicators/topics/work-and-worklessness/unemployment-by-borough/

unemployment in some areas of London is v higher than in Liverpool. so in london, the claimants either cannot or dont want to do the jobs that are available.

Blacksausages - what exactly do you know about ESA? Have you read any of the accounts of people dying after being found 'fit for work', of the appeal rate that is stuck at 40% sucess raising to 70% if you have an advocate at the appeal. People being found 'fit for work' becasue they were non atendees at their medical due to the fact they use a wheelchair and the assessment building has steps?

Any idea how ill/disabled you have to be to qualify? Only 7% of people who do qualify are considered so sick/disabled as to be unemployable, everyone else is put on the work programe. It is completly plausible to be recieving IV chemotherapy and radaiation therapy, to be fighting for your life, to be assessed and be found capable of doing work related activity. This means attending interviews at JCP, maybe a few courses or a work placement and getting your CV in order.

Work providers are starting to complain (and you really arn't going to get many bleeding heart liberals in these places - they want to make money from the claiments). They are complining the people that are being sent to them are too ill and they can't do work related activity so they can't make any money from them - Boo Hoo for the providers.

The benefit cap is more than our entire household income and my husband works!! You should not be better off on benefits and not everyone is willing to work, there are people around where we live who have no intention of working!! And they are not afraid to say that they are better off not working - how fair is that?? As a family we have worked for what we have - and my husband has always worked damned hard for what we have, my job has been supporting him and raising our children. My cousin lives abroad where there is no social security - either you work or you don't have anything!!

I think people are going on about London because it is one of the areas this will have an impact - because of high rents. In my area in the north, rents are relatively cheap and someone would have to have an enormous family to get anywhere near this cap on benefits.

Yup blacksausages I am sure everyone receiving benefits are living in London

I think you will find people on benefits are all over the country, what is this bloody obsession with London.

So let's say for example you got made redundant and had no choice but to claim benefits, so you no longer have any money who exactly is going to stump up a deposit and months rent and moving costs then?

I am sure in your fluffy little world it pays for itself but in fact it's not the reality for a number of people.

"If I was a single mum I would give up a bedroom and sleep on the sofa for my children. Worse things have happened"

PMSL- so all single mums should sleep on sofas now?

Why can't couples also sleep on the floor on a matress? I'll keep my proper bed and matress (which I got frree from a friend) thank you very much. Besides dd often joins me there.

I do think that it's necessary to cap benefits but people do need a certain basic standard of living like a proper bed for example. I did actually sleep on a matress on the floor for the first few years of dds life.