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.

Yes Sara, on benefits.

What do you think we do now on our less than benefits earned income??!!

No need to buy it jade, it's linked to here on MN plenty

this is a "I have read the DM so it must be true" thread.

Mrsdoasyouwouldbedoneby completely agree!

You lot seem to be missing the point that folkgirl would be better off AND her husband would have all day not working if he packed in his job! So presumably folkgirl could save the 'extra' from what their income is now, yes? I don't imagine folkgirl is in an unusual situation.

And that's another one jenfraggle.

jenfraggle a teen who has never works get £57 a week JSA no other benefits if they are not disabled and living at home, they also have a small chance of getting a job due to lack of experience.

The jobs are advertised yes, but employers don't tend to choose those on benefits, who have been out of work with employment gaps. Lucky to even get an interview in many cases

Either way, it is WRONG that someone could get more money for their family by not working, and this is what needs addressing. Raise the wage, drop the benefits, whatever, just address the unfairness where someone can earn more for sitting on their arse and occasionally showing up at an interview that they can by doing a decent full time working week.

Folkgirls DH would be expected to be searching for work and going on courses, not to be swanning round parks

Or taking part in other jobseekers courses

I think it's a very unusual situation jade. We are on NMW, we get around 10.5k per annum plus WTC/CTC.

During times we have had to claim benefits we find we are around £20-30 per week worse off. Which is not much, admitedly, but when you live on not much to begin with, it's enough to make the difference between feeding yourself or your children or feeding both and not heating the house.

I don't where Folkgirl has done her sums but I dare they're either wrong or she is not claiming something now that she would be entitled to.

Oh because looking for a job is a 40 hour a week commitment. So, what do people who are working full time but looking for a new job do, may I ask?

SaraSidle tell me about it.my ds has been looking and looking, gone to countless interviews and Zilch, that is even if he got an interview! then he would never hear back from the job.
happily he has a job(1 more hurdle to cross, a drugs/alcohol test, which he will pass)

I agree to a certain extent with capping the benifits.
I have 2 step sisters, both with partners. The oldest is 25, so is her boyf, they are now on their 5th child, never worked or been to college yet they have just been given a 4 bed house, they have a car and all the mod cons.
The youngest is 21 who also has never had a job or gone to college just like her boyf, they got a private rent flat that the social paid for, got evicted for not paying rent and damaging the property, went back to live with the parents then got a council flat all paid for! They are now trying for a baby! No doubt they will get re-housed to a bigger place!

I left college, went straight into work, have worked all my adult life (im 31)
Had a child with my then partner, we split, i carried on working (luckily with help with childcare from the ex) couldn't get a coucil flat as i was low priority so had to rent private. I met my current partner and moved in together with my child, we both work, struggle through the month and no we don't have all the mod cons - i think im the only person left in my town with old style big TV and a 12 year old computer!

I see almost daily on social networking sites that my sisters and their friends all discussing what they think of the council, DSS etc and getting tips off each other to get more, makes my blood boil!

But there are genuine people in need of these benifits, people find themselves out of work through no fault of their own. I was lucky my ex helped with childcare, not many single mums have that. Childcare is expensive, there is still discrimination from employers who would prefer employing single people rather than single mums who are more likely to take time off to care for a sick child!

Genuine Disabled people who rely on the benifits, the carers and family members who look after disabled people.

How do you weed out the bad from the genuine?

Sorry rant over!

Ok dooin, I accept that. But spin it round. Is it worth working for that little extra per month? For some, maybe. For others, no of course not.

Which of course would mean slave that someone else would have to be employed to do the caring that the disabled person was doing ergo costing the government more

Err, no it wouldn't. I realise that carers save the government money, but if they had to employ somone else to care for that person, then they would also be creating a proper tax paying job. While the original carer was also in a proper tax paying job. If they are too disabled to have that tax paying job, then they get support, but they don't get to claim that they can't work and that they can work both at the same time.

Yes, Jade, that is it. The point is, I don't think that benefits are necessarily too generous. I don't think it's a cushy life and it certainly isn't affluent!

But it's the same as we currently have, and we wouldn't have to work for it. The government would just give it to us!!! And evidently, they just give it to other people too.

That's the point. I also very much doubt we're the only ones in this position. It's just the way things have ended up.

I also would probably have been a bit about it until we had expereinced it ourselves and the only reason my DH emailed the facts and figures to me is because I refused to believe him.

I'm not saying it's what we're going to do, but it is frustrating to realise that it is the reality.

You're right, Sara, benefits is not an easy life, but it would be no less than we have now, and in fact a little more. That is the point!

raising the wage is the answer,
dropping the benefits just makes poor people poorer

employers don't tend to choose those on benefits emplyers get £1000 for employing someone on benefits. maybe this should be upped for someone long term.

slavetofilofax Wed 23-Nov-11 10:50:20
Which of course would mean slave that someone else would have to be employed to do the caring that the disabled person was doing ergo costing the government more

Err, no it wouldn't. I realise that carers save the government money, but if they had to employ somone else to care for that person, then they would also be creating a proper tax paying job. While the original carer was also in a proper tax paying job. If they are too disabled to have that tax paying job, then they get support, but they don't get to claim that they can't work and that they can work both at the same time.

that is one of the daftest posts ever you probably should find out more about being a carer before you write about it.

The MAJORITY of recipients of Housing Benefit are IN WORK. Wages are so low, and rent is so high, that most people on low wages need to apply for housing help and tax credits.

Dooin - I didn't do the sums to be fair, DH did them.

But given that he works for the local authority, used to work in the benefits service and part of his job includes ensuring that agencies are fully aware of the benefits their clients are entitled too...

I would suggest that the real problem for us is the cost of repaying the student loan, repaying his work travelcard and contributing to a pension, none of which he'd be doing on benefits. But doing all of that takes us below the benefit line.

''But it's the same as we currently have, and we wouldn't have to work for it. The government would just give it to us!!! And evidently, they just give it to other people too.''

I think, for me, this sums up the situation. What a depressing state of affairs.

Yes it's most definately worth it. £20 per week, we work week to week as most low paid are paid weekly, is a lot of money when you only bring home £200 per week. It is the difference between making sure everyone eats and heating the house.

Plus it gives you access to overdrafts for emergencies and credit if your washer breaks down, which you don't have on benefits.

NMW as it is now is a joke. No-one can live a comfortably and afford to save for the what-ifs.

And £34-35k is well above the minimum and average wage!

So that means there are a fair few other people in at least a similar position.