Every household?????

[Trainfromredhill]

So, the chancellor is going to give every household £400 for heating. Surely there should be a cut off of household income? The Beckhams, Elton John, james Dyson, Harry styles…….they all get the money too? . I say this as someone in the fortunate position of not needing the £400- I’d much rather it went to someone who does need it.Just seems a huge waste of public money to give it to everyone

I’m probably in the bracket that misses out on everything but still has to penny pinch. My husband and I earn about £100k per year between us

Only on Mumsnet.

Much better to give 800 to the very poorest and nothing to the very richest.

All these people accusing others of not giving to charity - how do you account for the billions donated in 2020/21 and even more to food banks every year?

@420Bruh

so define those 2 buckets

This is bribery money and I strongly oppose why this government is doing what it is doing. I genuinely believe that we have never seen such a badly behaved government and that, as a result of their attitude to all forms of decency, they remain the biggest threat to the country and democracy. That giving money to distract from their utter corrupt and reprehensible behaviour is just playing the only tune they know: that it is ok to give (or take) money in return for a blind eye.

This

And you are all idiots if you are infighting over this. Or indeed giving it any focus at all. This is exactly what the govt wanted. To stop us talking about party gate and how they are pushing all the wealth back into the hands of an elite few.

Is £400 how much we can be bought for these days?

Cheap at twice the price for this corrupt band of far right Tories I would say if it means they stay in Power.

It's definitely to distract from other shit and keep the Tory voters voting Tory.

Other organisations are really struggling with energy costs - schools for example - but they won't get a penny of help because schools don't vote.

Same here. People simply don't understand do they? Earning £100k comes with a different set of expenses basically. People just assume we live lavishly. It's a boring uneducated assumption.

😂

400 for everyone is better than 300 for just poor households. Hopefully this will mean payments reach people on time for colder weather in autumn/winter.

Of course this is a bribe because of Partygate and a way to avoid civil unrest and pressure on the NHS when people end up hospitalised or dead because of malnutrition or the cold. Energy companies will still make interest between the time that those £400 payments are transferred from the government to when they are applied to consumer accounts.

I am definitely in the lower income bracket of this and to be honest, I am just relieved and grateful for a bit of help in time for winter. If people who are high earners also receive the payment, I hope it helps them too.

I was genuinely very surprised yesterday when this was announced, it takes a little bit of stress away from us and makes me think we can get through this. We will still need to be really careful with our usage and make some changes, we will still need to be really careful with the food budget-but I feel like it is "doable" now. This time last week, I was panicking BIG TIME.

What would you like the cut off to be op?

And if this is a Johnson "apology payment", it hasn't worked with us. It won't change how I vote, but I am very grateful for it. I do think there would have been civil unrest if nothing had been done, though

It depends on various things whether people get UC on an income of £31000. A single parent with significant childcare costs will qualify on a salary of over £40k.

Because it’s universal credit, it means that it’s covering a range of different purposes (tax credits also had multiple purposes embedded). It’s not simply about the poorest people in society. Part of it is about reducing barriers to people working or staying in work.

For a lone parent on a salary of c. £35k, UC is effectively a childcare subsidy mechanism. Average FT nursery costs for a child under 2 (or 3 but not qualifying for any free hours) is about £265 a week. Without that subsidy, the lone parent wouldn’t be able to work and would be dependent on UC (as a replacement for income support). She’d get more UC but have a lower household income overall - but also much reduced costs. The system wants to enable her to continue working despite the childcare costs because it takes a longer term view of the benefits of that for society.

Which is to say, all the £31k is the median salary in the uk comparisons are not helpful. Whether that’s enough to live on depends on loads of things. That’s why UC is so bloody complex.

The money isn't going "directly to families". It's going to energy companies, who in turn will graciously not increase our bills to the tune of £400 per customer account.

I agree that they will be using the ‘costs too much in admin’ excuse BUT, they have thresholds for child benefit and other state benefits. They already know what the household income is for families and have done for years. I too would rather it was means tested but I cannot understand why this is not but other benefits are. If anyone can explain that I’d be delighted to hear it along with the ‘why don’t energy companies charge less when they clearly are making vast profits’. I have asked my brother who works in the energy industry. His answer is ‘it’s complicated’ but he still can’t explain it. I think ‘it’s complicated’ is just another fecking excuse to do what they like.

Will it really make enough of a difference though to those who really need it? That's what matters.

Oh yes, every household. It's our world beating government don't you know?

We have a house in the UK but are not resident there. To my bemusement we've had the £150 cost of living paid to our account and I suspect we'll get the £400 payment too.

World beating I tell you.

What’s the £150 payment?

Your energy company will get the £400 not you

@SoggyPaper that's precisely my point. A household income of 30k was presented here as easy to live off with two kids in nursery. It cannot be due to the cost of childcare and housing. So posters on here making out thar 30k is easy for a family to live off just aren't being truthful. If it were then these top ups would not exist

No, £100k comes with expenses that you CHOSE to buy into. If you stayed where you were and didn't trade your lifestyle upwards, you'd be a lot more comfortable. Noone is holding a gun to your head.

It's not boring uneducated assumption if you're actually brining in this kind of money but know how to manage it.

Jesus wept, I thought I'd heard it all.

What I will say is that six figures actually sounds like more than it is as a sole earner will get taxed highly. However, two lots of £50k is naturally better.

It doesn't make you rich but can make you very comfortable.

Exactly.

I would not have given anything to second homes.

It's a relief to me personally as I am the classic 'don't qualify for benefits of any kind, but have no money left" group of people. So any kind of payment normally doesn't come my way. It will make a difference to me (not a big difference, given the size of my bills), even though I'm not on the minimum wage or on benefits. If that means Elton John gets it too, I can live with that.

People who don't want it can give it to charity/HMRC/a friend who could do with the extra.

Why is it so impossible for some people to
understand how expensive childcare and housing is in some parts of this country. It’s £1250 a month for full time day nursery where I live, £1500 a month to rent a tatty 3 bed terrace/semi. So if you’ve got two young children you’re looking at £4k per month before any other bills or food. You’d need a salary of £70k just to cover housing and childcare….what about council tax, electricity, gas, phone, food, clothes for your kids, dental care…

I agree. It's easy to look at a headline "we earn 100k combined" and think that's an incredible amount of money.

2 kids in full time childcare and rent on a 3 bed will decimate pretty much all of that. You wouldn't starve obviously but £400 would definitely make a difference.