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?

GingerIvy Upping the minimum wage is not the solution.
If I had to pay some of our staff more than minimum wage I would have to get rid of them because quite simply they don't make me enough money to justify their roles.
Or I pay minimum wage and put my prices up, and in turn the company buying from me puts their prices up and everything costs more money and the minimum wage needs increasing again
Things I can do is provide a good training scheme to allow staff to train and progress. To offer flexible hours and working. We've even bought 2 staff members cars, personally out our own money not the companies (one broke his and another his wife left and took it) to allow them to get to work, kids to school etc and they repaid at something stupid like £20 a week. We can do these things, what we can't do is commit to paying them more

Rafe, large number of us have worked full time whilst having small babies and shared the childcare cost 50% with our other half. We paid 100% of one salary for child care for small babies. It is doable and involves an investment in a long term career.

I support the benefits cap. Lots of people do. I see it does not apply if you work. I saw one press report on someone with loads of chidlren -about 9 or 10 and as the father worked they were not subject to it. I was appalled by the exclusion.

"Are you affected by the benefit cap?

The cap doesn't apply to you if you are of pension age or you receive war widows' or war widowers' pension.

If you have been employed continuously for 12 months and you lose your job through no fault of your own, the benefit cap won't apply to you for the first 39 weeks of your claim.

You won't be affected by the cap if you claim universal credit, and you or your partner is working, and your monthly joint take home pay is £430.

Families who receive working tax credits or who work enough hours to claim working tax credits are exempt. Use the Gov.uk tax credit calculator to find out if you're eligible.

You are also exempt if you or your family receive:

disability living allowance or the personal independence payment
attendance allowance
support component of employment and support allowance
industrial injuries benefits

From 7 November 2016, you are exempt from the benefit cap if you or your family receive:

carer's allowance 
carer’s element of universal credit 
guardian's allowance""

Something has to change.

My sil (lone parent to 2 dc, no maintenance, works 0 hours) has a weekly income of £206, after rent and council tax.

My sister, (married, 2 dc. Works 12 hrs. H works 40 hrs a week) has a weekly income of £201 after mortgage and council tax.

I don't know what the answer is, but I can understand why people are frustrated.

The first thing I would address is the number of NRP's who walk away from children and never pay a penny or share any of the childcare. My sil has to attend regular job centre interviews and is working out how she is going to make up the shortfall in her rent, while her ex is taking her to court calling the shots about access, while refusing to even buy them a toothbrush for overnight stays.

This morning on Radio 4 they were talking about this and interviewed a single mother with four children, one of whom was a baby. Now, I appreciate we can all be a victim of circumstance; we can all lose a job, we can all lose a partner and suddenly find ourselves in need of help. That is what the benefit system should be there for. And to help those with illnesses or conditions or disabilities that prevent them from leading "normal" lives. Far more money needs to go into that side of things.

However, this woman said she was struggling before the cap. In which case, she must have been struggling prior to having a baby. So why did she have another baby? It's people like that that make so many people support this cap without question.

I have to say, the basic tenet of you shouldn't be better off on benefits than working is, in itself, correct but you have to clamp down hugely on those taking the piss and support those in work better to ensure it happens; it isn't just about capping benefits but other things too, which aren't happening.

I'm a single person, no children, in his early 40s. I have a mortgage on a one-bed flat of £350 per month. I own my car, which is 3 years old. Small and economical. I have no debts other than my mortgage. I receive no benefits. I take home £16,500 per year after tax (as I earn £20,000 per year). I eat well, can afford to go out, go on a holiday each year (not all inclusive, but not Butlins either) and have still managed to save £10,000 in the last 6 years. I have a mobile phone on £10 each month and landline/internet but no Sky subscriptions, gym memberships, don't smoke.

I've worked out that I could cope if I took home £12,000 so £20,000 on the face of it doesn't seem totally unreasonable in itself.

Wait imisschocolate you're saying you survived on 14k as a SINGLE person and expect a family to survive on 20k? you know that's not much more right?

Still no wiser.

I'd love for someone to be able to explain the idea (not just because poor people should be poorer than me) and how it will improve things.

The knock on of this and other punitive, punishment based cuts will be what?

Agree with the benefit cap? How will it help?

Same answer trotted out. It won't help anyone but it will make the poor suffer.

It seems that is enough for some.

Firstly I'll state I can't stand the Torys and that I'm lucky enough to be comfortable and even I say they're being well hard on the poor/disabled, what they're doing to them is an absolute disgrace, if they're going to target anyone let it be the young who can't be bothered working, not the disabled people who've worked most of their life, or are genuinely unable to, this government tar everyone with the same brush, but the people who agree with the Torys remember, you can't spell "Conservative" without spelling "Con" and remember this, you're never one fall or one redundancy away from being in that exact same position yourself, were you're being victimised for being less well off or disabled, and if you've worked all your life, doesn't make the slightest bit if difference, I think it's an absolute disgrace and the Torys are nothing but evil personified.

Pay for company directors should be capped if the lowest paid workers are eligible for tax credits.

This would be fantastic. A great start at actually sorting the issues people are facing. This way it wouldn't hit small businesses who cannot afford to up wages either. I expect most who have to claim tax credits work for larger companies who can afford to up wages.

That is the equivalent of a £29k net salary. For living on benefits? Or £1916 a month or £479 a week.

Too generous still. Are people really going to complain about receiving nearly £500 a week for not working?

And dont forget the other benefits of free prescriptions, free school meals etc etc etc. It all adds up on top of that.

I support it - there has to be a cap. It has to be wrong if families can get more in benefits than if they work. As PPs have pointed out, a great many people live on far less than £23k. Private rents can be high in some areas, but if you work then you have to live where you can afford, that is maybe a smaller place or different area - why should it not be the same for those on benefits?

Really? So you don't have a child until you know for sure you can afford it for the next 18-21 years (including uni contributions of course!). So you, what, put that amount in savings before getting pregnant? Because NOBODY can guarantee that 5 years down the road they won't get hit by a financial slam that wipes them out or perhaps end up injured or ill and are unable to work. NOBODY. So I guess NOBODY should be having children then, right??

Disability is impossible to predict, yes. Apart from that, there's a lot of things you can do to effectively reduce (not eliminate) your risk of poverty.

At the risk of getting flamed... why should a healthy working age person be long term unemployed? I understand employment interruption but long term unemployment is not something we should support. Working is not a choice it's an obligation, cure this and benifits could be substantially higher.

I agree with it im afraid, there are many hardworking families or single parents who work and earn less than the benefit cap. I agree benefits should exist but you should always be better off working otherwise there is no incentive for people to work.

reallyanotherone if you earn 19k and have children ( plural ) then you are in receipt of both tax credits and child benefit.

Why should company directors be capped?
There are many small businesses employing people. 1 of our staff claims top up benefits. He has 2 children by 1 woman, and another by his current. She has 5 children with 4 Dads. We cannot pay him enough to support them all and why should we?!
His wage is linked to the job he does - everyone would be saying its unfair if we paid him more to support his family than we do the single lad with no responsibilities.

As for capping Directors I know most of you are hinting at large organisations but as a small business owner this includes me. I have been months with no pay to ensure we can pay our staff, I am the one who has risked everything to build a company up and invested my own money - why shouldn't I reap the rewards?

I think the real benefit scandals is how much is being paid to private landlords in the form of housing benefit. someone mentioned this up thread and they were right - what's needed is more social housing. It's an absolute disgrace that consecutive governments have allowed councils to sell off their housing stock at a knock-down price over the years, not replaced it and are now filling the gap using the private rented sector, pouring millions of pounds of housing benefits into the pockets of private landlords. The buy-to-let bonanza this has spawned is also responsible for pushing up house prices in a double whammy for low-income families. Do people really believe that all those in receipt of benefits deserve to be homeless in the absence of low-priced social housing? If there has to be a benefit cap then it should be calculated after rent is taken into consideration - housing benefit is paid straight to the landlord in most cases anyway - it's not money in a benefit claimant's pocket. But what would be better is to get on with replacing all the council housing which has been sold off - perhaps the government could levy a special tax on those who have benefited in the past to pay for it (obviously I am joking - but is it any worse than penalising those coming up behind who now have no social housing to move into?) - to bring down the benefit bill once and for all.

I get sick and tired of seeing my brother getting another tattoo and spending an arm and a leg on his kids at Christmas - he smokes too. Doesn't bloody work though

Alfie you wouldn't need tax credits if you paid far less tax

People who currently pay no tax can receive thousands in tax credits. Many people who pay some tax get more than they pay in back via tax credits.

Cutting income tax doesn't give enough help to the poorest people, at the same time it allocates a huge chunk of government money to people who already have more than enough to live on.

housing benefit is paid straight to the landlord in most cases anyway

I'm not sure that is the case anymore.

I'm not sure that is the case anymore

No. Usually the housing benefit gets paid to the claimant. This was brought in to stop slum landlords collecting rent while refusing to fix problems.

Still though, even if its paid to the claimant, it goes to the landlord right after so I don't really see what difference that makes. The issue is still ridiculous rents in a lot of cases.

More social housing...again. Jobs while its being built, lower benefits bill in future.

my bro and sil both work pt.
Their only child is at school - family provide any childcare
Their rent is a tiny £250 per month.
They get all benefits going - they are out every weekend and have just had a week in Spain.
New car every 2/3 years.
My dh works ft and I pt.
2 kids in school
Our mortgage is 3 times their rent.
No benefits
We manage 1 uk holiday a year.
My car is 11 years old.
It does leave a bitter taste in my mouth Tbh.
Why should they work ft? And lose their wtc and ctc and hb?

However, this woman said she was struggling before the cap. In which case, she must have been struggling prior to having a baby. So why did she have another baby? It's people like that that make so many people support this cap without question.

Contraception error? With a partner that then bailed on her? Funny how she gets the blame, but nobody says "why did HE have another baby with her?" It's always "why did she have another baby?" Perhaps because she's the woman and it's the women that carry babies? So therefore women get smeared in it all, while the men walk away.

Nothing changes. Nothing. Same shit that was going around years ago.

Just wanted to reply to those saying someone earning this amount would get tax credits anyway. That is not true. It depends on their circumstances.

As for capping Directors I know most of you are hinting at large organisations but as a small business owner this includes me. I have been months with no pay to ensure we can pay our staff, I am the one who has risked everything to build a company up and invested my own money - why shouldn't I reap the rewards?

Of course you should - but at the same time, we have to move towards a living wage. I'd love to see the market enforcing this rather than the government, but I don't see how that will happen in the face of cheap labour in the developing world.

Some people are very idealistic, just because living on £14k is achievable for a single person wherever you are it doesn't mean its possible elsewhere, especially when a child is involved. A single person with a child here would be spending £10k of that on rent, leaving £330 for everything else, my council tax is £140, gas, electricity and phone/internet is another £120, which leaves a massive £70 to feed and clothe two people.

And it really isn't as easy as just getting a school hours, term time only job, they exist in only a small selection of career sectors and massively competitive, yet that's constantly brandished around as the solution to all single working parents problems.