David Cameron welfare reforms-no family will receive more than £25,000 a year.

[Hammy02]

Good idea? I think so. I can't believe a single family receives this much already in benefits. It is about the same as the average income so it would be ridiculous for any one family to have more in benefits than someone that works?

If you were earning 25k and were finding things tough you would just have to get on with it and budget or move house to accomodate this. So surely apart from disabled 25k is enough

I am not in the slightest saying that dla should be stopped capped or anything changed - although I would like it made sure of that people who can work do.

What I am saying is that even when everyone on a thread says that dla and benefits for the disabled should not be touched and that the debate is about people who choose not to work for instance you still get the same people within the first few posts saying 'what about the disabled' - I am sure that everyone on here feels the same - the disabled should be helped financially so much more than they are so the point being laboured again and agin is a bit tedious.

As for the 25k - why for fecks sake should people who do not work have a standard of living of that of people who do - sorry chummy you do not provide for yourself - the state provides for you so cut your cloth accordingly because this is all we can afford - and yes if that means only have one kid, not having a car and having to shop at charity shops and boot sales - well hopefully that will give you the push you need to get yourself out there in gainful emloyment.

Yup. I was the higher earner in my family but got ME/cfs which has really changed things. My husband earns about £24,000.

We lived in a dodgy flat on the edge of london and struggled, but owned a home back here so we had no support. It was crap, so we've moved back here (south coast) and he lives away mon-fri. It really sucks but we're managing.

It actually makes me really cross to find out we could be living better off on benefits and actually have my husband home during the week. And people have lots of kids and then the cheek to complain when the government wont give them bigger houses etc.

Lots of people earn under the average wage (otherwise it wouldn't be an average wage would it?!) and it appears get less than those on benefits. It does seem really unfair :(

Also - I keep coming across people with children (single mums usually) who are being told it doesn't pay them to work so are actually being discouraged. Well yes. A basic entry job isn't going to bring in £25 grand is it - the system is really flawed as what is the incentive to going back to work if that is the case?

Madame - thing is, as has been pointed out on this thread, it's possible to become poor. So you might have three children and then be hit by disaster or tragedy of some nature.

There's also the issue of the working poor - plenty of people in work qualify for housing benefit, for instance, because housing in this country is so expensive and wages for many jobs are low. The housing boom was great for people in good jobs who could move up or retired people who could downsize but it's shit for anyone who doesn't already own a house.

"Also - I keep coming across people with children (single mums usually) who are being told it doesn't pay them to work so are actually being discouraged. Well yes. A basic entry job isn't going to bring in £25 grand is it - the system is really flawed as what is the incentive to going back to work if that is the case?"

Who are these single mums? I'd love to meet them. Single mums with children over the age of 7 now have to claim jobseekers

Lots and lots on my local netmums (am I allowed to say that here ;) ) board. Usually post along the lines of "well I would work but I'm being told its not worth it for me too". Presumably with children under 7.

I think too right parents with children over 7 should look for work!!

Thehuman, I am horrified by your situation. I have worked for years in spinal injuries and have never heard of such poor after care. Were you admitted to an actual spinal injuries unit or were you in a general hospital setting.

I have never heard of a patient having to pay towards a specialist wheelchair in my area, unless they wanted a second one for sports or ocasionally if they wanted a fancy colour! I am even more shocked by the provision for your continence care as all this is provided where I am and in several other SIU i am aware of.

The same goes for home adaptations, we would only let someone go home in your situation if it was temporary. the way you have to get round your house could cause serious long term problems. SI patients should also have a specialist social worker.

If you didnt go through a spinal injuries unit for your injuries it may be worth asking your GP for a referal to a local rehabilitation consultant/neuro-rehabilitation consultant, not stroke rehab.

Feel free to ask me anything on here or via PM, i find it difficult to believe that there is such a difference in spinal injuries care and it sounds like you have fallen through the system. Our patients get help with every aspect of care needed following discharge.

So Madam, how would you go about reducing your family to only 1 child if sudden disaster struck, e.g. your husband walked out on you or died and you lost your job and couldn't get another one?

Are you actually allowed to euthanise children in such a situation?

I didn't think you were. But I suppose if the problem can be sorted by having the right number of children, then you must be.

People on £k can apply for tax cerdits

people on benefits already have that amunt taken into the equation

And yes we becmae poor AFTER ds4 ws born. Am not an advocate of aborting 3 yeras olds.

Lunar really?

Everyone I know paid towards tehir wheelchair! Without exception.

I can 't think of anyone who's had a free wheelchair either. And most useful wheelchairs are an obscene price thanks to profiteering in the disability-aids industry. So people have to near-bankrupt themselves to afford basic mobility and freedom. Presumably whilst euthanising any additional children over the quota we're allowed and living off hedgerow contents whilst wearing charity clothes. Just in case we don't already have a life filled with challenges that no-one else has, and just in case we're not saving society £100k a year per disabled person by coping in society rather than in a care setting? Why not go the whole distance and have us put in the public stocks so people can throw tomatoes at us and have a good jeer whilst they're at it ?

My Dad had a stroke, he was provided with a wheelchair, the physio visited his house and noted what adaptations he would need. My Dad being my Dad said don't worry about the stair lift, I know an old lady who's died, I'll buy that one!!!!

I also know of an extremely wealthy man who's company adapts patients houses to make them accessible. He earns a fortune from the health service.

Tomatoes are too good- we might eat them! Can't have that!

It is very variable Alouise- postcode lottery all the way.

Who is telling them this emsies? The jobcentre? It really does depend on the job, some jobs, taking into account travel etc would pay much less than benefit. If benefit barely allows a person to live then they just cant afford to take on a job paying less. It's not always as simple as it appears to be.

I'm not saying some people dont take the piss, they do..i've known plenty!

The Frogs - that's kind of what I mean in that its a vicious circle, without people intentionally "taking the piss". It just doesn't seem to pay to work. Of course entry level jobs aren't going to pay as much as being on benefits if benefits can be paying 18-25 grand (admittedly the 25 grand is unusual) but then that just can't be right that people can sit around doing nothing when other people ARE working entry level jobs to provide for their family. Also unless you try an entry level job you're not going to progress to a higher paying one.

I do think its hard and if I was in a nice cushy 3 bed house on benefits I'm not sure I would want to work if it didn't leave me better off either, but that kind of is the problem isn't it? So I can see there is a need to lower benefits to make working look more attractive, or to somehow not penalise so much when you start working.

Peachy get your scrounging paws off the taxpayers tomatoes! Amberlight - ooh, hedgerows? Free food? I hope you're bloody well declaring that.
Agree re extortionate cost of equipment and post code adaptations; dh built the ramp himself with wood bought by a friend; I can't use my kitchen/bathroom/bedroom unaided, been told adaptation impossible, been trying to get on shared ownership list for 18 months.
No doubt you, Riveninside, me et al are all happy to perform like dancing dogs to prove to Atos (annual profits how much?) we are genuinely vulnerable to make sure no lying b* gets £100 pw. I take it that those so keen to stop all this lifestyle fraud and scrounging will be likewise prepared to endure all this crap to please Call me Dave and his school-mates. Any chance of getting the tax evaders/Eton 'charity' allowances/bankers bonuses? Too hard for you? Thought so. Get us instead, then. That's OK don't mention it.

I am shocked at the difference in care across the country. I know other departments often hate us for the services we get in the SIU. Ive never heard of someone building their own ramp.

alouise

They noted what adaptions i need but they do not do in private rented and nothing available council .So i would still be in hospital waiting to come home and they do provide a wheelchair not neccessary the most suitable just needs to be adequate

Tsk scrounging tomotoes don`t you know your meant to be growing your own , well how else are we going to find enough rotten ones for Dc

It's ridiculous that my post was removed, and just makes disabled people look like they have a chip on their shoulder, not to mention having no idea at all of how the economy works.

"Whether they work or not, this is judging someone's worth and contribution on the amount of money they have and offer. I think this kind of assessment is rather immature; having lived abroad in a number of countries I can say the wealth of spirit, consideration and generosity which British people offer and enjoy is a heartfelt pleasure to come home to."

Be that as it may, the subject of this thread is money. The average banker contributes far more to the economy (and the tax take) than the average disabled person. That's not being 'disablist' (which isn't a real word btw) that's fact. Without the financial sector, the benefits system simply wouldn't be possible at all.

"Amongst my other disabled friends and acquaintances, I can count a senior social worker, the head of a charity, several Vicars, one Bishop, several accountants and surveyors and lawyers, a top scientist, ...shall I go on?"
Do you think your friends and acquaintances are a representative cross-section of disabled people in Britain? None of these people are claiming anything like £25,000 in benefits.

sadly private rented means no money will be spent on adaptions lunar .Have pm you

"Any chance of getting the tax evaders/Eton 'charity' allowances/bankers bonuses?"

How do you suppose the government goes about doing this, without driving people out of the country and thus reducing the tax take even further. Labour were in power for 13 years and didn't do anything. Do you not think there's a fairly good reason for that?

Yeah, bankers are great for the economy....where we would be without them?

Oh yes, completely fucked.

well if they are tax evaders basically liars and stealing from the goverment we don`t need them so thats one lot gone .

What cuts would you make to make up for the tens of billions in taxes that the sector contributes?

"One lot gone"? Which other "lot" do you intend to get rid of?