Pip and the government decisions

[Differentstarts]

I don't understand why the government are going for an all or nothing approach with getting disabled people back into work. I think there is a significant amount of disabled people who could work part time but if they lose pip and lcwra then this won't be an option as nobody can live on a part time wage. I think expecting people to suddenly be able to work 50/60 hour weeks just isn't realistic. I work part time and claim pip and lcwra and it works when I worked full time in the past i actually worked less as I was always ill and in hospital. I should be still able to claim pip and lcwra with the changes but I don't have a lot of trust in the system that this will definitely be the case and if I lost that money then what as I wouldn't be able to pay my bills, get to hospital appointments pay for aids etc. I would lose my home, my job everything. I just don't understand why there isn't a middle ground and part time work isn't being encouraged as surely the aim is to get more people working. I just don't get it.

The people with the most severe disabilities should get the most.

It should be awarded on the effect of a disability not as a means to prop up poor pay or other benefits

Because it's being cut which means people already living in poverty will be a lot worse off than those who don't need it.

That hypothetical disabled person earning £100k - spoiler alert, never personally met one - would be a net contributor and should be supported in continuing to work and contribute. They would be one of the people funding benefits for others. Would you rather penalise and demoralise them? Drive them out of the workplace?

That would be a bit bloody stupid, wouldn't it?

It's used to pay for necessary expenses relating to your disability. For example, necessary equipment or a carer or cleaner. It's not given as compensation for having a disability.

absolutely literally overnight, I went to bed perfectly okay & woke up in the morning having had two strokes and become disabled. I am completely without feeling on one side of my body, which obviously means I have no feeling in my hand. I scored enough points to qualify for the living element of PIP. But I don't score 4's because I can do just enough not to score a 4. But I'm having to buy more expensive options of food, I'm having to buy and pay for other things that non-disabled people don't have to and everything takes fucking forever. I can't even get out of the house at a time where I would have been working for three hours previously!!

As for work, 🙄🙄🙄, I can barely get myself washed, dressed and fed in a day, everything is falling behind and that's without currently working. Yes, it's not helped by the fact I live alone and don't have a spouse to do all those things, but it's my reality.

People do need to realise and remember that it could be them overnight

What's bloody stupid is paying benefits to people who don't need it. It's like the warm home payments being given to pensioners living in a villa in Spain.

They really don't get it ❤️

Who in your view deserves it? You? Generic 'poor' people regardless of their disability?

My PIP allows me to work it's that simple. I do meaningful, rewarding work which isn't especially well-paid. It funds my car, some health supplements and occasional neurophysio. These things keep me in work. You don't get to judge who needs it. Are you disabled? If you're not some day you might be.

People with disabilities who are living on a low income.

Personally I disagree
I think everybody gets it

40 years or so ago, there was an obligation for larger companies with a certain number of employees to employ a % of disabled people and they could claim grants to enable them to work there eg making the building accessible, provision of specialist equipment etc. Naturally companies wanted to actively employ disabled in order to reach their quota. (not sure if there was a tax advantage to the company but do recall HR being absolutely delighted when we took on someone wheelchair bound and kept offering funds for things to help)

I think re-establishing this requirement would assist the uptake of employment of disabled people no end.

Given we are told there’s no money and they are trying to make savings how would you propose its financed
No point suggesting through the tax those workers would pay as the tax man would get that anyway from others doing the job

So does it come from benefits to other disabled people or from where ?

You see I think that’s the problem. All forms of financial encouragement have to be financed……

I agree that PIP should be means tested. if you have more than enough to take care of your family still, why should they be entitled to the same as those who cant afford it?

The likes of David Cameron claiming DLA for his son (equivalent of PIP for children) is horrible. They shouldn't have been entitled to it with the money they have.

@SwizzelYou saved me by posting the exact same I was about to.
i think a lot of claimants have missed the need to score 4 on one descriptor before cumulative total

Ok, no problem. I'll quit work and ask DH to move out. Congratulations, I'm now disabled and poor. Now get your fucking wallet out and start giving me all the benefits under the sun.

Or alternatively keep giving me PIP so I can keep working and be one less person claiming the whole suite of benefits. I'll even maybe eventually be a net contributor again.

A green paper is the start of a consultation. There will be opportunity to feed into it. Lots of scaremongering by people who should know better (including MP’s making gestures and charities and the media who should know better). I’ll reserve judgement.

I've got no idea what you're talking about. The government want to cut a certain amount of money from disability benefits. They want to make it far more difficult for people to qualify for PIP.

I'm concerned that some people will no longer be able to afford essentials that PIP pays for. Some may be using PIP to keep their heads above water.

My suggestion is that rather than making PIP more difficult obtain, it's means tested.

The snarly responses aren't really necessary. I'm concerned about the desperate consequences on societies most vulnerable.

They only asked very specific questions on the green paper consultation and all were geared towards getting people working. Completely missing the point that many disabled people ARE working already in one capacity or another. I was disgusted by how limited it was, it was quite clearly funneling people towards a certain outcome rather than an open consultation.

They don't care about disabled people, even though many of us are more disabled than we needed to be because of the absolute shambles of our 'healthcare' system.

It's not about 'snarly responses' it's about trying to get you to see the bigger picture. Every person we keep in work is a good thing. If PIP facilitates that for disabled people then it is a win by every conceivable measure.

The great unmentionable is that the true targets of this were those with mild mental illness and neurodiversity, especially the under 25s. Rather than having the courage to be honest about this they have attacked people with severe, enduring illness. I have MS. It's incurable and progressive, the one goal with MS is to slow down progression along the disability scale. The irony is people like me are the ones striving to stay in work!

These cuts aren't about getting people into work. They're about cutting disability benefits by a certain amount. Just because the government are using the reason behind it as getting people into work, doesn't mean it's true.

There is only a certain amount of money for disability benefits available and I would prefer to see it going to society's most vulnerable.

They would be people with disabilities who are living with a low income. Perhaps they're completely reliant on benefits or only have a small, single income.

Whilst many disabled people are working there is a growing number not working.
Thats the problem.
People who could work but aren’t!

Just because it’s an unknown that can happen to anyone doesn’t mean it can’t be means tested.
Becoming unemployed can happen to anyone at any time and yet the benefits are means tested.

Well they didn’t claim it anymore once he was dead. He was highly disabled and lived 6 years, personally I have no issue with anyone in that situation claiming dla. Dla isn’t just the money, a lot of access to other things is based on dla/ rate of dla you get, it’s seen as the proof that you are disabled. So for example I take my son to a disability swimming session at a water park but you now need dla as proof to access as apparently there was a lot of people going who shouldn’t be

What should be the cut off for means testing do you suggest?

shoukd it be based on household or individual income? For example if an adult disabled person is still living at home should it be means tested based on their parents income?

Plus unemployed benefits aren’t means tested in the short term, nor should they be