to think benefits are pretty LOW actually. How much do you get?

[ItsGraceActually]

I'm on ESA (used to be 'sick benefit'). I get £90 a week, plus my rent (£400/month) and council tax (£100/month).

With my £90 a week, I pay for heating - it's an all-electric house on a pre-pay meter; water rates; phone, internet, mobile, etc; TV licence; everything else.

I can't afford to run a car or, indeed, use public transport. I smoke, which I pay for with 'permitted work' (about £20/week) from home. I NEVER go out, except for one coffee a fortnight. I don't know how I'm going to afford heating in the winter.

I am extremely grateful for the welfare system, don't get me wrong! I feel fine about claiming: I paid in for 30 years, in the belief that anyone who needs it can get it.
Just now and again, there's one thread too many in here about people on a "welfare lifestyle" , living it up on benefits. Chance'd be a fine thing ...

I don't think they are too low, I really don't, but I do think bashing people on them is silly.

ExP generally am inclined to agree with you

Especially in this current climate

personally I would like to see a higher rate apyuable (on top of what we have now as a base level) to those who have amde long term NI contributions as a way of helping those who contribute to handle short term dependency- eg sickness- when debts etc don't all magically vanish.

But I don;t think base rates should rise except in line with inflation generally (whatever rate of inflation you use, am no expert)

I used to get a lot more on Benefits than I do now, but it's swings and roundabouts.

Because I'm not on benefits I was able to buy a house, which is a long term investment. However, I now live on £590 a month and pay my own rent and council tax. When I was on benefits I was living on £400 income (including tax credits), plus rent and council tax paid, which came to another £950 pm.

Life is much tougher now, but as we are able to get credit, we can cope if the washing machine breaks, whereas I couldn't before.

I would never bash anyone on benefits, but there is definitely much more security, as you have a roof over your head. But if you are living on benefits you need that security, so it is no bad thing.

Basically it is a very low income, but there are those earning on a much lower income, who may feel bitter that they cannot have their wage "topped up" by the government to what the government believes to be the minimum standard of living; which is why they lash out at those they feel are getting a rosier deal than they are, and doing less for it. I am not one of them may I add!!!

YOu know I get wher you are coming from but tbh it isn;t secure

We're not benefit dependent- working poor- but need the disability aspects to cope with me being a carer and not earning (I have a higher easrning potential but DH simply couldn't cope with two ASD kids all day, many people could not).

And tbh I feel far less than secure: when we home owned we knew we wouldn;t be booted out any minute, if we paid we stayed.

We knew the next gocernemnt woudln't suddenly decide ASD is all a game and cut entitlements.

It felt more secure tbh

Oh and when I woked if I wanted more money (and I did do it at one stage so DH could change jobs) I took on anohter,

Can't do that now .

I think ccpccp does 't know the difference between ESA (as IB is now known as) and DLA [rolls eyes]

DLA exceptionally difficult to get (took my mum years on her reassessment to get the higher rate), ESA a bugger to get.

"invisible" illnesses they think you're fine regardless of the evidence.

oh I'm definitely not "secure" on benefits - I may get HB - but my landlord could decide to sell up at any point in time, then I'd be out. And trying to find another LL to take HB is hard.

But it is the same for lone parents that work. I can't take another job as I cannot leave dd at home on her own. There is a rut under a certain income where, whether working or on benefits, you are stuck. You cannot get more income as you are barred from working or cannot strike the balance between work and childcare costs.

I do know what you mean about it feeling more secure, but I have the constant worry that the house could be repossessed within two months if I lost my income, which scares me more than anything. I feel less secure now than I did on benefits, as the rent went straight to the council.

What a mess!!

I don't know how the system can be made more efficient, though I'm aware of the enormous layer of claim processors - who are paid very high rates for the job, and incentivised to reduce the number of successful claims

I've been refused DLA on appeal. I would have thought it obvious that I'd be earning more than my benefits if I could hack it, but the claim is all about a points system. A woman came to my house to check that I can bend over & stand on one leg You'd have to pretty much paraplegic to get instant approval for DLA. The issues with the points system and mental illness, or variable conditions, are well-known but not properly addressed.

The DLA mechanism is my only problem with the system as it stands. That, and the fact of unclaimed Tax Credits. It's outrageous that people returning to work, or with children, aren't automatically sent a Tax Credit claim form.

Also, if you're on JSA, can you get an advance payment to attend interviews? I know there is reimbursement, but that wouldn't help much if you were already broke when the interview came up.

The Government is only pretending to think this country's awash with benefit fraudsters. It's a politically easy way to demonstrate their commitment to savings, and deflects public attention away from the big-money 'fraudsters' who are still merrily enjoying their tax-free incomes and large bonuses.

The fact that it's just a political move is demonstrated by that idiotic remark about benefit claimants "with the blinds down". It made no sense at all, but was a transparent appeal to the majority of Sun & Daily Mail readers.

havent read the thread but this is what i get per week as a single mum with 3 dcs -

£148 child tax credit
£65 income support
£42 child benefit
£155 rent
plus council tax and healthy start vouchers which add up to £9.10 per week.

That doesn't look too gruesome, skooobie, though you won't be ski-ing in the Rockies this winter, evidently. Do you think it's fair?

well, £1700 a month in hand is about the same as earning £30k.

Notb (rightly) as flexible though and in some ways being on benefits can cost mroe (eg the lack of access to credit- something In know poverty charities cite a lot)

Wish to restate I don't think we should get mroe btw!

pointydog - eh?

£30k pa gets you £1,885.30 a month. Plus she'd still get CB, so that would be about £2,000 a month in total.

what?

Everyone gets CB so a bit pointless adding it in. I just did a quick estimate and got around £1700+ which is around £30k. I wasn't trying to round it to the nearest 10p.

Single mum of 3 here I get (per week)

£47 CB
£126 housing benefit
£6 council tax
£132 child tax credit
£46 income support (reduced as I'm paying back a social fund loan that I needed to enable me to move last year)

It's less than we had when I was with exH and he was working full time for 16k a year and we got WTC.

well really you should take out HB and CTB as well then - as my brother works..........and still gets some of both of those benefits.

And likely that when I start working next year I'll also still get CTB and HB.

Lots of low income families still qualify for some of both of those.

Its no surprise that disabled groups are complaining about it SMA. Thats part of their remit.

Hope you get carers for DS1. Be grossly unfair not to get it when other parents have been exagerating their kids illnesses to qualify.

Eh? The government 'believes' that all the 50% are fake claimants? I doubt that. You do understand that the level of (actual) disability in a population doesn't necessarily correlate with the level of (identified) disability, and that this is Not Good?

You clearly don't understand basic logic. You say 'The level of disability in a region is often proportional to the number of unemployed in that region. So the fewer jobs a region has, the more disabled its workforce is. An odd coincidence?'

Amazingly, if many people are disabled, and unable to work, they will indeed be amongst the unemployed. Hardly a coincidence!

If you take out the child benefit, I make skooobie's take-home equivalent £1,634/month which isn't that far off £1,700 - but is £250 less than what she'd get on a 30k salary.

Even as a general remark, your post was inaccurate. I feel I have to take issue with it because that's the kind of assumption that leads to "scrounging" accusations. £250/month is quite a difference.

sliq we get £52 a week ctc and dh earns £1100 a month - im surprised to see you get the same as us i thought you would get a lot more not working - just goes to show

you haven't added on teh council tax, grace, which is probably £100+ a month. I was adding that in. £28k then

This is a very depressing thread - we work hard for very little and would definatly be better off if I gave up work.

AND don't get me started on managing school holidays.....

I always try to look on the positive of what life brings you but I really must hide this thread beofre I write my letter of resignation!

ccpccp

thank you, I can;t actually qualify for additionalc arer4s anyway after the first child so that's not an issue, it's the DLA I worry about as that enable him to have a life that is better than the one he would otherwise have, which I think would by now (DLA payss for therapy etc) be in care as he is close to my handling limits anyway even after a lot of improvements and dietary control.

I agree that disabled grpoups would say that but that doesn't mean they have a point witehr! When you large groups opf people with a significant disability such as ASD having it reinstated at appeal it suggests that something is wrong with the assesment (not just for the person but the state as appeals cost!)

Thats not what I said Dragon, on either count.

I said the government clearly didnt agree with your explanation for the 50% rise. If they did, they wouldnt be pushing through reforms to tighten up the disability system.

Second one was my error - statement wasnt clear. You would expect the number of people claiming disability to be the same per 1000 people, say, across all regions in the country. This isnt the case. In areas of high unemployment, there are more people claiming disability. The logical conclusion being - they arent unemployed because they are disabled. They are disabled because they are unemployed.

Dont ask me to find the article though - searched for half an hour and cant see it anywhere. Maybe I dreampt it.