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?

Would it make sense to move in together? Save on housing costs?

"doing bugger all with delusions of grandeur" well apart from the years of study, numerous degrees + qualifications + sacrificing time with their children/families in order to climb the career ladder?
FFS you think the people in these roles haven't worked very hard to get where they are?

Anyone could be judged not fit to work if they followed procedure. It’s far from watertight.

It’s part of the snotty, ‘I’m worth it’ attitude toward those who work. They think they can out-moral you with some very fancy footwork. They cannot.

Yes I agree many people can’t make more than basic contributions due to this.

No one "deserves" to give up work in their 50s unless they've worked long and hard enough in relatively high paid jobs to save and invest enough to support themselves and don't need state handouts. Not sure why you start your post mentioning 80 year olds - they're long past state retirement age so irrelevant. Someone "in their 50s" will have worked (maybe) 30 or so years (maybe less if taken time off to have children) and that's simply not enough to finance 50+ years of not working (i;e; childhood and old age), even more so if some of those years were part time.

You haven't answered how you'd afford the moving costs, first month's rent and deposit with no job.

I would lose my UC, so we would actually be worse off if he moved in.

If he’s working he can support you both, and I saw on another thread I was on you have no housing costs as your property is owned outright, so he would have more disposable cash from saving on housing. Seems like a win win to me?

. I would move for work if I had to.

Sorry don't know how to quote. Almost spat my tea out.. good luck getting accepted by a landlord, especially if you haven't actually started the job yet. Some of these responses are hilarious, people clearly don't live in the real world.

I would be a "cocklodger" in my own home. No thanks.

Yes, many ridiculous suggestions, that quite frankly should be ignored!

And that’s a good excuse to have the public fund you for decades? Because you don’t like the notion of somebody who loves and cares about you supporting you (with the benefit of free accommodation in return) rather than the state? If life on benefits was hell, I’m sure living with my partner and having the stability of their employment would be a much better option.

I'll bite.
It is FAR more complicated that just moving him in, and I am not going to go into here. But it is not an option, so please erase it from your head. Thanks.

Ok!

There is not the threat of money being taken away , in fact it's very generous if people want to try to do some work. they don't re-assess people just because they try some work, and as you say there is the work allowance meaning they start earning and if only working a few hours a week there would be absolutely no deduction on their UC. I honestly can't understand why people think they will be worse off by trying a bit of work, unless the system is just not being expalined properly to them ?

Bump 🙂

The simple reason is that the UK can't afford to maintain the current spending on benefits.
It's set to rise too.... especially at current rate.
UK will literally turn into a country where nearly everyone is claiming benefits because the system allows them to.
People not working is bad for trillions of reasons for a country's economy...
Depending on your disability/ needs there are some jobs that disabled people can do
It doesn't set a good example for children/future adults to basically be on benefits majority of your life.
Plus the old trope of why should people busting their guts working/paying children ..... basically not entitled to much because they are working....fund this?!?

There is absolutely a threat of money being taken away. You know this.

Many disabled people simply cannot "try a bit of work", and they stand to lose HUNDREDS of pounds.

Exactly. Starting a job is a change of circumstances, and can trigger a re-assessment. I was told this by my own work coach.

They do not re-assess straight away often not for ages as they are so far behind with re-assessments. And people on ESA can do permitted work also meaning they can keep their ESA and do some work earning up to a certain amount each week without being worse off or losing benefits. Permitted work has always been a thing. And you said yourself that LCWRA means being limited in what work you can do not completely unable to do any work so perfectly feasible that they allow people to work part time hours and not be penalized.

That is ESA. There is no permitted work with UC. It is just based on earnings and the work allowance.
But I can't blame anyone for not trying because they stand to lose too much. I know people who are too scared to even volunteer as they think they will lose money.

Being discussed on Tom Swarbrick

I wonder that too. A brain malfunction during birth in my case. Totally unlucky and you couldn't have prevented it. Luckily, while it had a severe impact on my brain, I didn't have an empathy bypass like you.

Unfair comment.