Who really gets £500+ weekly state benefits?

[vivizone]

I find this shit so hard to believe. Reading the media, you would think this was a common figure on life on benefits.

Yesterday and today's Metro newspaper - people writing in saying they agree with the cap of £500 and why should people be sat on their arse and be rewarded by £500 per week. . Why should they earn £200 per week working and people are getting £500 a week doing nothing.

Seriously, who gets this £500 per week that is being peddled out of the media? I spent 7 months out of work after redundancy and I could not live on the pittance I received for me and my children. I do not know how people do it. I really don't. I had a decent redundancy package and that was the only way I could make it.

How many people do you know (forget the newspaper stories) that are RECEIVING £500 or more every week? I thought so.

How come if life is/was that cushy on benefits, not enough people are/were packing in their jobs to join a life of riley?

We have been had. Life on benefits is HARD and DEMORALISING. I have tried it and I can tell you you get PEANUTS.

The reason why stories run on people living in million dollar homes/getting thousands a week in benefits is because it is RARE. It is SO rare, that it gets reported on.

absoloutely, which is why i said most LL.

and with respect. tenants make sacrifices too, and that's just to be able to have one roof that they cant even call their own.

Oh of course the disclaimer of most makes it ok for you to bitch about the minority, it's like saying some of my best friends are gay at the start of a homophobic rant, ridiculous.
Of course tenants make sacrifices, what they clearly haven't made is good financial decisions at some stage in their lives, we've all been there but just because I have for example sold shares at the wrong time doesn't mean that everyone else shouldn't be able to benefit, that's life, learn from it be ready for the next opportunity.

how ridiculous! i was not bitching about any minority because i wasn't bitching full stop. re-read my post. i have not insulted any LL at all. if you think i have, quote it and show me where.

as for not making good financial decisions. some of us were never in the position to make 'good financial decisions' like investing wisely or selling at the right time. some of us were born into debt and educated ourselves through debt. some of us will never be ready for the next opportunity because we will never have that spare cash floating around to take advantage of that cheap house at auction or those shares at a low price. how small minded of you to assume we all can.

It is ridiculous to be expecting sympathy for landlords on a thread Luke this mosman

There is no comparison between the worries over loss of investment and loss of home

I don't think anyone is asking for sympathy but pointing out the scorn isnt usually justified either. The investment was once my home and maybe again and my not renting it out certainly wouldn't help the position of somebody who canot for whatever reason get a mortgage or save a deposit.

Don't you think that worries over investment can amount to the same as worries of losing your home? For plenty of people that aren't rich but aren't breadline poor either, if they lose their investment they do them go on to lose their home.

Their homes and their lives and their children are just as important as anyone else's.

scuse me if i can't muster sympathy for the potential doom of those with second homes

so ver mumsnet

And there we have it. The dog in the manager attitude that makes the UK the great country that it is. It's embarrassing really.

If you can't muster sympathy (not that anyone's asking you to) for people who could suffer because of a failed investment, then why should anyone else muster sympathy for people who could suffer because of benefit cuts?

People on benefits are not more worthy, are not more important, are not more deserving of sympathy, or of consideration from the government than everyone else.

There are lots of circumstances that lead people onto benefits, just as there are lots of circumstances that lead people to be landlords. If you are going to have a prejudiced attitude towards anyone with property, you can't then complain about someone else's prejudiced attitude towards benefits claimants.

Both are equally as short sighted, equally as inaccurate, and equally as distasteful.

'Of course tenants make sacrifices, what they clearly haven't made is good financial decisions at some stage in their lives, we've all been there but just because I have for example sold shares at the wrong time doesn't mean that everyone else shouldn't be able to benefit, that's life, learn from it be ready for the next opportunity.'

Bollocks! So young people who now face stricter lending requirements, an era of tuition fees, fewer jobs, having to take on unpaid 'internships' to get better jobs etc. are just people who haven't made good financial decisions.

And the vast majority of 'people on benefits' are in work. But hey, no sympathy for those who work for min. wage doing often vital jobs. They're not strivers, the hell with them.

And that was exactly what I faced in 1992
Their time will come, providing they create the right conditions for themselves.

'And that was exactly what I faced in 1992
Their time will come, providing they create the right conditions for themselves.'

You paid tuition fees of £3000-£9000? I hadn't realised tuition fees were in place back then.

Their time will come, but in the meantime, they have to rent and pay back the student loans, but hey, that's okay for them, but it's not okay for you to have to sell whilst in negative equity and lose money.

I agree with expat. 1992 tuition fees?

They have youth and time in their side, I'd give £50,000 to be 18 again.
And yes people were having to pay for university in 1992 depending on where in the world they came from.

Young people will be fine, what you're really complaining about is those who are in mid to late 40's who've had every opportunity and blown it or wasted it one way or another and now the golden goose has stopped laying. I still can be sympathetic towards those who find themselves renting and trapped and don't hold them in contempt as some seem to for those offering to house them at a financial loss.

Ah, of course! Not just run of the mill people from the UK wanting to attend university then.

'what you're really complaining about is those who are in mid to late 40's who've had every opportunity and blown it or wasted it one way or another and now the golden goose has stopped laying. I still can be sympathetic towards those who find themselves renting and trapped and don't hold them in contempt as some seem to for those offering to house them at a financial loss.'

I'm not complaining about anyone in particular, and having a house sitting in negative equity is hardly a sound financial setting to be in, either. You claim to be offering a house at a financial loss to yourself, why not sell it and cut your losses?

Because who would that help ? Not my children, not my tenants the only people that would benefit is the bank and im perfectly happy with my situation thank you.

People on benefits are not more worthy, are not more important, are not more deserving of sympathy, or of consideration from the government than everyone else

freddo they are not more important etc etc; but I certainly have more sympathy for people who are looking at not being able to afford to pay rent and food, han I have for people who are maybe going to loose equity in a second property

mosman not everyone is academic, or entrepreneurial or financially savvy. Some people just have low paid jobs. Do you masure everything in monetary terms?

I have heard a rumour that the NHS are looking at reducing a nurses starting wage to 14K and removing the unsociable hours elements of qualified nurses pay

cnt see many nurses being able to save a deposit or be in a position to make sound financial decisions if that is the case

sound they just get off their arses and get a 'proper job' which pays more?

I don't actually takabut equally I don't look at anyone who's been able to save a bit and provide their family with a bit of security with the contempt displayed on here.

It's funny you mentioning nurses because that's what my counsin and her husband do and own a lovely 4 bed detached in Worcester, they are 30 so again it's down to choices made along the way isn't it ?

Hey, if you're happy losing £200/month as you claim then that's your lookout.

It's funny you mentioning nurses because that's what my counsin and her husband do and own a lovely 4 bed detached in Worcester, they are 30 so again it's down to choices made along the way isn't it ?

If they chose to be nurses now...they probably wouldnt be able to afford that home. Should people not choose to do these jobs because they are low paid and they will always have to rent? Who will do the low paid jobs?

Any contempt towards landlords on here, is pretty irrelevant to the discussion i think. You can call for lack of contempt, but you are going further and putting their 'plight' in the same catagory as benefit claimants