To be confused by benefits cuts to the disabled and ill?

[AllyHayHay]

As luck would have it, I have not been in this position, but I do know of one disabled lady who has struggled. She was incredibly fortunate to already own her own home prior to her accident.

I am not what you'd call politically astute, but I have been reading about the proposed spring benefits cuts and wonder why people always discuss this ONLY affecting the sick and disabled.
I am also aware that there are many, many rough areas with families who have never worked, people who are struggling with addiction, prison sentences (their kids, spouse, etc) and these people never seem to be included in the Guardian articles and opinion pieces online.

Why would a system wish to make the life of a disabled person worse, yet ignore the growing issues of illiteracy, generational poverty and other issues which are going on in most urban areas just out of sight of the comfortably off?
Why not address the reasons that great swathes of people are living on benefits across the UK who are NOT disabled? I imagine this would drag up questions of why those issues persist - and no one in government wants to address that.

Since benefits claimants who are not in work of on the pension are a minority, are these cuts more of a populist tendency?

Maybe only make medical care available for non smoking, healthy BMI workers free of hereditary diseases who are totally able bodied with no addictions. Got to get them back to work! work work work! Perhaps refuse pregnancy care to women who refuse to abort disabled children. No A and E for suicide attempts either!

Lets free up that budget!!!!!!!!

This will also reduce the benefits bill. Any flaws in my logic?

Trouble is when workers are paid more, inflation rises and tax rises are needed to pay the extra wages of public sector workers and increased public sector spending on other things and of course increased benefits. So pretty soon, you're back where you started.

I'm sorry but this is such an extreme response. I cautioned earlier about posters mentioning death, genocide etc as soon as the financial reality around cuts is mentioned. We simply can't allow hysteria to guide us when so much is at stake. If we carry on as we are currently going then things will get worse and even harder decisions will have to be made. No other country is going to step in and pay off our debt. We can't default and run away. We have to face up to this! Protect the most vulnerable as best we can but accept that cuts are necessary and they won't be easy.

The percentage of the population claiming these benefits has risen to 10%

In the 1980/ it was 3.4%

That's suspicious in itself

@Bumpitybumper this isn't just about keeping something the same. This is taking a hefty chunk of money from many people who are already on the poverty line and many will no longer be able to cope. It's not like they can think - never mind if I lose this £400 at least the NHS will be better or there will be better social care for the person who is losing the benefit. It will only mean that a life that is already a huge struggle to get the support you need will just become much more dire and depressing with so much less income.

Why not? It's so logical and it will balance the books wonderfully! Think of all that money that could be freed up for the most able bodied (working age) people and infrastructure! That is what really matters. Supporting the most able bodied and productive in society, nothing at all else.

All those medical interventions only create EXPENSIVE useless eaters, if we stopped offering the medical inventions, they would die and free up more of the budget. Problem solved at the source!!!!

We simply can't allow hysteria to guide us when so much is at stake!

Maybe Ukraine or Isreal will pay for our healthcare in future.

You can ridicule all you want but it doesn't change reality.

It's only hysteria until it's happening to you, HTH.

I understand this and nobody would choose to do this but we really can't just bury our head in the sand and pretend that the current system is affordable. The disability bill has risen massively since 2020 and future projections are eye watering. If we want to keep funding this then other big state bills need to come down. Those trying to mock me by suggesting extreme rationing of healthcare may well find that healthcare will become more limited. Also old age benefits and social care. These are the financial big hitters. We can't just mess around the edges anymore.

@Bumpitybumper You try keeping calm and not becoming hysterical when the whole country seems to be blaming you for the financial defecit and you are being faced with having your income slashed by hundreds of pounds every month!

This.
If the changes happen, then I will have to live off of £395.45 a month. I live alone with my dog. I wont be supporting local businesses anymore, so they will suffer too. Food banks are time limited, and as I am unable to work, I can't improve things. I may as well just lay down my arms.
People who are not going to affected by this just do not get it.

It absolutely is not an extreme response. It is likely to become a reality for a great many disabled people and dismissing their feelings isn't acceptable.

EXACTLY.

The thing is - there are clearly a lot of people who could and should be working but are not- no way is the population so much less healthy than in the 1980s with 3 times as many people ( adjusted for population growth) claiming these benefits

I think they do get it. It just doesn't affect them so they can put on a bit of a sad face, shrug their shoulders and say 'well, what else can we possibly do'?

These people, often married, with family support, investments, property etc probably spend that on a weekend break. £400 is a mere giggle, a side hustle away! Maybe a few less designer clothes. "Can't you just take in ironing?" between appointments and managing a broken, unreliable body etc.

Losing LWCRA would mean a reduction of 26% of my income. It would literally put disabled people like me BELOW the poverty line, which is £1,227 per month. Thats assuming they leave PIP alone (doubtful, they always wanting it back. Guilty until proven innocent in the UK, despite many, many consultants letters).

They don't care. We deserve it for being expensive and not dead. Maybe crime will pay off, as at least I will be able to eat in prison and get help with my medical issues inside, if humane euthanasia doesn't get passed. "I'm not worth it" and society hates my existence. I did not ask to be born and have not brought children on to this planet (imagine if they were as useless as me! ... assuming some one as defective as me could even attract a decent partner. I can't, obviously)

I've heard it all now. Zero hour contracts were not set up to be disability friendly because 'they' can't deal with reasonable adjustment and secure contracts with employment rights.

They benefit the employer whose profit margin would be affected if they had to provide reasonable adjustment, secure contracts etc.

Employers are not saying they can't recruit staff and are now willing to employ staff that may cost more because the resource of cheap staff has run dry.

You can 'incentivise' the ill and disabled by cutting their benefits (stick rather than carrot) but you can't force employers to recruit them. What then? You may have 'encouraged' more people to look for work but they have not been successful for reasons beyond government control. Government has the power to cut benefits but not to increase employment. So it's just a cut to the sick and disabled and all else is bollocks.

I have been an unpaid carer for years and loathe the idea of institutional care but would support us all joining together and saying enough is enough. This is a step too far.

The state takes over day to day care and then thinks about whether the disabled in their care can and should work and how they can afford it.

I'm sick of it being made my problem. UC makes a mistake and overpays me but I have to sort it. This is annoying but minor in comparison.

As a carer, whatever changes they make will impact negatively. You can't incentivise my autistic 24 year old son whose special school placement failed 9 years ago and who is now housebound. The government could stop all his benefits. Zero incentive. But we couldn't afford to live. Because I can't leave him to go out to work (not to mention CA restricts work) So he sees himself as a burden and better off dead. Is this what labour aspire to.?

1 out of 8 young people not in employment or work is your problem not mine. Don't imagine that cutting my son's disability benefits will solve it. But you knew it never would. His suffering is purely performative.

Oh ok, we're all supposed to be fine with losing our homes and being unable to feed ourselves/our families, we're collateral damage as long as you catch out the ones who should be working, right?

That they are going to be euthanised? Really? That medical assistance will be withheld from them?

@PapadonutWhat on earth is a benefits influencer?

Where will the government put the thousands that will become homeless as a result of these cuts? There certainly isn't enough social housing.. but are there enough hotel rooms? Councils will go bust very fast. So that will mean street homelessness. Disabled and sick people street homeless? I've seen this in poorer Eastern European countries. Is the government saying we are at those levels now? If so, can they be honest with us?
At least in the US there is a greater quantity of homeless 'shelters' we don't really have such a thing over here.
It's called a domino effect, Labour should google it.
As a poster already said, it would be fairer to get on with the assisted dying proposals 😞 then at least people have a choice. sorry to all going through this, it's disgraceful

No the changes are not great for those truly in need but it's probably the quickest/ only way to weed the wasters out

U less you have a better idea ( that doesn't cost )

Will they really end up homeless ? Is housing benefit being cut for these people as well ?

It is not about weeding "wasters" out. It is just about saving money, even though it will be catastrophic for many.

No it isn’t.