To think that a 23k benefits cap will drive some families in the SE

[Minifingers9]

... Into destitution?

I live in a pretty unappealing and comparatively cheap part of greater London but you can't get a 3 bedroom rental for under £1400 a month.
If we lost our jobs we wouldn't be able to live on 23k a year as a family of 5. Not when 15k of it was going on rent.
Why don't they have regional benefit caps?

Yes, and I don't agree with that, but this thread isn't about that, it's about a benefits cap that doesn't affect people with disabilities, as has been said many times already.

No one is trying to compare a situation like Dawns to the situation linked to in the Mirror. They are different.

I have 7 dc Newbrummie multiples can happen to anyone. That being said I love everyone one of my dc and wouldn't have it any other way. I am not mad and my dh works very hard to provide for us.

The cap does apply to the disabled. ESA claimants are only exempt if they are in the support group.

Wanting a bath as well as a shower, is reasonable, not at all entitled.

Exactly morgage , showers are not suitable for very young children.

It's incredibly refershing to see on MN so many people in support of an end to the Benefits Culture. Just a few months ago most of us would have been shouted down ( although I note that someone has started with the predictable abuse) .

I feel there has been a real shift in attitudes recently , a sense of fair play, a sense that those of us working hard are sick of supporting those who don't - often enjoying a better lifestyle.

The winds of change are blowing .

Yet many people who claim no benefits tolerate showers only with young children because they take responsibility for their own lives.

However much some on the thread don't like it the benefits cap at £26k has been very popular and bringing it down to £23k has huge voter support and it does as said above exclude the disabled.

[Yes, I could live in a small flat in London, that's true; but 30 years ago to buy a small house we had to live out here in outer London and if I wanted a house the size of mine in London I could not afford it (even if I were prepared to waste money on stamp duty on a move) so I cut my coat according to my cloth. (Don't have the island - it went to pay divorce debt but certainly I have never said on mumsnet I am poor. I have no savings and I work 6 or 7 days a week but I have enough food and the like)]

yes Eatupnow it's excellent news the media propaganda has worked. I go to bed every night with a smile on my face knowing more children are in poverty.

The sad thing is that Labour created this backlash.

They showered the workshy, feckless and lazy with a myriad of benefits that they coudn't possibly earn by working .

The rest of us got sick and tired of it and we voted - loudly.

The benefit cap DOES INCLUDE MANY DISABLED.

Sorry to shout but three times I have mentioned ESA and the cap.

I know soontobesix.

Those poor, poor, destitute families having to scrape by on £29 K a year.

[cry].

Exactly morgage , showers are not suitable for very young children.

So if you are living somewhere where the facilities are not suitable for young children, why have more?

Lotus if you could afford a house where stamp duty comes into play you were hardly skint.
That's great your young dc were ok with showers many are not.

yes exactly eatup.

TTWK they didn't have anymore dc after moving into the house with only a shower. The three year old is their granddaughter.

No chance of me answering. Dd has woken with very high temp and we are off to GP..sorry

Eat up the only families who would every be entitled to 23 k would be scrapping by due to number of dc/ high rents. And like I said before a working family in their circumstances would receive benefits on top the earned 29 k.

Good god I must tell my friends who live in a property with a shower room but no bath that they are harming their kids. They might think Im bonkers because their children are clean, happy and well cared for, but hey! you heard it here on MN, therefore it must be true!!

Ptolemy. I wasn't trying to compare my situation with the people in the mail. What I was saying is that when you and others state that people should only have children they can afford to support, just in case they end up on benefits, that includes my family, and we did just as many other families have done.
I'm pleased you were supported so generously by the state when things went tits up, we, unfortunately, are not.

(I've never ever suggested I was skint. Someone just asked me above about my personal circumstances. I am a big tax payer. I hope that does not disqualify me from saying how my money ought to be spent. I work hard enough to earn it. I don't expect benefits claimants to kiss my feet but without full time working women and men like me there would be no benefits at all. The people have spoken with the Tory victory. we can now build a better Britian where hard work pays off and everyone including the less advantaged will benefit).

Six, it won't apply to households that get attendance allowance or DLA, and if it does negatively affect any disabled people who really need more than £23k, then that will be because of problems with the way people are assessed, not the cap itself.

Lotus, I think that's why they got back on. People are fed up of those that don't work having a better lifestyle than workers. Those that don't claim benefits have to budget and if they want another child they have to see if their salaries will stretch. Those that claim benefits (working or not) don't tend to have to do that as they know they will gain more in benefits and get a bigger house or larger HB payment. That's sends a very wrong message.

People seem to think the future is cast iron set, they don't think that having numerous children will have a serious impact should they suddenly be single or fall ill. Likewise taking out a maximum mortgage or quitting work the moment they become a parent. If parents won't teach their children to plan ahead wisely allowing for disasters then it needs to be built into guidance lessons at school.

It's always the states fault, never the parents.

Dawn, your situation is one that couldn't be avoided, you may have ended up on benefits even if you'd had no children.

I do think that people should think about what they can afford before having children, and they should have a decent contingency plan. You obviously agree as you said you thought about whether you could afford another before your third pregnancy. You could afford it when you conceived, and you could have continued to afford it had disability not struck. I think pretty much everyone agrees that the welfare state should support people in your circumstances, and should support better than it does.

What I don't agree with is people choosing to have children when they can't afford it, and then continuing to have children knowing that they'll have to claim more in benefits.

You can see the difference and you know what I'm saying, you have no need to be picky.

TTWK they didn't have anymore dc after moving into the house with only a shower. The three year old is their granddaughter.

OK, (sigh) I'll try again. Why did their daughter have a baby when the facilities where she lived weren't suitable for a young child?