To think too many people are happy to live off benefits forever?

[BritishQueue]

Okay, I know this is a touchy subject here on MN, but I need to ask, AIBU to think that too many people are just choosing to stay on universal credit rather than work?

Obviously, I’m not talking about people who genuinely can’t work - disabilities, carers, etc (even though a lot of those who claim to be unfit for work are perfectly capable, and I’ve seen “carers” for people who don’t actually need any care…). But I know multiple people who are completely able-bodied and yet have no intention of ever getting a job. They say things like “it’s not worth it” or “I’d be worse off working,” and honestly, I don’t get it. I work full-time, pay tax, and yet I see people getting rent paid, extra handouts, and still managing holidays and luxuries I can’t afford. Not to mention that a lot of women think the government should subsidise their SAHM lifestyle.

I just don’t understand how it’s fair? Surely benefits should be a safety net, not a lifestyle choice? AIBU?

I was talking about benefits today with a friend my thoughts/experiences of it are..
I was born to a teenage single mum on benefits and lived in a council flat. It was shit, no luxury’s, not enough money for food and heating in the winter. I have been told that back then (Thatcher years) It was impossible to get back in to work in this situation.
I had my son when I was in my early twenties (single and on benefits) council house. I brought him up alone for the first 12 years. Working Tax Credits and help towards childcare costs meant I was much better off getting a job. This gave my child a far more comfortable lifestyle than I had. I then met my now husband and as my child got older could work full time and get off benefits.
The idea of scrapping these schemes is shameful, it will be children who miss out.
I do know people (my mum who I know longer have contact with) who went on to benefits in 1981 and has never worked, just had kid after kid. This isn’t fair and shouldn’t be rewarded with free money. I don’t know the answer though.. The obvious one is the dad in this set up should be providing. The two child benefit cap was probably put in place to stop things like this but again I feel the only ones missing out are the children.
I do know a couple of people who are on long term benefits and seem to have quite luxurious lifestyles but that’s because of disability and is obviously not their fault.

She WFH and is post grad (Russel Group) educated. A very specialised role that she loves.
And it is part time. She literally can not give any more to it.

The answer is for the state to provide everything kids need and not hand the parents wad after wad of cash.

We need high quality and free breakfast/lunch/supper clubs in schools. Free bus passes for kids, healthy food parcels, free books, free dental checks at school.

That way no child will go without but we’re not just handing cash to the parents to spend on vapes and tattoos.

She sounds fantastic, good on her for not jacking it in. I hope others follow her example.

Nope.

It's been engineered this way to keep us at each other's throats and satisfy the Machiavellian ethos of the ends justify the means. Although the ends are rather nebulous depending on zeitgeist.

I'm more scared by the biggest transfer of wealth to the already wealthy that has escalated since Covid. I'm more concerned that the country is being asset stripped so quickly and we're being held like cattle to the slaughter with bread and circuses.

We're at the end of capitalism, but with big tech and automation we have no precedent for how to proceed.

Well, she is feeling suicidal about the proposed changes to benefits.

Oh this tired old chestnut again - ‘they just want us to hate each other so we don’t notice what they’re doing…’ blah blah. It’s just become to stock response to swerve anybody having any level of individual responsibility. It’s a load of nonsense and thought terminating cliche.

Sadly benefits have to change as the bill is absolutely terrifying.

No, I do not. My reading list extends beyond the Daily Fail.

I understand that the global economy is shrinking due to falling birth rates and a global COL crisis.

I also understand that Britain is in worse standing than other European countries in this crisis because we shot ourselves in the foot with Brexit, further shrinking our economy.

The benefits bill is a drop in the ocean. And pensions make up the vast majority of the welfare bill.

We do not need cuts. Cuts shrink economies. We need growth.

There are 800,000 vacancies and 1.6 million job seekers (without counting the sick, disabled, and economically inactive, the government are trying to push into work). Until the number of vacancies outstrips the number of job seekers, we will always have people who are physically able to work but unable to find work. And the only way to create more jobs is economic growth.

Ah, it is ok. I guess suicides will mean less people on benefits.

Well what is your suggestion to find an extra 5 billion every year while the number of taxpayers shrinks?

Maybe have a look at the amount of benefits that goes to housing - landlords having their mortgage paid off by the taxpayer.

Err…

In 2024 to 2025 the government is forecast to spend £303.3 billion on the social security system in Great Britain. Total GBwelfare spending is forecast to be 10.8% of GDP and 23.8% of the total amount the government spends in 2024 to 2025.
Around 55% of social security expenditure goes to pensioners; in 2024-25 we will spend £165.9 billion on benefits for pensioners in GB. This includes spending on the State Pension which is forecast to be £137.5 billion in 2024 to 2025.
In 2024 to 2025 we will spend £137.4 billion on working age and children welfare. This includes spending on Universal Credit and its predecessors, and non-DWP welfare spending.
In 2024 to 2025 we will spend £90.4 billion on benefits to support disabled people and people with health conditions, and £35.1 billion on housing benefits.

What were you saying about benefits being a ‘drop in the ocean’ compared to pensions..?

Eh? What would your reform be, then?

@Wildflowers99 pensions are part of the benefits/welfare bill?

Clearly, what I meant was the welfare bill is a tiny proportion of our overall expenditure.

Well I'm not wrong am I?

I know your mindset is akin to that Monty Python sketch where the limbless Crusader opines "t'is but a flesh wound", but have you truly examined how quickly the employment market is changing, and how selective it is?

In terms of individual responsibility, should those marginalised in the employment market just go and demand jobs from employers weeding out even entry level applicants by algorithm? Hold them at gun point perhaps,

And if employment was such a holy grail, why raise business rates and NI contributions forcing mismddle sized and small businesses to cut back and fold?

More social housing. A huge amount of the benefit bill is housing. Landlords inflating prices. Tax payer is paying their mortgage via benefits.
Another huge part of the welfare bill is pensions. Well, what can we do about that? Push all pensioners off a cliff?

Ok. So, how many social houses? Where will we build them? How much will they cost? Where does that money come from? I’m guessing to make anything like a dent it would need to be hundreds of billions if not trillions?

Really? 23% is ‘tiny’, is it?

This is another tired old trope. ‘Oh I would never be taken on so why bother..’

You sound like you are fine in your own housing situation. No idea about how anyone else can be struggling.

A cap on the amount a landlord can charge for rent

Over half of that is pensions.

Less than 12% of that is other benefits, and a lot of that will be housing benefit and disability benefits.

Can you not just answer my practical questions?

Dismissal is apparently your tired old trope.

Time for a top up, chin chin.

Advanced search. Person does not believe in MH or ND issues. That says it all