Why is the benefit cap still in place?

[Mrsbeanz]

Why haven't the government scrapped the benefit cap as it was introduced to get people into work. Why at a time when people are losing jobs and finding it hard to find work, and many being told they shouldn't go to work should people still be capped? It just forces people into.poverty and homelessness. Especially since rents are high and a housing crisis

I knew people could work along side PIP. I did not know they could work full time though. I think possibly the PIP should be reduced accordingly if the persons health allows them to work more/less over the month. PIP should be reflected in this scenario.

Why should it? PIP isn't means tested, and is awarded on various factors, for many the hours worked doesn't affect the additional equipment/resources they require to make life easier or doable in some cases. Disability covers a huge range of things, there is a lot of ignorance around it though.

@ConsuelaHammock We can't just take them away. PEOPLE WILL DIE. I've been screaming it and I will keep screaming it... IT NEEDS FIXING NOT JUST TAKING AWAY.

People need help and guidance (the proverbial teaching them to fish) not sticks and punishment. Throwing money at people doesn't work when it's just enough to keep them afloat (giving them the fish). Everyone can say that benefits are too high all they like but if we pay a higher rate of benefit and teach people how to save, support them to save and make the most of it and not penalise them when they've actually saved some (but not enough to actually do anything meaningful with) you'll find that the majority will actually get qualifications, buy houses, earn more etc.

Seems fucking ridiculous to expect a single mother who has exactly enough coming in each month to pay the bills and feed the family to achieve a law degree and buy a house. Especially when you've told her she has to move 300 miles away from all her support systems and now she has to spend extra on travelling so the kids can see their feckless dad who hides his self employed earnings to weasel out of paying child support because SHE was the one who 'chose' to move so SHE has to travel for contact.

Of course there are going to be those who try to play the system as much as possible but the majority shouldn't be penalised for it. If real, useful support is in place to actually help people break out of the cycle those who refuse to engage will be identified and it'll be harder and harder to play the system.

Everyone just wants the short term savings of cutting benefits and think that'll save them some tax each month. It's gross

Honestly people are so narrow minded and quick to believe what makes life more palatable for them. Of course you'd like to think that everyone is given the same opportunities in life because to see the real world would mean facing up to the fact that IT IS BROKEN AND WE'RE NOT FIXING IT

There will always be people with a "can do attitude" as well as the "can't do attitude".

Fact is, we are so lucky to have a welfare system that will support us should we need it. The sad thing is, most people on this thread seem to take it for granted and feel an entertainment to a good living standard when in reality they are living of the charity of others (= taxpayers).

The problem we have is that it's unsustainable in the long run especially as we are heading towards mass unemployment and global recession.

The benefits cap might just mean that the limited resources can be used to support more people.

Your coming across greedy. It’s not that I’m ignorant I am fully aware of what a disability is.
Absolutely unbelievable. a disabled person is greedy for not wanting their pip to be reduced.
You very obviously have no idea about disability. (YesI expect the reply ‘ I /or family member is disabled) in which case you know about one disability.
There are a significant number of people who have had to give up their jobs having lost their Pip, because the mobility component enabled them to travel easily and safely.
People with disabilities may have higher fuel bills than average. Me- one of my promos that I get through a loo roll a day, I need new Knickers monthly, sheets and trousers regularly. So I suggest you think it through before accusing people of being greedy.

@Gilead

Your coming across greedy. It’s not that I’m ignorant I am fully aware of what a disability is. Absolutely unbelievable. a disabled person is greedy for not wanting their pip to be reduced. You very obviously have no idea about disability. (YesI expect the reply ‘ I /or family member is disabled) in which case you know about one disability. There are a significant number of people who have had to give up their jobs having lost their Pip, because the mobility component enabled them to travel easily and safely. People with disabilities may have higher fuel bills than average. Me- one of my promos that I get through a loo roll a day, I need new Knickers monthly, sheets and trousers regularly. So I suggest you think it through before accusing people of being greedy.

I’m not talking about disabled people I’m speaking about you. Why are you outraged because someone disabled or not can work full time and I suggested their PIP should be adjusted accordingly why should it not be? I don’t see the problem. You would pay your fuel bill IF could work FULL TIME that particular month... if you couldn’t work at all your PIP would reflect that. Fuel bill would STILL BE PAID. I don’t need to prove myself to you. I said what I said and I will say it again!

I am not disabled myself, I do not claim PIP, I am in the fortunate position to not be reliant on beneifts, but it doesn't stop me empathising and understanding the system. Therefore I am not 'greedy', I just get frustrated when people who have little understanding and a lot of ignorance start making 'suggestions' which would invariably make life harder for a group of people who already face challenges.

Its ridiculous that it has not been suspended because of the pandemic. Why isn't anyone speaking out? They increase payment to people but obviously if there is a cap they see no increase. No wonder they wanted to give families food parcels, guess giving extra money would lead to cap? Maybe there should be help for people to find cheaper housing? but not this punishment that was brought in to get people into work. The Government has failed in so many ways in its reaction to pandemic. The UK was one of the worst affected leading to shut downs and school closures. Someone can't just go out and work in a pub or shop. Its people in these kind of jobs that have lost their job. Re training takes time. Why treat everyone like they are lazy and need to be taught a lesson? Most people on benefits work or worked.

[quote NatashaAlianovaRomanova]@converseandjeans definitely agree with this - as a single parent with 3 primary school kids I received more "take home" pay a month in benefits than I currently earn as gross salary.

The equivalent gross salary I'd have needed to maintain the take home element would have been £34,000 before I even considered childcare to allow me to work - that just wasn't right & provided no incentive for people to work.

Not that I agree with the current cap - the entire benefits system needs a proper overhaul but that would take years & cost billions so no chance it'll ever happen. [/quote]
How much do you think the current cap should be then??

They increase payment to people but obviously if there is a cap they see no increase.

Only people on UC were given the extra £20 a lot of us disabled people are still on legacy benefits and we saw no increase at all, we just have the £60 severe disability payment being stripped away from us when we move over to UC eventually, my disability wont have changed but the support will

I never commented on any particular disability did I. I stand by my comment. I know what a disability is. It should be adjusted accordingly like other elements of UC if you work more/less one week

I disagree, for some people PIP & mobility allowance will make the difference between having a job and not having a job.
People with disabilities should not be affected by any benefits cap.

... and if you think about it, the employee with disabilities working FT will actually pay their taxes.

@Ylvamoon Charity?? You think benefits are a form of charity?? It's more like an insurance pay out. You pay in when you can (taxes) and then claim when you're in need. Most people on benefits are currently in work. Most people on benefits have paid tax (or currently pay tax). Most people on benefits are either just claiming short term anyway to bridge a gap or can (if the support was there) be helped to earn enough to stop claiming benefits and start earning enough to pay tax therefore paying back into the system.

Once again, the benefit cap is not being applied fairly or even usefully. Giving thousands of people just enough to scrape by each month keeps them in a position where they will have to claim benefits indefinitely. Give them a bit more (money AND support) to help them out of the situation might cost a bit more short term but will save a hell of a lot more in the long run.

And before anyone says it... absolutely get stuffed with the 'there's no magic money tree', 'we're in debt as it is', 'who should pay for this'. The government are capable of finding money when it comes to keeping the DUP sweet, giving MPs payrise a when no one else gets one, bailing out banks, subsidising meals 3 days a week to get people spending in the middle of a pandemic. The money is there but having a group of people to blame is nice and convenient

The Greatest Trick The Rich Ever Pulled Was Convincing The World The Poor Was To Blame

Dallerup - but if everyone gets qualifications who will do the jobs which don’t need qualifications? You cannot make everyone rich ! Tax payers don’t want to pay towards those who won’t work or don’t want to leave their children to go to work while they leave theirs to go to work . No one is complaining about anyone working in minimum wage jobs and getting too ups . The benefit cap doesn’t affect them anyway .

And going back to full time education when you have young children seems to be preferable to working nowadays . “ I don’t have any qualifications and want to give my children a better life “ is perhaps something which should be considered before having the children and expecting everyone else to raise them !!

I do think there are deserving and undeserving poor. I don’t believe we need those living in poverty to bring more children into the world to live in poverty . What about the children ?

It's about punishment. Not getting people back into work.

@ConsuelaHammock Oh fgs, I never said anything about making everyone rich. It's about choice. It's about giving people the CHOICE to improve their lives IF they choose. Young people will still work the jobs that don't need qualifications, people currently gaining qualifications will work those jobs, people who don't have any interest in gaining higher qualifications will work those jobs. Why is it fair that Henry is stuck only earning minimum wage because he couldn't pass his A-levels because he was caring for his sick parent when actually he would love to be a human rights lawyer but oh no, he's not allowed to claim enough in benefits temporarily to allow him to qualify!

And yes, the benefit cap CAN affect people earning NMW. It's starting to affect people now who got put on furlough and are now, 9-10 months later having their benefits slashed through no fault of their own. It affects people who can only get exploitative zero hours contracts and so don't always meet the threshold. It affects people who have been made redundant and are desperately trying to find new jobs and being told that they should 'just retrain'.

Of course going back to education and retraining is preferable to work when you want to break the poverty cycle. LONG TERM it's better for children to see their parents trying to break the cycle and working hard instead of putting up with a job they hate just to scrape by. Those children will have better opportunities when they are older and their children will have even better opportunities IF THEY WANT THEM. If they want to work in McDonalds that's great too, they're a fab employer. It's about choice!

And yes, it's should be thought about before having children but often that option isn't there or people follow in their parents footsteps because they don't know any different. Or someone gets married young, gives up a chance at a career to support their partner in their career, partner dies and now there's no money so they have to claim benefits to make ends meet. But you're only allowed to claim the bare minimum to scrape by and they have to earn any extra but no qualifications so only entry level jobs for you (if you can find one) and no leeway to retrain. Oh sorry, they should have planned and saved for this scenario? Not everyone can!

Once again. Your experience is not everyone's experience. Benefit Street is not representative of every benefit claimant.

And 'expecting everyone else to raise them'?? What about those kids who are in childcare for 10hours a day 5 days a week? Is that ok? Personally I have no issue with it but surely the person spending the most time with kids are the people raising them?

@ConsuelaHammock Get fucked with 'What about the children?' If you really cared about the children you wouldn't be championing keeping their parents in poverty and punishing them for the privilege! Don't pretend you care about the children when all that's coming across is 'think of the taxes we could save'! I've never seen anyone get so uppity about their precious taxes being spent on anything else that they don't agree with

@strawberriesontheNeva

It's about punishment. Not getting people back into work.

Yep, and stymying social mobility whilst simultaneously encouraging Victorian ideals of morality so you have more and more down at the heel and the rest shaming them to put up with more and more of it.

Over 5m on UC now. Wait till furlough ends. You already see reams of threads here of people who've had to claim it and are shocked at how low it is, how it doesn't their mortgage, how they are expected to use their savings to support themselves and they are a better class of unemployed than 'those' - that system's been in place for years now and applies to all who claim it, regardless of how many years they paid in.

Yeah, some really disgusting attitudes on here.

The poorest already paid for the financial crash they didn't fucking cause with 'austerity'. TEN years, yes TEN years of the benefits freeze where benefits barely rose at all, and all the other cuts.

Look at the massive expansion of foodbanks.

It's disgusting what mental gymnastics some people will use to justify other human beings being made to suffer terribly because they don't want to pay a little more in tax.

I really hope we have the humanity not to make the poorest in our society pay this time.

Poverty isn't a lack of character; it's a lack of cash | Rutger Bregman

Conseula are you related to Marie Stopes? 😡

What a depressing thread.

It's proof that the British public have bought into this notion that those who are less privileged should not be supported in order to live at the basic living standards and should therefore suffer a life of abject poverty.

There's no thought for what this actually does to families, in particular the CHILDREN, long term. We know that children who are living in poverty are more likely to suffer MH issues which only worsen as they get older. Let's just ignore the fact that children in poverty are at a higher risk of getting involved in crime. Has anyone thought the increase in crime and MH issues over the last 10 years may be in relation to poverty?

No, it's just a case of "why should my taxes pay for their kids "

The thing is it costs more in the long run to try and address the issues such as MH and crime in adulthood.

Such short sighted views on this thread from some posters.

@popgoestyeweasel - you can't change people.

Some are happy to drift along on benefits and NMW jobs. It's their comfort zone. It keeps them in control.

Some are more ambitious and want more, they either turn to education/ hard work or crime.

Some feel and crave the attention they receive for (mental) health conditions and petty crimes. Institutions give structure and predictability.

Then there are people who genuinely fall on hard times, though redundancy or divorce or bad decisions or whatever else can go wrong in life.

Our welfare system does support all of the above.

No, it's just a case of "why should my taxes pay for their kids is a reaction to the above from people who genuinely work hard, people who might have been on benefits (like myself) but managed to move on.

@Ylvamoon I think you have summed it up right there.