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?

*gilly

If their are no jobs where you are move to whee the work is

Single mum of three. I work full time. Could you tell me how I would do that if I had to move away from my 75 year old mother who looks after my children when they are ill? Two years ago, one of my children had a very nasty infection that resulted in him being off school for 31 school days. How else would I have managed? Please don't tell me my employer would have to understand because it doesn't work like that. I am a teacher and those 31 days happeened during the run up to GCSEs. Would you have tolerated that as a parent? To have non specialists covering - not teaching - at such a crucial time?

Moving to where the work is if where the work is is no where near existing support networks is pointless for single parents. And that's assuming you can afford the moving costs and new tenancy costs which can easily run into thousands. And assuming there is childcare available at a price you can afford to be able to work. And not forgetting courts can actually prevent you moving with your children if your ex wants to be difficult.

But hey ho, carry on with your ignorance. It'll only impact on innocent children.

Get the dad to contribute?

I do not support it.

I think the problem is very low wages and austerity making those on the breadline resent those on benefits. Mostly through Tory media propaganda.

It can be hard when people on lower income are topped up to the same income. We worked out that we would be better off if DH took a minimum wage job as we would get something like 250 tax credits a week (5 children). Plus then childcare help etc. And DH is on pretty good wage.

But I would prefer people to be topped up to low middle wage than lower the standard of living of children.

Am I being thick (fortunately never claimed any benefits as husband been in work with a decent enough salary and I've worked where fitting round the children so we could afford to more than just survive).

My 23 year old son and his girlfriend are self employed (dance/fitness you're joins plus some retail thrown in when not doing that) and earning very little, but some seem to be entitled to any benefits at all (mainly because self employed plus zero hours contract I suppose). They're just about managing to earn enough to rent a shared flat. So who's getting all these benefits. Is it unemployed (or "partially" employed) parents.

Perhaps they should have a baby then they might get some help!

(I'm being facetious - they love their jobs and they're scraping by - I was just surprised when i tried out a benefits calculator to find they could get no help whatsoever)

And round and round in circles we go. Whether you like it or not, the courts cannot force a reluctant father to see their children or partake in a fair rota of care. And maintenance is more often not paid than is. And that's with the support of the CMS.

Aw I wish the Dad would contribute he owes his dd thousands.

I class myself as a socialist, though one who needs to see Corbyn run out of town before I could vote Labour!

Huh?

easy to lay the blame on everyone bar the people who caused it

You mean the bankers, sheldon? I'm sorry, I love a good political debate but your opinions are rank. You are judgemental, narrow minded and seem to assume that everyone has a life as apparently easy as yours. Before you judge, walk a mile in another man's shoes.

Engineersthumb do you KNOW what socialism is? Clue Tony Blair NOT a socialist, Corbyn IS a socialist. Nye Bevan socialist, Beveridge not so much a socialist as a skilled economist and pragmatist.

en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/socialism

Socialism is about the community working together to ensure success for all. Conservatism is about the duties of the individual, their responsibility to them and theirs (I'm alright jack and if I'm not I'm blaming those 'beneath' me) didn't thatcher say 'there's no such thing as society?'

As for your comment on carers! I worked in care homes for several years including as a manager, it's a highly skilled job that requires practical and medical knowledge, an understanding of many varying illnesses and conditions, tenacity, stamina and an ability to empathise - so you wouldn't last a day as one! Extremely offensive comment you should be ashamed - will you still have that view if you're ever in need of one?

engineer did you miss the link about unclaimed benefits

Zigzag, if they don't qualify for benefits, they are earning too much to do so. I know that does not mean they are well off. Generally only the very poorest without kids are entitled to anything.

Move to where the work is

Ffs!

I repeat

Not possible if you're on benefits. Bloody hard to find landlords that will take on claimants anyway. In addition the poor can't save up deposits, moving costs, up to 6 months rent in advance.

Would incur further costs to the country by:

Moving people away from their support networks leading to decrease in mental health, increase in physical ill health, increase in childcare costs, increase in the poor working needing time off for their own/children's sickness.

More demand on properties in cheaper areas pushes rents up.

Cheaper areas usually have higher unemployment/fewer jobs therefore MORE likely to need benefits for longer.

Makes more expensive areas more elitist, so increases rents here too.

Workers on low wages living outside the area they work in means they need more support to get to work, are doing longer commutes leading to more ill health (mental and physical).

More pressure on transport into the more expensive area for commuting purposes.

Plus how would it work in practical terms moving eg an entire county?
Totally unrealistic.

Oh and kilmuir, well know genius and valuable contributor to threads has arrived with her 'insight'. You get my son's dad to contribute, if you think it's that easy.

Halo
You are working so the point is null. Yes moving away from family is benifitial in the end if unemployment is the alternative. Should there be help to move absolutely but there are things that you can do in the situation you identify such as buddy up with someone in the same situation. What do you think would happen if our children were ill for 30 days? If lucky unpayed leave and debt! We are 90 miles from the nearest relative others are overseas. What is so different?

Under a tory govt there absolutely would NOT be more money spent on social care, just look at their history, if they get more money in it goes to their pals - EVERY time

Graphista. Exactly this.

In terms of moving, it does cost to move and can cause other problems such as having no free help with childcare. So I understand why people don't want to. The other side is that many people have moved because they can't afford rents where they were living or brought up as kids.

And sadly many people have to somehow manage without any family help at all.

such as buddy up with someone in the same situation

And leave their family behind, engineer?

Grap
It darn well is possible. Poor mental health due to moving!!!!! What rubbish! New start best foot forward. Moving is not bad for your health!

But a mother with a 4 month old baby should not have to go back to work yet. I am a bit taken aback that on mums net others are saying to a woman with a 4 month old baby, just to go back to work.

I had no choice but to go back to work when my DC was just 10 weeks old. He was also an emlscs so I was barely recovered from that too.

I support the benefits cap. I work full time in a professional role for £25k pa. Why should someone who chooses the benefit lifestyle get more money than I do?

It does cost money to move, but many people do move. Even to different countries.

Jess
Yes leave ffamily and friends behind. Unless they fit in the suitcase! Are you attached at the hip! Phone, Skype, visit. That's our reality.

You are working so the point is null. Yes moving away from family is benifitial in the end if unemployment is the alternative. Should there be help to move absolutely but there are things that you can do in the situation you identify such as buddy up with someone in the same situation. What do you think would happen if our children were ill for 30 days? If lucky unpayed leave and debt! We are 90 miles from the nearest relative others are overseas. What is so different?

I work now. I have been on benefits. I understand the difficulties. You clearly don't or you wouldn't have asked your last question.

I don't know anyone who lives on taxpayers' charity (aka benefits) but having watched a few of those sensationalist Benefits programmes, it seems to me that most people on benefits have big TVs, sky sports as well as 20 a cigarette habits and usually have a few rabid animals thrown in to the mix for good measure.
I'm inclined to believe the welfare state was created as a safety net, not a lifestyle choice. There are always jobs if people look hard enough. Benefits should cover basic food, housing and clothes. No one on benefits should be able to afford to smoke, go on holiday or have pets etc. Being on social welfare should not be an easy option.

They don't! Do you understand that? They don't get more money than you do! If you think that's the case, ditch the job and stroll into your local Jobcentre! The ignorance on this thread is unbelievable !