to envy/hate people on benefits to be as well off if not better than us

[chocaddict]

I know that this post may have some mixed reviews and may even get me slated but I can,t help it.
Someone I know although she is a genuine case her and her husband have as much as me and dh coming in and with a brand new car thrown in for good measure.
I can only dream of a new car and I work my tripe off 5 days a week as well as dh whilst some people can sit at home and get the same income coming in it seems really unfair.

What nonsense you talk Boffy. Millions? Where do you get that from?

Let's assume we could see into the future, what exactly would you expect me to do with the knowledge that I would develop terminal cancer at the age of 41? 'Cos other than topping myself, I'm not sure how else I'm supposed to deal with it in order to save you a few quid.

I'd just like to add that the cuts to DLA have nothing to do with dealing with fraud, the goverment are clear that they simply intend to save 20% of the budget. This is why they are replacing DLA with PIP and change the eligibility criteria.

People who currently claim legitimately will no longer be able to do so.

There also needs to be a review of how benefits are reduced when the claimants income rises, I had one case at work where someone turned down a pay rise as her benefits would be cut and would actually receive less money. Surely this needs to be stepped so people benefit form increased pay. Sees daft that a private company wants to pay more money but the employees would not accept it!

Well, I can see both sides here to a certain degree. FIL on dla, can't work, and he gets more than enough to live on, and I dont grudge him a penny. However next door neighbour split up and became single parent with 3 unemployed. Had to claim. I understand this. She was a SAHM and when her ex left, I 100% believe she was entitled to claim for her and her children. She then met someone else who doesn't work, (im sorry but im a bit at single young person with no dependants claiming unemployment ( i live in Scotland, at the very least go to college and better yourself, it's freeish) but then found out he was claiming incapacity because he was an alcoholic. That i totally disagreed with. Then they went on to have 2 more children, all while not working, and i really really dont agree with that at all. Neither of them have any intention of working, so afaic, have a bloody cheek having more children. And it was not a contraception fail neither. She had 3 girls to her ex and she wanted a boy. 4th was a girl, 5th thank fuck was a boy!

i dont understand why disliking abuse of the benefits system is benefits bashing?

Ilovecoffee, are you sure about that? In-work benefits i.e. tax credits are reduced on a sliding scale. HB also works on a sliding scale. So for each extra £1 you earn, you don't lose the full £1, but the amount you lose increases the more you earn.

The more you earn, your income increases. Eventually you'll reach a plateau, where each £1 does mean £1 off the benefit i.e. total income stays the same. AFAIK, it never decreases.

The main things that make a difference are work expenses. If you work more hours/days and have to pay more for travel, childcare etc, then you can be worse off.

RealTilly, my comments aren't aimed at you, you aren't benefit bashing but there are many (OP included) that are.

Those surviving on benefits are very aware of the cuts and are also tired of defending their position on MN from people who feel that disabled people are somehow stealing their taxes and ultimately not worthy.

You are right though, there is some fraud in all benefit claims, but people are defending their position that is all.

ReindeerBollocks - yes i have seen some comments in the past & i cannot decide if the poster has explained what they mean v badly or if that are in fact a eugenicist.............

i changed my mind after the last one of these threads:

Before: the country is screwed financially and the benefits system needs overhaulling.

After: the overhaul needs slowing down as ATOS etc is flawed. if we have money to write off tax bills for big business, we can afford to updated the benefits system in a slower & fairer way. i am suspicious of the govt rushing through the changes.

Tilly The problem with pointing out that one or two do fiddle the system is that, everybody knows a family. This then escalates and tars us all with the same brush. If you actually pin things down, it's rare that the people concerned know the exact circumstances, they just assume. On top of this, as has been pointed out, in the DWPs own figures, with regard to DLA, the fraud rate is 0.5%.

As for Boffy I shan't insult your intelligence by discussing the huge benefits culture you insist exists, but your imagination could do with a little tinkering, dear.

Don't get angry at the family or benefits, get angry at crap employers who are paying about the same as the minimum amount of money the government thinks you need to live on.

We have transformed into a nation who will borrow money rather than pressure their employers to stop shovelling the money upwards. How did we become such cowards?

Tilly, the problem with describing one person abusing the system, is that lots of people seem to 'know a man who....' and then go on to state things that just can't be true (eg getting dla by being'signed off' by a gp).

There are whole programmes and newspaper headlines devoted to a minority who fiddle benefits, and it all adds fuel to the fire of righteous indignation that there are 'million' getting stuff they don't deserve, and more importantly making hardworking taxpayers lives more difficult. It contributes to the setting up of figures (immigrants, benefit scroungers, disabled 'fakers' etc) that can be blamed for the country's ills. In pre war Germany I think they were called 'internal enemies'.

DD i hear what you are saying - i have seen threads when people are talking about someone on their street & thinking they must be on the fiddle when there are legitimate reasons for the perceived 'extra' money.

my personal take is that in recent history, it suited politicians to park people on IB to keep unemployment figure down. now it suits them to be 'seen to be doing something' about the number of people on IB.

i doubt if normal people are any different, only what suits politicians has changed.

God, it has all decended into goat talk.

Just skimmed the last 100 or so posts but wanted to note

Tilly
I refuse to even consider the answers of a poll that asked if people with many children should still get benefits (or however the question was put)

Lunatic is a great example of people running around with half a story, half-misheard and half-exaggerated. You are talking shite. Stop it.

The spartacus tweet thing is fab.

Boffy
What a load of guff.

How can anyone foresee sudden illness, death, disability, unemployment.. or any of the myriad reasons that could cause someone to end up claiming benefits?

Even if you have insurance or some savings, how long will they last you?

Boffy is obviously a secret millionaire with no money worries whatsoever, because surely 60yrs + of earnings/pensions would need to run into a lot of ££££ if she has covered herself for all eventualities.

We had LOADS of insurance back in the day (well, about 2003)

When your employer goes bankrupt the last thing tehy want to do is sign the forms and without that you get zilch.

Just a word to the wise there.

Mme Spartacus was bloody fab so why are all the media outlets too chickenshit to cover it?

MmeLindor - actually when respondents were asked which group "should be the highest priority to have their benefits cut":

Immigrants ? 35%
People claiming over £400 a week in housing benefit ? 27%
The long-term unemployed ? 25%
People on incapacity benefits ? 4%
Lone parents ? 2%
Other ? 1%
None ? 3%
Don't know ? 4%

large families dont make it on the list & IB claims are only prioritised by 4% of respondents.

Immigrants get pole position.....i am white but part of my family are indian & another part turkish.......

People claiming over £400 a week in housing benefit ? 27%
The long-term unemployed ? 25%

seem reasonably fair (if families which special housing requirements due to illness/disability etc are excluded).

Although it should be regional; for that you'd get a mansion here, in London maybe not so.

Anyway a joke lifted off Twitter:

If you p[lay a Cameron speech backwards you get the devil. Worse still, if you play it forwards you get Cameron!

Snurk.

If you live in London, you can't really help but live in a house that costs more than £400 a week. Our flat is £1000 a month, tiny, in the basement, one bedroom. If we had kids, we'd need to pay at least £1200.

Tilly
I was referring to this (was too lazy to go back and find the poll, sorry)

62% want to see benefits capped for people who have 'too many children' (27% do not).

And another thing - why should immigrants have their benefits cut just because they are not British nationals? Do immigrants not have to feed their children and heat their houses?

Peachy
Prescott is on This Morning tomorrow and has tweeted about the Spartacus Report, so the press will have to cover it then.

Exactly, whereas we pay £595 for a decentish sized (well we don't have spare rooms but we are happy) terraced in Wales. Figures, without regional specifics, are rubbish.

Boffy, millions? Seriously? Do you have statistics for that or are you just regurgitating the crap being fed to you by the govt and media to justify cuts to the incomes of the poor and sick, while the grey market, tax evasion and tax avoidance are thriving?