to wonder what benefits will get the chop from the £12 billion of cuts?

[steiner8]

Just that really. I'm wondering which benefits are going to go or be significantly cut. Anyone have any idea?

alfie its only questions that suit that get answered.

but in general although the things said are not very nice i dont think they are aimed at you. the comments are aimed at anyone claiming benefits.

"Round my way TTWK, people are using benefits to fund their keeping horses... Seriously."

If the government decides how much someone needs to live on and that person chooses to forgo the normal comforts of life in order, such as wholesome meals, so they can afford to keep their horse, why is that a problem? They aren't getting anymore from the state.

Just as people who say 'I chose to only have one child because I can't afford more' aren't actually saying they can't afford more. They are saying that they can't afford more without giving up what they consider to be acceptable living standards. For each of us that will be different.

Its the heartless people on here that voted Tory.

fucking fucking bloody tories.

And I don't have a string of horses.....which I agree are a whole different scenario

Why is it different? Because you decided it's different. Some animals can be kept whilst on benefits and others aren't worthy? What if their horses help their kid's autism. How dare you suggest it's a different thing, you troll!

You complain about my attitude but you are making value judgements, that keeping cats whilst on benefits is fine but horses aren't. And just by coincidence, you have cats but not horses.

Where do you stand on dogs. Is a Chihuahua ok but a great dane isn't. What about a goat?

ttwk actually did you not know that everyone on benefits gets a free goat?

I know that goats mate for life. They stay together for the sake of the kids.

TTWK any chance you could explain why you expecting a charity to rehome your cats is fine but keeping much loved family pets whilst temporarily on benefits isn't. Still relying on an overstretched publicly funded resource.

You're shouting about how everyone thinks pets should be subsidised when nobody said that. You have whipped up this storm with illogical arguments and have really upset a poster on here.

The Race Relations Act has been superseded by the Equality Act 2010, ChilliAndMint

It's worse than that, ghostspirit. They get the goats of hard-working taxpayers

Does it matter what people spend their money on?
We all have different priorities and if somebody wants to forgo luxuries and a high standard of living to provide for their animals or God forbid extras for their children so what.
It is nobody else's business.
If tax credits are cut further then lots of people are going to be up shit creak, because they need the money in the first place.

I only judge cold hearted and robot like folk.

Horses are generally NOT pets for most people. YOU are getting confused between normality and luxury.

Lots of people will have cats or dogs however but in your insane and smug world they should give those up or starve them.

You brought up "a string of horses" and not me.

You still haven't answered the question about where all these animals will go if they have to be given up.

Horses can be sold and sometimes for lots of money. They can be loaned out for a regular income. You can't do that with cats or dogs.

Nor did you ever answer the question about an autistic child getting benefit from his cat. Should it still be re - homed?

If he got pleasure and comfort from horses that's simple. ...there are stables nearby. Horses don't generally live in your home and snuggle up with you at night. ...just in case you hadn't worked that out. Cats provide support in a totally different way...as do dogs.

And lol at "troll". If I am a troll at least I am human and compassionate...unlike you.

Do you really think TTWK that bringing goats into this is helpful?

Anyway....out of here. TTWK you are now being watched. Your posts are very goady which I think is suspicious. You don't come across as "real" and I've shared that with MNHQ.

I fund my cats with my disability money as they are indeed helpful for my mental health problems, I get this benefit whether I work or not, it goes on things that improve my well being and allow me more independence, like paying for a cleaner or carer, hiring a mobility scooter, paying for taxis and delivery charges for food shopping, buying aids for making certain things easier, like my shower seat, front fastening bras, decent shoes that won't worsen my gait. etc.

Sometimes it's spent on things that simply make me feel better, because it's fairly easy to become depressed when you suffer with chronic pain. With my cats, I had a reason to get out of bed, they made me laugh a lot, and stroking animals raises oxytocin, which combats anxiety/depression. It's why therapy animals are used.

People use the word benefits as a collective term when actually I think it's different depending on your situation. It would most likely be irresponsible to go and buy a puppy when on Jobseekers, but not as a pensioner or a disabled person. When you want people to "feel poor" on benefits, I wonder how terrible my life would be if that were the case for disabled folks like me. I'm not even sure I'd be here if I was in such an awful position and stuck there, when you are at your worst, and everything hurts, and doing something as basic as brushing your hair seems impossible, you do find yourself considering whether it might be better not to be here.

I don't think disability benefits should be counted as taxable income. But maybe some other benefits should be. I think the state pension is already counted as taxable income and that's a benefit.

I think it costs a lot less to keep a cat rather than a horse. I may be wrong though.

Will they just cut tax credits. Would that raise enough? I think knock on costs will wipe out some of the savings.

Just done a quick sum re the possibility of disability benefits becoming taxable.

Assuming someone is on the Enhanced Rate of both areas of PIP and in the Support Group for ESA, they will have an income of around £13,000 pa (assuming a 52 week year it is actually £12,950.60 but years are slightly longer than 52 weeks).

If both of these became taxable (ESA already is if you're on contributions based, btw) then they would pay a total of £480 tax per year - or £9 per week - this assumes a nil rate of National Insurance.

Why is it wrong for someone with an income of £13,000 per year from benefits to be taxed £9 per week if someone who is working minimum wage is taxed the same amount?

There are rumours that contributions based benefits will also be cut. So people who have always worked but now find themselves unemployed or too sick to work but also have a partner who works, will now receive nothing. Also rumours that carers allowance will get the same treatment. And rumours that 16 - 25 year olds will be unable to claim disability benefits.

Bye bye welfare state.

Because it costs more to be disabled, emwithme. Someone on minimum wage doesn't have to pay for a wheelchair, or renew their walking sticks every so often. They may not need showers three times a day and in the night. They may not need to wash their bedding every single day. They won't have frequent hospital appointments. They may not need the heating on quite as often. The list goes on. Disability benefits are to cover the extra cost of being disabled, removing £9.00 per week is a significant change for many people and may make the difference between having enough incontinence pads to get through a week, or not.
There is an assumption that everything is provided on the NHS. It isn't.

Anyone else want a reality tv show to approach ttwk and get her to practice what she preaches for the next year.

So a single person can't feel poor on £72 per week less £10 council tax and £5 every two weeks to sign on. Plus having to jobsearch daily with no internet or computer even wears out alot of shoe leather and cheap shoes last less than a year. Not to mention bus fares to attend interviews. Some people haven't got a clue what it is really like to be on benefits and no I have never claimed anything except child benefit and Smp until we lost child benefit. But I see people who struggle on benefits and desperately want to work but can't find work despite their best efforts. Her tv given to her by a friend is her only luxury and now people think she shouldn't have that. How do some of you sleep at night?

Anyway....out of here. TTWK you are now being watched. Your posts are very goady which I think is suspicious. You don't come across as "real" and I've shared that with MNHQ.

By goady you mean a different viewpoint from yours. And a few other posters have agreed with me.

By all means alert MNHQ. I'm not sure they wish MN to become a one
party Stalinist forum, despite what you may want.

Some people here need a taste of their own medicine. Nobody is immune to illness and intelligence and memory can be affected with some illnesses. I bet that Xania doesn't even pay a living wage to the employees anyway and if she has any properties she charges over the odds so she can get as much profit as possible. The only reason some people become very rich is by using the poor as They don't pay enough for their work . Now Xenia David Cameron has suggested that the rich pay a living wage not that the poor work 60 hours a week just to survive ( cover food and basic shelter ) . You work 60 hours a week but You probably get plenty of luxuries from those hours and a very good quality of life . It isn't the working poor or the disabled and carers at fault here really .