New £23k Benefit Cap.

[legotits]

AIBU to ask if anyone still supports this?

Which families is this targeted at?

Anyone who will be affected, is it even feasible to not be pushed into debt?

Whilst there are lots of truley up setting circumstances ive slso read an awful lot of entitled gibberish here too. This is what really annoys working parents so much!

1. If their are no jobs where you are move to whee the work is. I've lived in 5 counties chasing work. Admittedly I'm settled now but would move if needs be - I already commute 1 to 1.5 hrs a day.
2. Working is not an option it is a duty. The post earlier about the "staying at home option" makes me sick. I would like to have my children at home more but we can't afford children without FT work so we put up with it. Without the "choosers" maybe my tax would be lower and one of us could go part time.
3. Children are NOT a right! Don't have kids you can't afford. We had to wait and probably have less than we would have because finantiaĺy we couldn't have more. I do understand changes in circumstances but these appear the exception rather than the rule.
4. Wages are limited by working benefits. People will pay the minimum they can.
5. Wages reflect the worth of the person/role. You can't simply increase wages. Though it would be nice.

Rant over! Personally I think that we need a bit more balance. This cap is clumsy but we need to get a grip of the benefits bill. I think part of this is to increase government social housing and stop selling current stocks. This will save a lot of money that currently gets leached away by private landlords. I really don't want anyone to suffer. We need to tackle the abusive few and improve things for hard working people.

Moving to 'where the work is' won't make a jot of difference if my son can only cope with three hours a day in school and I have no other help, will it?

But what do YOU do fish? As if you don't work and are supported by your husband you are far from self sufficient

Also wages reflect the worth of the person/role. Really? So a care assistant who bathes and dresses a vunerable elderly person in palliative care 'deserves less' than some suited and booted manager of a chain store? All human beings are valuable. It's not about 'worth', it's about recognising all workers deserve fair wages.

Totally agree with you cannot

Maybe engineer you missed the posts where women have been left with planned children because their dh pissed off or in my case I had to run because of DV.
Each family is different you cannot stereotype. Moving costs money you must know that and children need school places. I'm not saying don't work, I'm saying don't tar everyone with the same brush.
Oh btw I do work.
I'll post this again in case you missed it

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/11/big-benefits-myth-tories-half-families-low-incomes-not-claiming-welfare

Wages have to reflect the worth of the person/role. You or I may disagree on how worth is calculated but the basic concept is sound. A care assistant whilst essential is a role many people can fill. It's worthwhile but not specialist. Everyone deserves a fare level of pay but that doesn't mean given for free.

www.turn2us.org.uk/About-Us/Research-and-Insights/Benefits-Stigma-in-Britain

Frankley They work self employed, lie about there earnings. work cash in hand. Even change there names.

We can't all live in the areas we want, lots of people have to make compromises and live in areas they can afford. If you are not paying the rent but taxpayers are then it shouldn't be a choice at all.

Easy to lay the blame on everyone bar the people who caused it. Those that quite openly state they don't see why they should have to work, those that have children they can't actually afford and those who blatantly state they only work 16 hours to avoid the cap whilst having numerous children with different men and have no intention of doing anything more than the bare minimum.

It's not about punishing children, it's about getting their parents to step up.

engineer

It doesn't work like that though, your tax wouldn't reduce if every single person able to work was employed.
Wages don't reflect a person's worth, unless you find the carer roles worthless. Including childcare which you leave your children with.
We have moved to where the work is, numerous times, but in our business and being a national company we have been able to. it isnt that easy for the majority.

Sorry haven't rtft but thought I'd do some maths.
I'm a single mum of 2. I work 37.5 hours per week and earn not a lot.
Currently, after tax and including benefits, my income is £23,163.27 per year.

If I quit my job and go onto full benefits I'd get £22,079.24

So by working full time £1,084.03 better off. Only I'm not because I have to pay for work clothes and travel. And childcare. And lose fsm for the children. In fact I'm worse off.

(I worked out that that income difference works out to 55p per hour worked in my pocket)

Figures like this make me cross. I could have more disposable income from doing nothing than I do currently.

BUT I still don't support the benefit cap. Pushing families into poverty is not the answer.

)And in the interests of fairness...
If I were on full benefits when the cap came in I'd only be entitled to £20,766.88)

I did point out that I understand changes in circumstances. My focus is on some of the entitled post I've seen. I class my self as a socialist, though one that needs to see corbyn run out of town before I could vote labour. Certainly no Tory!

Who are changing their names? Who doesn't know we have a housing crisis.

The benefits cap is £20,000 so how the hell is anyone going to get more?

Actually being a very good carer is a skilled job. Doing an okay job which is all society seems to want, is different.

Portia it's 23.000 in London.

Sheldon Give me one example of a real family who won't work. Name them and report them for benefit fraud

According to the entitled to website I'd get£20,766.88 after the cap. How does that work? I'm not in London

God knows but the cap only came into operation today

Gillybeanz
Maybe my tax wouldn't fall but there would be more in the pot for public services... like hospitals and social housing. You missed the point.

Fourormore she isn't living the highlife on £117 a week tax credits.

These companies could help hospitals

www.ethicalconsumer.org/ethicalcampaigns/taxjusticecampaign/taxavoidancerankings.aspx

engineer

Only, if they are earning enough to pay tax in the first place.
With so many zero hour contracts, pt jobs, min wage jobs, there wouldn't be a surge of money in the pot.

The problem is those on high wages can't see the system, they don't understand because it's complex.

Gully
That's tosh. There would be more money in the pot because there would be less going out in benifits!