Benefit Britain - the irony

[Mhoys]

Years ago there was no Housing Benefit as far as I remember - talking about growing up in the 1960s. Or even Child Tax Benefits, etc etc. Now it seems so many people get these, even people working in reasonably good jobs. The Government is meant to be anti-benefits but expenditure on all this must be significant. Some of this may be due to a small rise in living standards since then. But also have wages become so low relative to living costs, that the state is effectively subsidising private enterprise? There is nothing necessarily wrong with this I guess, but isn't the government "in denial" when few ordinary people could afford a family or rent or buy a home in the South at least , so the taxpayer/State has to stump up? I have some thoughts but am also genuinely puzzled ...

Its not a lack of housing, its a lack of social and affordable housing thats the issue.

New houses are built with 1 in 8 being housing association, the rest are sold at the same price as whatever the equivalent existing stock in that area goes for. E.g 3 bed goes for £400,000 they put them up for £425,000 with stamp duty paid. In order to buy that you need a 10% deposit and to earn £85,000 a year to get the 5 x wages thing.

Near me all the 2 bed and 3 bed new build 'starter' homes get snapped up by landlords off plan and in bulk as they are the ones who can borrow at the moment. So the people who could have bought are now bolstering the private rental sector and filling the houses they would have bought anyway. So they are now renting the house they would have bought. Or if they weren't able to buy they would have been placed in a council house.

We have people in hostels and on the streets as they cannot afford to pay what is being asked, i don't know if its because theres not enough houses.
What i don't get about this 'theres not enough houses' in the 70's and 80's there weren't empty houses but yet the houses were affordable and there were council houses for people who needed them. I can see it when i look at population increases vs houses being built and i can see it with supply and demand. But i don't think its new build houses for sale we need being built, i think its government backed building like we had after the war as its council houses we need.
That would pull more people out of renting, keep more money back in the cycle of housing benefit rather than out to private landlords.

tinkly Strawberries were also seasonal and all British I think that added to the 'treat' aspect. I don't think it was a cost factor, you could only get them for 8 weeks. We grew up broke but always had strawberries.

But back to Farages (yuck!) point, i do see that if theres plenty of people queuing for a minimum wage job why would you pay more? If the potential work force is smaller you will have to pay more to make that job more attractive.

Incidentally strawberries are priced out of my life now!!!

Completely missing the point English strawberries are MUCH nicer and dirt cheap in season.....

Tinkly do you really think employers would wake up on Thursday and suddenly discover their altruism and pay a higher liveable wage if tax credits were stopped tomorrow?

Where on earth have I said that? What happened in the past was that minimum wage was forced on them by government. And a higher minimum wage could be again. Thus removing the reliance on tax credits and giving people more independence.

I think the people that really miss out are the childless on low wages.

I work full time on a very low salary. My friend works part time, yet takes home more than me because she gets all these top ups.

I am sorry, but that breeds resentment.

Hopefully once the minimum wage reaches the annouced £ 9 per hour then more people can look after themselves without top ups.
That is the intent, i believe.
Would make a level playing field for all employees, irrespective of status.

I work full-time in a good job (teacher), work in London but commute from Slough because there is no way I can afford to rent even a one bed place in London, as even the most basic 1 bed flat costs over £1000 a month. Only people on benefits can afford London, as benefits will pay out the average housing cost in that area.
Sorry, but there's something galling about someone on benefits being able to afford to live somewhere where a working person can't. Rent caps could be an answer - everyone should be able to afford decent housing.

I'm not sure that everything needs to be more expensive for people to be paid a decent wage. In many industries profits are massively high and driven by the demand for dividends from shareholders. In the past, many more businesses were run on less of a profit making basis or were nationalised. Profits went back into the business rather than being creamed off.

This is certainly true of bigger companies. Those at the top earn huge amounts while the minions at the bottom are stuck on minimum wage, poor conditions and littl job security. You only have to look at Sports Direct as a recent example of modern day slavery.

"Only people on benefits can afford London, as benefits will pay out the average housing cost in that area."

Bollocks! I'm a teacher in London, virtually none of the staff live in other places and commute in, whether they be young, single parents or whatever.

Its also bollocks because benefits are capped too.

What you mean is, I can't afford what I want, where I want in London.

If your single do what everyone else does and rent rooms in houses/flats.
No single person under 35 gets rent for a flat, unless you started claiming once already in, then you get 13 weeks.

Once again this is merely inverse jealousy based on actually not knowing how the system works.

The benefit cap does not apply if you work a small number of hours, coincidentally if you receive tax credits.
The benefit cap only applies to people who don't work at all.

If you don't work then your benefit is capped at a maximum.

If you do work then you would receive lower than the maximum, hence it is capped.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/the-benefit-cap/the-benefit-cap-and-housing-benefit/the-benefit-cap-and-housing-benefit/

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/the-benefit-cap/the-benefit-cap-and-housing-benefit/the-benefit-cap-and-housing-benefit-who-is-exempt/

Heron - this drives me insane, as I've said before with no kids your time is your own. I could earn 4 times my salary in commission and bonus and a second job v's tax credits and housing benefit. My ex has no kids and sits on his arse working but certainly not the pedal to the metal that I would do if our roles were reversed and he was looking after my four kids. I suggested we swapped roles, he wasn't keen funnily enough. If you are single you can decide to work more or harder, single parents already have a full time job before they are out the door in the morning (as do most working mums, even with partners).

Pissed...your time isn't always your own, if you don't have dependent children - I work a floating rota, which means any day I can be working any time from 6.30 am to 10.30 pm. It's hard to find another job that fits in with hours that eccentric (and I know, because I do have another job - it's self employment and erratic earning, but it occupies all my time when I'm not at the day job).

Removing tax credits and benefits will not result in increased wages.

The problem is that rapidly advancing technology will destroy almost half of the work activities currently performed in the UK. Many occupations could soon see machines doing large amounts of the work resulting in large scale redundancies. For example, two thirds jobs in finance and insurance could be could be performed by technology. In food service, three-quarters of the work could be replaced and in retailing, over half of the current jobs could be lost. Raising the minimum wage will unfortunately result in greater acceleration in disappearing jobs.

The biggest problem facing the UK is how to provide meaningful work and good wages for the millions of office clerks, retail workers, accountants, solicitors, factory, etc. workers whose jobs will disappear.

The political debate in the UK needs to start discussing ways of guaranteeing economic security to families.

One option is to expand the tax credits and benefits system - not removing them! - to give some form of economic security to families.

The second option is a universal basic income and this really needs to be on the cards.

Thats exactly what i meant about attitudes to the childless.

No your time is not always your own just because you havent got living proof that youve had sex without contraception.

Its these attitudes that often leaves working childless people with the shitty end of the stick over Christmas working hours as well.

User... your who is exempt point leaves out the fact that if you work you won't be eligible for maximum benefits anyway.

So the cap doesn't apply because you are not eligible anyway, nor because someone in work can still get more.

You're in a far better position to change your lot in life without childcare concerns and other people depending you for their very existence. Tbh Helen, I know plenty of parents who work over Christmas, because it's triple pay. Attitudes towards the childless when you are in the situations you describe are you lucky buggers at least you can do something about it !

I'm late to this thread.

When I moved to the UK, I was surprised to see that most menial or entry-level jobs actually paid the minimum wage. I came from a country with very little safety net. The MW was significantly below the living wage. And so very few jobs paid the minimum. They paid what the labour market dictated. I think the mw was something like 8 an hour but I was paid 12 to work in a retail shop. Jobs in chicken slaughter houses were filled by illegal immigrants who came a thousand miles because they were paid 20 an hour (its a grim and smelly job that citizens won't do.)

I realised immediately that the topping up with benefits was propping up Tesco, etc.

I've not met many people who still get triple pay over Xmas. Even the staff at Wetherspoons only get time and a half.

Pissed off, that was quite condescending btw.

Depends which day you work of course doesn't it. Boxing Day as a bank holiday paid triple last year at asda. Parents were cueing up to do that shift.
I don't think it was any less condescending than describing children as evidence of unprotected sex btw.
Facts are when you're physically able you can improve your life, Zap has two jobs, it's the only way to survive it would seem

small

I dont know anyone who gets triple pay over christmas

And i assume by that you mean christmas day as i dont know anyone who gets paid extra for christmas eve or boxing day

Aaah hold on

pissed had the people working at asda been there for a few years, or quite a few years?