Social security spending out of control?

It's really not this simple.

Where I am we have spiralling rent costs due to the entire available privately held housing stock being snapped up by speculative landlordism. It invariably ends up BTL or on Airbnb.

The remaining privately owned properties on the market then see enormously increased monthly rents, because the owners could, in theory, also place existing stock on to the short-term, holiday let, and party flat market and increase their income, so they increase monthly rents accordingly in order to make up for this "loss" of income.

It's nothing at all to do with Housing Benefit, or benefit claimants, because HB is strictly capped and would not begin to cover the cost of a typical private rental here. The net result is HB claimants end up in either LA or HA stock, usually after a years long wait in emergency accommodation, and the rents in LA and HA stock are often around a third of those in private stock.

So no, the only thing driving up rental prices here is good old speculative landlordism and greed.

If enough people couldn't afford rents/food etc then prices WOULD come down. It's simple economics of supply and demand. A landlord isn't going to leave his property empty for months when he knows he could rent it out a bit less than he'd hoped for. It's because of benefits, NMW increases etc that there's money "in the system" that sucks up prices due to basic economics.

https://www.tax.org.uk/tax-gap-2025

Most of the tax gap is small business, black economy and mistakes! The report shows that "big" tax evasion is actually a very small component. It's basically huge numbers of "small" people evading/avoiding relatively small amounts but all add up to huge numbers because of the huge numbers involved. It's NOT mostly a small number of millionaires/billionaires evading big amounts. It's simply a numbers game. A few million people evading/avoiding relatively small amounts is a bigger figure that a handful of billionaires evading big figures.

Indeed. Gordon Brown's benefit splurge caused housing cost inflation.

Likewise, student loans caused a massive increase in the cost of student accommodation.

It's simple economics - greater available of funding just sucks up prices causing inflation.

@LougleI hope your husbands job is safe. Just wanted to say though that he should apply for those jobs even if he doesn’t have the formal qualifications, if he has been trained in those areas by the LA. Just pop it in a covering letter. They’ll be trying to weed out anyone who is unskilled in those areas. We often put desirable qualifications in our job descriptions, but would consider (and have employed) those who didn’t have the qualifications if they were experienced in that area.

The Government doesn't pay SSP. It's funded entirely by the employer.

Yes I have heard of zero hour contracts. I was just providing the figures to correct what you had asserted previously

Oh dear. Need to free up funds first war ship, I suppose.Sigh.

Because the Government knows that the jobs aren't there. DH's job is at risk. I've been scouring the jobs pages. Most of the jobs, even minimum wage, require either trade certification, degrees in a particular field, experience of x, y, z. He has lots of transferable skill - risk assessment, health and safety, fire marshalling, legionella testing, light plumbing, light electrical, light carpentry, repairs, fire alarm testing, site surveying, etc., but because it was all trained in house by the Local Authority, he doesn't have 'qualifications' in those things, so it doesn't transfer to a trade job in them, or a quality control job.

Many jobs are 0 hours. The administrative cost of taking someone in and out of conditionality groups outweighs the UC that many people actually receive.

We're fortunate that, at the moment, we get a top up because the DC have disabilities. But they are getting older and will move off of our claim into their own claims. We'll still be looking after them, though. Once they are off our claim we'll get less than £800 per month UC. Yet I'll still be at home, unable to work, because DD1 can't be left alone safely and can't leave the house safely.

There are so many people who are too ill to work but have been assessed as ineligible for PIP. It's actually really hard to get PIP for physical illness unless there is functional deficit. In other words, people who are in pain, or 'sick' but can still get washed and dressed and chop a few veg just can't tick the boxes. There's a reason that so many PIP recipients, proportionally, have ASD, LD, or mental health illness. It's because they are more likely to have 'global' difficulty and therefore tick the boxes, even if they feel physically well.

Who wants to employ DD1? I'll give you her profile and you can tell me what job you would have her do:

• Requires 1:1 support at all times for safety
• Fine motor difficulties so likely to drop things and limited strength
• Very limited sense of danger - underestimates danger of some things and thinks that other things are dangerous when they aren't
• Will speak her mind without a filter. Will tell strangers off for their behaviour
• Impulsive and unable to discern appropriate social responses
• Fatigues easily and needs naps in the day time to remain emotionally regulated
• Periodic episodes of psychosis
• Angers quickly and becomes erratic
• Intellectually challenged
• Unable to write fluently and can't spell
• Severe speech and language disorder on the 0.1st centile (1 in 1000 would perform worse)
• Profoundly slow processing speed
• Autistic

Bear in mind that she is classed as relatively 'able' in the LD world.

Have you heard of zero hours contracts? It’s really not easy to find full time work at the
moment

Many countries run welfare systems - Denmark,Norway etcetc but don’t have thousands of neets or many permanently on benefits.

They could nail absent parents. Naturally single parents will struggle to work and care for DCs and need benefits. Mail the other parent

Would you rather we got UC, or the State picks up a care bill for DD1? Because if I work, she needs to go into residential care and for her needs you're looking at £3000-£4000 per week.

Unless they are funded under Continuing Healthcare (CHC), which is extremely hard to get, then all people who receive Social Services funded care have a Financial Assessment. DD1 receives PIP and UC. She will be expected to contribute about £120 per week towards her care. She's allowed to keep the rest for clothing, food, travel, etc.

Housing benefit is probably contributing to raising rents. If they stopped dishing out housing benefit rents would fall to the natural affordable level.

Yes it does, but it’s a minority of top ups going to those that are working full time. If you look at the stats, only 34% of those receiving working age benefits are in any kind of paid employment. Then for the ones that are working, the AET thresholds are so low - very part time. The AET thresholds for a couple are not even the equivalent to one full time time job between them

Well some of those out of work are probably people who don’t qualify for disability benefits seems(or don’t have support to challenge a decision) but don’t have the ability to secure employment/compete with more able applicants.

If the UK stopped the pending fuel duty tax everyone would be helped.

Jobs should pay a decent wage.

More people will need help with the costof living soon now Trump (your president @DrivinginFrance ?) started his war

Aside from disability claimants, what about all the others claiming social security. Why are they not supporting themselves?

Surely any job should pay an actual living wage? Why should some people have to work a full time job and then take a second job in order to make ends meet? The first job should pay enough to live on for full time hours. This isn't America.

And having a failing health service doesn’t help. People awaiting treatment for issues preventing them from working.
The number of claimants rising isn’t because it’s too easy to claim. The default for disability benefits seems to be decline and only award to those with the support required to appeal to tribunal,
You have no idea @DrivinginFrance

And if a job doesn't pay enough to live off, tough luck?

Isn't this why someone might take on a 2nd job or change career and in the meantime economise. The fundamental reason why people go to work is to earn money. That applies whether you are rich or poor. Why do you think the rules do not apply for everyone.

And if a job doesn't pay enough to live off, tough luck?

Do you ever wonder why benefits are increasing? Or do you think benefits provide the Life of Riley?

If they want money they work. Crazy to think that anyone would think that is a shocking suggestion.

Do you want the magic money tree to give to everyone? Why would anyone bother to work.