To want IDS to crawl back into the primordial slime from whence he came!

[Dawndonnaagain]

Latest leaks on welfare cuts, may just be ideas being posited but still fucking nasty.

Well, they can hardly take benefits from those who don't claim any, can they?

So, a very very tiny number of families, then, Edsgreypatch?

Granny is claiming a pension, winter fuel allowance, bus pass... The younger families are claiming assorted pregnancy and child-related benefits.

The looks on some people's faces when child benefit was cut for higher rate taxpayers! They clearly didn't didn't think they were "on benefits", either.

(Before you ask, I didn't support the CB cut. I support the universal model of the welfare state: almost all pay in; almost all benefit.)

(Before you ask, I didn't support the CB cut. I support the universal model of the welfare state: almost all pay in; almost all benefit.)

And I don't.

No! I never would have guessed!

We lost our CB. We have 5 kids shrugs

It's kind of you to think a family on a six figure salary should have state benefits but I disagree with you.

I believe welfare is there only for those in need.

Do you think your insurance company shouldn't pay out on your car, or break-in, or critical illness, because you earn lots?

That's the point of the National Insurance model of welfare state. You pay in, you get cover.

I hope they will limit child benefit to 2 or possibly 3 children. All benefits in this country are too generous except for those that go to the truly deserving such as the disabled and those genuinely unable to work- not those who choose not to work as benefits pay more.

We lost our CB.
I believe welfare is there only for those in need.

Er... Which is it?

You claimed benefits, or you don't believe in people with your income claiming benefits?

According to stats in Prospect from the Office for National Statistics, Britain's total welfare bill in 2013/14 was £205bn.

By far the largest component is state pensions which along with pension credit amounts to £90bn.

Benefits for families with children= £37bn a year

Sick and disabled = £36bn

Low income help= £34bn and two-thirds of that takes the form of housing benefit.

The smallest category, just 2%, benefits for the unemployed = £4.5bn.

I agree, this latest leak is testing the water and also agree that if you cut benefits for the sick and disabled you are just pushing the problem elsewhere.

I speak as a carer for a disabled child who is on the cusp of adulthood. The care I have given my child with complex disabilities would have cost the state £280,000 to support. In addition I have also have made many personal sacrifices and have lost my career as a result and all the implications that has for me long term. I am a graduate who worked in education before becoming a carer.

As a family we have had to pay for a bigger house to meet my child's requirements ( own room and detached owing to screaming,violent meltdowns) and seperate transportation. I would have liked my child's introduction into more independent, supported living to be more gradual but if my carer's allowance is cut then my hand will be forced and the bill will have to be picked up by the state. My child needs 24 supervision and around the clock care.

There will be many families/individuals who will not be able to cope if these changes are pushed through who actually offer far more to the economy than they take.

Now isn't it time Pensions were scrutinised?

Separate fgs.

Thanks for digging out the stats, Kissy. I thought the breakdown was something like that.

I should have said £280,000 a year.

I have an idea. How about making pensioners pay NI contributions and lowering the income tax threshold for them?
Not sure how much that would amount to but it has to be sizeable.

Suggesting lowering the income tax threshold for pensioners is just nasty. People don't become less worthy than anyone else when they get to pension age, and as they already pay income tax on their state pension, perhaps you should direct your attention to healthy working age people who contribute nothing in tax. All those SAHPs that claim benefits like tax credits or income support because they don't want to provide for their own children would be a good start.

No monster CA is on individual income not household.

It's not nasty. Pensioners have seen no real fall in their standard of living for years and as the largest sector of benefit recipients need to make their contribution to plugging the gap.

perhaps you should direct your attention to healthy working age people who contribute nothing in tax. All those SAHPs that claim benefits like tax credits or income support because they don't want to provide for their own children would be a good start.

Best post of the thread, right there.

All those thousands who carefully work out just how little one of them has to work to get the maximum state take.
Now that's nasty. And thankfully being tackled. SAH by all means. But pay for it your fucking selves.

And as for hitting pensioners - you don't choose to get old.

You do choose to have kids and not work.

It's not nasty. Pensioners have seen no real fall in their standard of living for years and as the largest sector of benefit recipients need to make their contribution to plugging the gap.

Right, so basically you think some people are struggling so the only fair thing to do is to make pensioners struggle too. It's not enough that they are nearing the end of their lives, physically cannot work full time, have probably got illnesses, may have been widowed and are watching their friends and family get ill and die (or if they aren't they're only a few years away from it).

You think it's wrong that they haven't seen their standard of living fall apart from in the ways that have affected everyone because the cost of living has risen, so we should attack their standard of living just because there are a lot of them.

What is that? Do you feel this way out of spite, or jealousy, or what? Because surely you aren't suggesting that it's ok for vulnerable people to suffer as long as it's not your family?

And pensioners have no way of improving their lot. They cannot go and get a job.

Neither do many disabled people.

I read in a newspaper recently that our disability benefits are 'generous'. I am not sure where this is being compared with, but maybe that is the start of something. Tell us the benefits are generous and then 'bring us in line' with wherever else we are more generous than.
I must admit I wanted to cry when I heard they might cut disability benefits.

Housing benefit recipients are also one of the largest groups of people getting benefits, but there's been plenty of complaining about the removal of the spare room subsidy for social housing tenants. And rightly so when it affects people who are disabled and cannot increase their earnings, but it was fair to try and cut that benefit for people who are working age and could pay for their spare rooms themselves.

That is the difference here, people who can should provide for themselves, those who can't do anything to increase their income, like disabled people and the vast majority of pensioners, should be properly supported.

Larry, some benefits are generous, but some others aren't.