to think benefits should be capped at minimum wage

[moogster1a]

A little idea that all benefits should be capped at a weeks worth of minimum wage; so 37 and half hours times whatever minimum wage is now ( £6 pounds odd ).
That way no one gets paid more for sitting at home than they would for going out to work.
Out of this, all rent prescriptions etc. should be paid, the same as most people in low paid jobs have to pay for everything.
it might also provide an incentive to go out to work to up your wages if you progress in a company.
Just think it would be a lot fairer.

like

Really?

Do you include HB and CTB in this?

And what about people who need lots of prescriptions or are disabled?

Do you think these measures will help the economy?

people on MW are often entitled to WTC and CTC are you including this in your calculations?

Do we keep the tax credits or do you think we should scrap them?

Hi usual,good thread eh?

Moogster.... Everyone else on nun wage has the option to apply fir tax credits, housing benefit and council tax benefit. Assume in your little 'scenario' that benefit claimants would also be able to???

*minimum!!

Usualsuspect your tcs on minimum wage usually get eaten up by the 30% you need for childcare. We have a lot of friends who get more money than us for being a non working couple and we both have low wage jobs. I wouldnt quit though as I enjoy working and what will those people do when their kids are older? Its not worth it for more money now to lose all the positives that come with working imo

Jolly good idea. Send it to the Prime Minister, the Minister for Benefits and your MP. Also send it to national newspapers and get an e-petition started. You'll make your 100,000! From experience, I know that people who stay at home can receive more than £300 per wek in benefits.

I even heard that if you are on benefits and have a dog, you can claim for that as well (might not be true though). No wonder we see beggars with dogs.

YANBU. Although lots of help with childcare costs should be given, but only for the first two children.

SaraSidle has got it in a nutshell.

Sure, if minimum wage were doubled.

People on low incomes are usually entitled to housing benefit/ tax credits so we need to keep them.

But I'm in favour of much higher taxation to pay for good school meals, free prescriptions and dentistry for all.

Basically I want to be like Germany - 50% tax, healthy, successful country - NOT in recession.

yep. They can apply for exactly the same credits etc. that working people get. The crux of the matter is that their "income"so to speak is no more than minimum wage.
So, if a person on minimum wage would normally have to pay for prescriptions, they do too. They would have to buy the annual prescription if they need a lot, the same as people in low paid jobs do. there are already exemtions for all people with certain conditions ( eg. epilepsy who don't need to pay whatever their income.

And so any later DC get discriminated against?

What if you have three DC before you need to apply for any benefits?

Don't be stupid!! That would be giving people who don't work MORE money!!

You are proposing to swap the £67.50 a week benefit for a week of minimum wage!!!

WWhat do you mean, later children get discriminated against? In working families, the more children you have the less money per person there is to go round. The same should be true for people on benefits.

So what is a weeks wage at mw then??

In a way I agree with the OP because people do need a financial incentive to come off benefits. However, as I repeatedly say on these threads, benefits and taxes need to be reformed together.

Raising minimum wage to a level that is a living wage and removing all taxes on the first £10k of income for each person, and allowing a tax credit to cover childcare would remove the barrier to work for many people.

Tax credits are a very bad idea compared to raising the tax fre earning threshold. Tax credits subsidise employers so they can pay less than a living wage. Much better to allow the employee to earn up to the living wage tax free and employers to pay a proper living wage.

Is the NMW an acceptable level of wage? What about people in more expensive areas? Or should they just move because they're poor so not allowed to put roots down and settle anywhere?

£228 ( I think!)

Peole 'on' benefits only get the gateway benefit....income support or jobseekers..... They can then apply ( like anyone else) for tax credits,HB and council tax

Income support is £67.50 a week

What incentive does this give to people who don't want to work? I don't thinks it's right that someone can work extremely hard doing a minimum wage job will get the same as someone who chooses to sit at home all day - I am not saying that everyone on benefits chooses to sit at home all day but there are a lot who see it as a lifestyle choice!

I actually think that there should be a voucher scheme for food etc so that people aren't able to spend all their money on alcohol and cigarettes instead of supporting their children - again, I know that not everyone does this but I certainly know of people who priortise their own need for cigarettes and alcohol over their childrens' needs for good food etc.

Op is proposing the £67.50 a week is replaced with a weeks worth if NMW..... So that would be MORE money. Op is just saying 'pay your prescriptions from that'

Iggly - wages would rise naturally in areas that there was a shortage of supply of labour or had higher living costs. We have to let people make choices based on incomes and prices. In high cost areas with high demand for labour, like London, wages would naturally ris eto attract labour. Wages are currently distorted heavily by the benefits and tax credit system so that in places London we do not see that price signal working properly and wages are lower than they otherwise would be if the tax and benefits system worked properly.