AIBU to think benefits are needed to push earners up from avg. wage to increase equivalent of 10k p.a. in salary?

[williaminajetfighter]

So I'm watching very bad tv 'Rip Off Britain' and they cover someone who is having debt problems. They show him reviewing a spreadsheet about his debt and and it shows his income:

Wages - 1,600
Tax credits - 280
Housing benefit - 200
CSA - 190
Child benefit - 80
TOTAL - 2350

Assuming he works FT then his income is circa 24,600 which is pretty typical of the average wage in the country. Removing the income from CSA, his new income is 2,160 which works out to what your take home income would be FT at a salary of 34,000. So essentially benefits have given him a 10k salary increase!

I don't know a great deal about the benefits system and obviously have no idea of his personal circumstances - can glean that he has a child and is getting ex-spousal support.

But what I'm struggling to understand is that his salary is pretty much the average across the country so I wonder -- are most parents on an average wage in need of such a significant top up? I'm sort of blown away by the fact that an average wage does not provide enough to live on and that benefits can increase someone's 'salary' so significantly.

[Madamecastafiore]

It actually was not Thatcher's idea to sell off council houses. She had to be convinced to do so. It was a conservative minister but not Thatcher. Gleaned that info from Question-time last week.

Live it though that people still spot out her name as if a cuss. I do that with Blair and Brown though to be honest.

[Madamecastafiore]

The thing is Tomblibloounn you may not have more money in your pocket if you just had to rely on what you could earn even if all that you want to happened as the economy has been so screwed up with all the top ups being pumped in.

That is what everyone will be up in arms about as the top ups have brought about a sense of entitlement.

[ivykaty44]

If you don't put up NMW wage then you have a workforce that is subsidised by the government and the tax payer, therefore companies that make very large million pound profits end up receiving these subsidies for their workers and other smaller companies struggle and go out of business.

better for the government real subsidies, which is what happens anyway on a small scales - so increase that so that companies can be competitive.

Canada give large subsudies for their computer games companies - the uk give nothing to very little and the companies are struggling in some cases and going under - it makes it harder for Uk companies to compete.

Better in my mind for the government to assist companies and then they flurish and stay afloat and keep people employed and able to pay a decent wage.

Than subsidising shelf stacker on minimum wage working for nwm at tesco and the like

[ivykaty44]

sorry that is supposed to say

better for the government to give real subsidies to the actual small companies, which does happen on a small scale - so that increases the companies competitivness agains global companies in the same business.

If a company in canada is getting financial help form the government and our companies are not then they will suffer and go under and jobs will be lost.

[BrokenSunglasses]

I agree that the government should help companies, but not through tax credits. If this money was given through employers instead of being claimed by individuals, then it would be directly related to work, and would make work pay, which it often doesn't at the moment.

Top up wages through companies, get them to pay for the costs of administering it, and stop relating it to how many children people have.

[Wallison]

The problem is that we are a low wage economy with a high cost of living. And the biggest cost is housing, which is an essential. There are various ways that this could be tackled and I think tax credits are really just a sticking plaster because they don't do anything to change the imbalance. However, while none of the main parties refuse to do anything structural to address this imbalance, then tax credits are needed.

[PlayedThePinkOboe]

For everyone whining about council houses being sold off - let me ask you this. Who the fuck do you think would be living in them TODAY if they'd not been sold? The original tenants or pixies?

[Madamecastafiore]

No, life long labour voters live in the council houses which they bought years ago, I would bet my bottom dollar on it.

[contortionist]

CHJR - I agree with you that benefits which top up employment income to a living wage shouldn't be seen as a subsidy to the employee. But I don't think they are necessarily a subsidy to the employer either. In service industries they are a subsidy to the person paying for the service - having a haircut / dinner cooked for them / their children looked after / their groceries delivered.

In manufacturing, benefits act partly to counteract the incentive to move work to lower-cost locations. It's not a subsidy to the purchaser of the goods if they could buy them from (say) China at the same price. And the manufacturer is arguably no better off than they would be if they were to move operations either. So it's perhaps more like a rental payment paid to retain manufacturing industry in the UK; which is a political goal with further economic benefits.

[dirtyface]

i think its an absolute disgrace that benefits are needed so WORKING people can survive

personally i think the high cost of living is the main problem, have said it before on these types of threads

btw am not a benefit basher, i don't judge anyone on benefits, have been on full benefits myself in the past and still need to claim some now even though dh and I work

[ivykaty44]

For everyone whining about council houses being sold off - let me ask you this. Who the fuck do you think would be living in them TODAY if they'd not been sold? The original tenants or pixies?

Families who could not afford private renting, instead the councils houses are rented out privately or sold as mass profits after they were purchased and the council never rebuilt to replenish - this making the private rental market what it is today f*cking expensive and transient

[Sparrowp]

Hmm have house prices been going up at approximately the same rate as benefits?

[Sparrowp]

Specifically living-costs benefits: Housing benefit, tax credits etc

[Sparrowp]

Or rather, benefits have been struggling to keep up with house price demands.

Now we see how all the productivity gains have gone to the wealthiest % of people.

[dirtyface]

There does seem to be a culture of entitlement these days, not sure if its the rise of the celebrity culture/ social media that has encouraged it but some seem to think that having a nice lifestyle is a right. I was taught you have to work hard for nice things but you also need to make the right life choices. I heard a comment on the radio the other day 'everyone once a range rover sport but no one wants to work for it

i agree with that ^^

i think there is definitely a culture of entitlement and i definitely think that social media and celebrities have something to do with it, esp with younger people. people just expect stuff.

i read an article somewhere the other day about these twats people getting into silly debt for things like rolex watches and swanky foreign holidays just so they can post the pics on instagram etc and show off. they were just normal people on min / average wage. these people had actually been pictured and actually admitted to it. i was ....they were mostly very young though (20's) with no kids but god if any of them were a kid of mine i would be ashamed

sorry slight tangent

[Wallison]

I don't think that not being able to afford to pay rent/mortgage without relying on benefits is evidence of a 'culture of entitlement'.

I also would be interested in evidence that people 'expect' more these days, when millions of working adults do not earn enough money to support themselves and their families, and yet they continue to work despite not earning enough to live on.

[Sparrowp]

"Those bloody people working full time and they expect to be able to eat?!? Bloody cheek if you awsk me they should be grateful for anything rant rant.

I am renting out my flat, I want £10423094035 per week for it. If you cant afford that just give me everything you've got. No I mean everything. No you dont need heating. Stop eating all that food you dont deserve a lifestyle with food in it. etc etc ."

^^ that's what it sounds like.

[NeverGetTheBestOfMe]

"For everyone whining about council houses being sold off - let me ask you this. Who the fuck do you think would be living in them TODAY if they'd not been sold? The original tenants or pixies?"

Ha ha yes that is true! Surely the people who bought their council house would still be living in it today only they would be renting it not owning it?


The problem with Council houses is they are "a house for life" which they shouldn't be. The lease should run for 10 years or so then the circumstance evaluated.

How many people out there are living in a council house where all the kids have grown up and moved out yet the parents are rattling around still in a 3 bedroom house?

A woman at work has this situation, all 3 of her grown up kids have left home yet her and her dh are still living in the 3 bedroom council house. They are both fit and well and could work full time each now and rent a one bed somewhere (like many couples with no ties do) yet the dh is unemployed and she is doing 20 hours a week because they know if they do anymore they will not get the same help with rent. Yet she works alongside someone who is pregnant with child No 2 and is fighting to get somewhere to live because she is on her mums couch. It is all wrong. Council houses should not be for life.

[Sparrowp]

Actually NGTBOM, people do need a house for their whole life.

Even young people and old people need houses, which is not a very well known fact, but it is true.

[Sparrowp]

And obviously you don't need a house when you are dead!
"A house for life" is quite catchy when you think about it.

[Babyroobs]

I was just reading a thread on another parenting forum where a family were on an income of £40k and getting over £500 tax credits a month ( 5 kids) + presumably £300+ child benefit. Surely this can't be right?

[Madamecastafiore]

What she is saying Sparrowp is that it should not just be a rolling tenancy but should be re evaluated every 10 years. I'd say less than 10 years though.

[twistyfeet]

I think it's housing. Back in ye olden dayes when my 3 kids were borne tax credits didnt exist and you could buy a house for 3 times the average salary. As your family size increased and you climbed slowly up the greasy pole you could buy a slightly bigger house still for 3 times your salary.
We left the country in 2000 and came back in 2004 to find tax credits and house prices had rocketed as had rents to a proportion where we could no longer buy a house even at 5 times DH's salary and we qualified for tax credits and housing benefit. Suddenly in our mid-30's we needed benefits having started a family straight from university and no benefits were ever needed.
Then it all went pear shaped and DH went part time then lost his job and it's been downhill ever since. And you know what, when your children reach 18 and leave home then suddenly you are completely fucked as all the tax credits vanish but you still hafta eat and live somewhere.

But I think it's housing costs. Where my kids are going to live I have no idea.

[janey68]

I think people do expect more these days actually.
People eat out more, own more clothes, are often quite obsessed with technology- not just owning a mobile and having Internet access but actually having the latest models, buying apps etc. A good example would be Uni students: many of them nowadays expect to go out drinking, clubbing, run a car Etc whereas back in the day you would pride yourself as a student on owning one holey jumper and never turning the heating on.

I do think its partly because while things like nights out, gadgets and clothes are accessible, the really big purchase - ie a house- seems I obtainable. If you think you'll be saving til 40 for a house deposit then it's probably easier to think short term 'oh well at least I can afford a night out'.
But definitely, people's expectations about things and experiences (nights out, travel etc) are far in excess of what was the case yesteryear

[Sparrowp]

^ janey68 is rich.