If you could decide how much people get in benefits

[OneLemonOrca]

There are benefit bashing threads being posted often, with complaints that certain people on benefits can afford a better lifestyle than them when they work, and that it is being made into a life style choice?
So if you could decide, I am just wondering how much you think benefit claimants should receive in certain circumstances or what their money should or shouldn’t be able to pay for, to get a general idea of what mumsnet thinks is “right”.

Why would anyone work?

Wholeheartedly agree.

Who would pay for it since practically nobody would bother to work, if they could just live comfortably on benefits?

This place is full of utter fantasists at times!

I'm not sure benefits are always fair. I have worked since 18, built a career I absolutely adored, then was diagnosed with a chronic illness which is slowly disabling me. I had to give up my career, work part time in a job I don't particularly enjoy and now can only work 12 hours a week due to my health. The only help I have to cover the very small salary I now have which is not even a 1/4 of what I used to earn is PIP and I have the very lowest rate they could award, I don't have it in me to challenge the decision. My bills didn't drop by 3/4 when I got ill, I cant claim any other benefits as they are means tested and my husbands income is taken into consideration. I dont know how the people who receive tons of benefits achieve that but I can say its not easy. When you see the quite frankly vile comments from Mumsnetters about benefits and how we should get our arses out to work or live on the breadline shame on you for your ignorant comments.

I'd love my health back, I'd love to go back tk the career I loved, I didn't ask for this illness I hate it and there are others like me who didn't deserve this and don't want this life, yet we are supposed to walk around almost feeling ashamed of ourselves? Just remember it could happen to anyone, even you!

The biggest expense is usually means testing, UBI removes that. The reason that all pensioners get the winter fuel allowance is because it's cheaper to give it to everyone. The introduction of the PIP assessments has resulted in many people losing benefits they really need but has cost more than it saved!

In all trials UBI it has never lead people to do less work, there is usually an increase in employment.

This what comes of the vilification of benefits claimants by the Tories and the right wing media it sets people against eachother.
I'm of an age to remember when the Tories blamed single mothers for all the ills of society in the 80s..they always vilify sections of society.. classic divide and conquer.

Universal Basic Income is the best way forward.

I think a universal basic income would be a great idea.

And the easy jobs will often be extremely boring. I'm a health & safety consultant so visit lots of factories where there is a surprising amount of manual input into production.

I recently watched a man who's job it was to catch boxed products coming off a production line and put them in a bigger box. Imagine having to do that all day, every day.

Due to noise you can't even chat with coworkers nor can you do things like listen to music/podcasts as phones and earbuds aren't allowed on the factory floor due to the risk of product contamination.

The trials in comparable countries have been very small. Too small to draw any conclusions.

Surely they have budgeted for the 18bn of benefits that is also unclaimed p/y? 🙄

Do you think your work with these people skews your opinion? These people already aren’t contributing UBI wouldn’t change that - but it might make them less likely to commit crime and of course it would also make your work redundant which I understand would be problematic for you!

No, it doesn’t skew my opinion, it means I’m more aware of the consequences UBI would have. People would continue to commit crime. UBI on a small scale might be achievable but for the U.K. is a wild fantasy that would result in economic collapse. There’s a reason Labour haven’t proposed bringing it in.

Benefits for adult disabled people
wjo are unable to work should be much higher. Enough for a comfortable standard of living.

It is fine for all the other benefits to be low enough that it is not comfortable though. There needs to be an incentive to work and to not have children you can’t afford. Housing benefit shouldn’t be paying for people to live in expensive areas that non benefits claimants can’t afford.

It’d be a basic income though so you’d want to work to have a car/ nicer stuff/ money for hobbies and holidays. I think you’d also have to give people a place to live. It’s quite dystopian in a way. There have been lots of books/ films about people who live in tiny apartments and get identical clothes/ daily food on tray from a hole in the wall.

Invariably the human spirit wants to be free and ends up in conflict with whatever regime. It’d be interesting to see how it’d go in real life.

Nice hobbies wouldn’t be enough to get people out of bed at 7am 5 days a week every week. It just wouldn’t. Swathes of lower paid jobs would go unfilled, people would either work very part time or just dip in and out of work if they needed something. Our economy would be really unstable with a high turnover of workers employees and loads of people on ‘indefinite work breaks’. It would be a disaster.

You could always not claim...?

Anyone who thinks the benefits / pension system in its current state is sustainable is burying their heads in the sand. A complete change along with an overhaul of our tax system is going to be forced on future governments at some point.

Agree. Of course if you say this you’re ‘mean’ or ‘right wing’

I think for UBI to work it needs to be for only a defined, relatively small and reasonably ‘closed’ set of people. So not really ‘universal’. Some of the examples upthread were like that (Cherokee Indians for example).
If it applies to everyone in the entire country, I would presume it would lead to inflation and I don’t think people would be better off long term.
And there would need to be some qualification checks (based on residence or right to work in the UK?)
I can see it working when it is applies to a small group within a wider society. But if applied universally to a large population I would really worry about what would happen to ambition and work ethic in 18-30 year olds. Because to start with UBI would seem high as a proportion of what you can earn on top at that age.

I don't think I'd decide what people should get in benefits, I'd look at making sure jobs paid enough to live on so we weren't subsidising big businesses to underpay people.

So surely you can see that a move towards UBI would allow a more progressive overhaul of our tax system?

Gotta keep the shareholders happy.

If by progressive overhaul you mean tax dwindling with the outgoings skyrocketing, then yes.