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 haven’t read the full thread and it seems from what I have read that there is a wide range of claimants and amounts they receive. Cap or not, I have personally found benefits easy to live on.

I was working full time on £40k a year until covid started and I lost my job. I am a single parent with a toddler and I paid full time childcare.

I claim UC and work part time now. I get around £1600 a month from UC which includes childcare (after my 15 free hours are deducted) I then earn another £500 ish from my part time job. It is more than enough! My rent is higher than the threshold as I rented my property in a nice area at a time I was earning well. It’s the first time I’ve claimed benefits and for me, I cannot complain as it’s really got me out of a tight spot at a tough time

Exactly, it is more than enough. There will be many in this position who stay home most of the time, just work a few part time hours and get paid by state to stay home. Benefits should be the.mini.um amount needed to pay bills and good not for people to live in s nice area with more than enough.monry to manage and no doubt have a similar lifestyle to when working full time. This is wrong as no incentive for a person to go back to full time work. Not fair to those working full time on a mimum wage who can only afford to live on a single room in shared house to have to pay their taxes so others can live in nice areas in a whole house. Time the housing benefits were given.a shake up.

@caringcarer

I can't help thinking if the government just made childcare free for all children from 1 year old and wrap around care after school free too until up to 6pm with after school assistants employed to run clubs. Then they could reduce housing benefits to just for the disabled and with children up to 1 yer old. Parents would have no reason not to go out to work as no longer have childcare issues. If they choose to stay home then they should not be entitled to claim benefits. Top ups could be given for those who work 40 hours.

Why 40 hours? Full time staff at my work don't work 40 hours, it's 37.

@caringcarer

I can't help thinking if the government just made childcare free for all children from 1 year old and wrap around care after school free too until up to 6pm with after school assistants employed to run clubs. Then they could reduce housing benefits to just for the disabled and with children up to 1 yer old. Parents would have no reason not to go out to work as no longer have childcare issues. If they choose to stay home then they should not be entitled to claim benefits. Top ups could be given for those who work 40 hours.

So if they could only get shift work they're fucked then? We've been moving towards a 24-hour society for a while now. The 9-5 mode is going out the window for many jobs or has been already.

@caringcarer

Exactly, it is more than enough. There will be many in this position who stay home most of the time, just work a few part time hours and get paid by state to stay home. Benefits should be the.mini.um amount needed to pay bills and good not for people to live in s nice area with more than enough.monry to manage and no doubt have a similar lifestyle to when working full time. This is wrong as no incentive for a person to go back to full time work. Not fair to those working full time on a mimum wage who can only afford to live on a single room in shared house to have to pay their taxes so others can live in nice areas in a whole house. Time the housing benefits were given.a shake up.

Whom do you think housing benefits benefits? It's the landlord getting the money.

And on UC, you don't have the option to work part time hours once your child is a certain age. You get sanctioned.

moonlightflitwick

What about people like me - with a life-long disability that means I have never been able to work? Do people who agree with the benefits cap believe that on principle the disabled should always have less money to live on than anyone who is able to hold down a job? I have always wondered this.

I don't think anyone would begrudge a disabled person being supported. Although I guess there are some jobs that can be done by disabled people - what is your disability? Could you for example still do office work?

Anyway I don't think people are suggesting that disabled people should have benefits capped. It's more about people who can work but choose not to & some people think that their benefits should be capped.

livingmybestlife

I claim UC and work part time now. I get around £1600 a month from UC which includes childcare (after my 15 free hours are deducted) I then earn another £500 ish from my part time job

£1600 is like a decent salary. So £2100 a month is what DH earns working FT as a teacher about 50 hrs/wk (after tax/pension). I agree it's a decent amount to get given as a top up. For some people £1600 is their salary - it's more than I get & I work long hours as a teacher too.

I can see why it's less motivating to go and work all week when you can get that amount for doing nothing.

@converseandjeans

moonlightflitwick

What about people like me - with a life-long disability that means I have never been able to work? Do people who agree with the benefits cap believe that on principle the disabled should always have less money to live on than anyone who is able to hold down a job? I have always wondered this.

I don't think anyone would begrudge a disabled person being supported. Although I guess there are some jobs that can be done by disabled people - what is your disability? Could you for example still do office work?

Anyway I don't think people are suggesting that disabled people should have benefits capped. It's more about people who can work but choose not to & some people think that their benefits should be capped.

You don't? Of course people begrudge disabled people being supported, hence the whole rhetoric and spin that's been spun for the past 10 years about the 'genuinely' disabled and moves like PIP and bedroom tax and stripping funding for services like Access to Work grants and Remploy.

It's not more about people who can work but choose not to it's about having bought into this myth that there were millions of people on the take so cut the entire system for everyone and Victorian bollocks about deserving and undeserving poor.

Drkpl- but surely your situation was only temporary until your partner found a job or you could return to work ? Was your rent so expensive that your UC only covered your rent?
It wasn’t a great idea to have a baby straight after graduation tbh. You can’t expect benefits to pay for your rent when you failed to plan adequately. Straight after graduation I was renting a room in a shared house not setting up home with my boyfriend and expecting to get my rent paid by taxpayers . Your situation was entirely of your own making and one of the reasons why we have a benefit cap in the first place .

Housing benefit benefits the person claiming it. They get to live in a house when they are unable to work or are on low wages.
The landlord receives money for providing a service. They aren’t getting the money for nothing.

Of course people begrudge disabled people being supported, hence the whole rhetoric and spin that's been spun for the past 10 years about the 'genuinely' disabled and moves like PIP and bedroom tax and stripping funding for services like Access to Work grants and Remploy

Ahmm, I used to work with someone who put a lot of effort into "being classed as disabled". And rightly, was called out on it thanks to a combination of not being very clever and actually being in FT work at the time.

Sadly there are people like this, scammers are everywhere where there is financial gain.
Unfortunately people like that have made it more difficult for genuine claimants.

@Ylvamoon

Of course people begrudge disabled people being supported, hence the whole rhetoric and spin that's been spun for the past 10 years about the 'genuinely' disabled and moves like PIP and bedroom tax and stripping funding for services like Access to Work grants and Remploy

Ahmm, I used to work with someone who put a lot of effort into "being classed as disabled". And rightly, was called out on it thanks to a combination of not being very clever and actually being in FT work at the time.

Sadly there are people like this, scammers are everywhere where there is financial gain.
Unfortunately people like that have made it more difficult for genuine claimants.

People can claim PIP and work full time. PIP is extra money designed to help with the extra costs of being disabled.

@converseandjeans

moonlightflitwick

What about people like me - with a life-long disability that means I have never been able to work? Do people who agree with the benefits cap believe that on principle the disabled should always have less money to live on than anyone who is able to hold down a job? I have always wondered this.

I don't think anyone would begrudge a disabled person being supported. Although I guess there are some jobs that can be done by disabled people - what is your disability? Could you for example still do office work?

Anyway I don't think people are suggesting that disabled people should have benefits capped. It's more about people who can work but choose not to & some people think that their benefits should be capped.

Autism, viisual impairment,chronic mental health problems and some physical issues. No, couldn't work in an office. It was the people saying no one disabled should ever have more money than someone earning. Bearing in mind that eg the minimum wage is not viable, the implication is that long term disabled people do not deserve quality of life.

Bereavement support allowance isn't means tested and does not fall within the benefits cap. As long as you are in the right age bracket you can claim it regardless of income.

@ConsuelaHammock

Drkpl- but surely your situation was only temporary until your partner found a job or you could return to work ? Was your rent so expensive that your UC only covered your rent? It wasn’t a great idea to have a baby straight after graduation tbh. You can’t expect benefits to pay for your rent when you failed to plan adequately. Straight after graduation I was renting a room in a shared house not setting up home with my boyfriend and expecting to get my rent paid by taxpayers . Your situation was entirely of your own making and one of the reasons why we have a benefit cap in the first place .

The strange thing about life is - it doesn't always go to plan.

moonlightflitwick

I think you might have posted before about trying to get a job and finding it almost impossible?

Well I would hope the majority of people would not begrudge you being supported. I think that's what benefits are there for. I don't imagine many jobs are possible if you're unable to see clearly.

People can claim PIP and work full time. PIP is extra money designed to help with the extra costs of being disabled.

Yep, and the criterion has meant thousands who were on DLA, some with lifelong awards, were told they don't qualify for PIP, which royally fucked a lot of them on UC, UC removed severe disability element, pensioners with a spouse or domestic partner under pension age (that the Tories raised as a stroke) now need to apply for UC rather than Pension Tax Credits and on and on and on.

Oh, and remove most access to Legal Aid, so you need to find help to appeal your PIP denial.

And Access to Work grants.

Again, the Tories have fucking decimated life for many, many, many disabled people and people still fall for their spin.

actually being in FT work at the time.

You can be disabled and work FT, you know that, right? . People who are classed as disabled are individuals like everyone else, not some homogeneous group that are all the same. Some people can work FT, but are still eligible for PIP etc as they require assistance and adjustments in areas of their life that aren't neccessarily prevelent in their job. Just the same as others are unable to work.

The stranger thing about life is that so many want /expect everyone else to help sort out their mistakes! Perhaps people will ‘ plan a little more ‘ now the safety net isn’t as big or so readily available .

@ConsuelaHammock How about you try looking beyond just your own experiences and realise that not only is it impossible to plan for every possible upheaval but some people don't have that opportunity. Ever heard of the poverty cycle? We need to break it! People who grow up poor (in general) have less opportunities than those who don't and often aren't given the assistance or tools to seize the opportunities when they do appear. Someone who leaves school with no qualifications because they've been a young carer is unlikely to get anything more than a minimum wage job and so how do you expect them to save up to but their own house to keep them secure? Save up in case of a job loss? That's just one example there are thousands of reasons why people get stuck in the cycle and no, it's not that easy to 'just move' or 'get a better job' or 'get some more qualifications'

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. We are papering over gigantic cracks in the system and people are getting stuck in them! Society cannot and will not survive with a 'one size fits all' solution like the benefit cap

I think genuinely disabled people should be paid equal to a person working 40 hours on the minimum wage + an amount to cover cost of their disability. This will be different for each disabled person. For some they will need to pay carers to come and help them 2 or 3 times each day others cost of taxi to shops. But I don't actually think they should be paid far in excess of a person who works full time pays their tax but is low paid. A low paid person who works hard full time should be able to keep more of their money to live on. Many of these people are forced into living in one room in a shared house. No matter how hard they work they are forced to hand over taxes to pay for others to live in nice areas and be handed eg £1600 for not working at all which is more than they get for working a full week and often in a hard physical job. I have seen many care leavers who are only 20 or so who rage at the injustice of working full time, being stuck in a room somewhere with no family support and because others get so much paid in benefits they have to hand over money in tax they want to save to get better accomodation for themselves. This results in care leavers often having poor mental health.

The poverty cycle is real I agree but benefits just help keep it going . Give a man a fish etc etc
It would be wonderful if no one had to work the low paid low skill jobs but that’s just realistic. If benefits pay the same as these jobs then people
won’t do them especially if it amounts to an extra £50 /week . I’ve read many threads on here asking if it’s worth it !
They will only take these jobs when they have no choice . The carrot approach was used for years . Now the government are using the stick.

You lot make me sick

I agree the system is broken but throwing money at it won’t fix it . We have too many people for the jobs and resources available .