There's too much animosity towards benefit recipients.

[Threadkillacilla]

Any and every flavour of benefit recipient, disabled, pensioner, out of work, low paid, single parent etc etc.
There's a mean and nasty cohort on mumsnet who are vitriolic in their hatred for them all.
What do people want instead of giving people a basic level of existence?
What do they think will happen without benefits?

Its not really the same as any other lease though is it? You don't have to pay road tax or insurance with mot ability. Not that i begrudge someone who genuinely needs to use the scheme!

You don't pay road tax if you have your own car and receive higher mobility DLA or enhanced mobility PIP. You can get half price road tax with standard mobility PIP.

I don't think anyone grudges benefits to people who genuinely need them. Clearly there are people on here who do and it's distressing to see the anxiety discussions like this cause. But it's disingenuous to say that everyone claiming benefits is in the same position. There are people claiming benefits who don't need to. That's the issue, and if that can be resolved then the pot for those who need them will be bigger. As it should be, those genuinely in need deserve more.

@bloodyplanes Disabled people are exempt from road tax. Yes insurance is included but many other leases have this as well. Such as Peugeot's Just Add Fuel amongst others.

OP I deliberately haven't read any responses on here because I suspect they'll send my blood pressure sky high!

To answer your question: I believe in welfare provision - to protect people who've fallen on hard times through bad luck, ill health etc etc. I want people to have a home, food, warmth (and healthcare of course). I want to make that absolutely clear. Where I part company from some of the more righteous MNetters is that I don't think benefits payments could or should provide a lifestyle that's equal to that of people in full-time work. To be clear: clothes, but not designer labels. Food, but not luxury items; and not the very latest in phones/tablets/devices for example. And certainly not beauty treatments - they're a luxury that I (who have never claimed but always worked ) have never been able to afford/justify. So it's right that benefits should be carefully assessed and yes, this might mean it's not always dead easy to get them.

I don't think reasonable people (and it's pointless to consider crazies here) begrudge valid claimants I certainly don't. But we all know of examples of fraud or people who try it on and it's galling when their lifestyle is more affluent than people who are working. I get really tired of the argument often trotted out on MN (and I bet it's already appeared above...) that while some people/businesses evade tax we can't criticise benefit fraudsters. Oh yes, we can. Two wrongs never made a right - and these things shouldn't be conflated. Once you start going down that road, you lose all logic and respect. Some crook somewhere has stolen £5 million, so it's OK for me to shoplift. Er, no it's not.

Fraudulent claimants absorb money which could go to deserving people and also, quite reasonably, alienate hard-working people whose taxes are paying those benefits. So it's not a victimless crime.

Absolutely and the blame lies with them. Not just for claiming fraudulently but also for tainting society's views of disabled people and those of us who claim benefits.

Disabled benefits now being part of Universal Credit hasn't helped. Now we're all lumped together as one 'entity' so it's just "I'm on Universal Credit" which 99.9% of people presume this means you're simply unemployed. So we have to immediately follow this with "But the disabled element rather than the unemployed element" Whereas before it was just "I receive Incapacity Benefit (which then became ESA)" which is pretty self explanatory.

Excuse you?! So you don't feel that people with disabilities through NO fault of their own, should have any kind of decent lifestyle?!?!?!

Clearly a red hot Tory

@CulturePigeon - you expressed that very well. I agree.

@ChristmasisRuined - that's not what she said. (Even you'd like it to have been)

You agree that people with disabilities so severe that they're unable to work, don't deserve ANY luxuries or any kind of nice lifestyle? Simply because they do not work? Wow. Tory beliefs personified in one simple statement

Yes, yes it is. Try reading the post again.

@CulturePigeon so disabled people who are so disabled they cannot work should live a miserable life?

Xpost with @ChristmasisRuined

You're absolutely bang on OP. Some people would like to bring back workhouses.

Pity the poor claimant who finds a designer label in a charity shop eh?

on another thread someone said they'd rather kill themselves than have two kids with disability, in a thread about benefit for kids with disability.

I knew someone who once said if she had a disabled child she'd kill it, then when I pointed out she'd go to jail said she'd kill herself after. Mind you I once had a row with her mother (who I met only twice thank God) about her eugenicist attitude, so no surprise really.

Some people are despicable.

Im on benefits and comfortable. Thankfully being disabled with 2 disabled children and all that that brings, I don't need to worry too much about money. Should we be starving and homeless?

Surely though @CulturePigeon that's an individual choice, we decide what a reasonable amount is to live (not just exist) and then the recipient chooses how they spend it? Should we dictate how the money is spent for single parents (i.e.) Because their partner has left and some people are cheats? Wouldn't we be punishing the wrong people? 40% of UC is paid to people in work so would they be ok with luxury food

@Deguster - I'm sorry to hear of the difficulties you have to deal with on a daily basis. Of course PIP shouldn't be means tested - ever. (I have never classed it as a benefit anyway any more than heart transplants or cancer treatment. It's about need).

I do think some wouldn't be happy until we were left with food vouchers and nothing else. I am another 'lucky' one with disabled DCs. Only one of them gets CDP (Scotland DLA equivalent), one lost their DLA a few years ago when he was 12, despite his condition being no different to when he was awarded it previously and the other has never qualified. DH nailed it though, he became physically disabled and was medically retired so we really cashed out 🙄

It was mentioned unthread about several members of the same family claiming PIP with no context, but lots of conditions and health problems are genetic, so it shouldn't be a surprise to find adults and children in the same family who are disabled. Also, when it comes to neurodiversity it's common for people to meet people like them. These multi family claimants are not all 'at it', it's note the case that unfortunately they all qualify. Imagine feeling bitter about that

@CulturePigeon

I'd be interested to know what food you would allow a disabled person to eat

@actualnamechange I totally agree, some would rather us on food vouchers where you can only buy limited items, no chocolate treats for the disabled!

Do people think we CHOSE to be disabled and have disabled children. My son has just been awarded DLA for 7 years. Do people think the DWP do that lightly? Do they not realise the amount of shit that we have to go through. It pisses me off no end.

So I can't just use my pip I have to make sure I don't blow my £100 a month on luxury groceries? What exactly would those be? I'll buy my smoked salmon and lobster out of my wages then 🙄 and make sure I go to Aldi to spend the pip.

I think personal attitudes to benefits are based on one’s own experience.

For example, the tories removed widowed parents allowance in April 2017 which paid a reasonable amount of money until the youngest child was 18. It was replaced with an allowance for 18 months. Because obviously when your husband or wife dies, 18 months later they become less dead, the surviving spouse is suddenly earning double their salary and everything is financially rosy 🙄

Contrast that with a lone parent (divorced:split up etc) who is able to claim benefits that aren’t affected by child maintenance payments. Arguably their children will have a better standard of living than mine. Clearly I’m referring to regular cm payments so don’t come at me with all the “they don’t pay and don’t see the kid” because of course that should be factored in.

But hey. It doesn’t impact that many people so who cares huh.

I don't think benefits payments could or should provide a lifestyle that's equal to that of people in full-time work

Do they though? How many people do you actually know who just choose not to work? Also to note there's a huge range of salaries in full time work, perhaps you should get a better job then you could afford beauty treatments.