Ok who wants to swap £2500 a month in benefits for my husbands MS and my epilepsy, narcolepsy and fibromyalgia.

[bluebirdblackbird]

Well according to a lot of people on here we are on a good thing.

the 20 seizures I have in a week, chronic pain and night terrors, losing my memory after a seizure, pissing myself, hallucinations. They are all great fun. Not to mention the amount of times I have been accused of being drunk after a seizure.

or there is my husband. Diagnosed with progressive MS. Cronic Pain, shaking, cronic pins and needles, weakness in limbs plus losing mobility. Had to give up his teaching job 4 months ago after gradually reducing hours.

Not to mention the judgement when we use a blue badge because we look ok in that moment. And apparently labour are going to find us both work. Yippee cant wait to meet the employer who is going to take us both on. I am sure pissing my chair on a reg basis won’t matter to them or the losing counciouness at least a couple of times a day.

i am just fed up of yet another they are on benefits and get money and it’s not fair stamp stamp stamp. The bastards have saved up for a holiday- it’s not fair. The bastards have a mobility car but they look fine, OMG- they have got new carpets or a new sofa.

since I am guessing they none of the moaners would actually swap places with us if they could then STFU.

oh and that pip that is easy to get- my husband gets lower rate for both and that is despite providing all the evidence and appealing so we are off to tribunal. He can’t even dress himself most days and he can’t hold a pan safely or manage his medication plus many other things. If he stays on the points he is on he will lose his pip completely under these new labour proposals.

but most people know someone who’s friends, aunts, nephews, stepdaughters, cousin twice removed who lied and got it. I was taking to a lady in a wheelchair who does not get any mobility component of pip at all.

I don't get the argument that if someone working cannot afford it, then nor should someone with a disability. If someone working cannot afford a basic standard of living, we should be angry with massive employers raking in millions a year in profit at the expense of their employees.

And, thinking about companies making a turnover of millions per year, do you know what the country cannot afford? Subisiding said companies' wage bills and yet we do, and no one complains about it.

Forcing the likes of Tesco, Asda, Amazon, Starbucks, etc, to pay an actual living wage and lift their employees out of poverty would save the country far more than hitting out at the most vulnerable in society ever would.

Well the salaries are as they are in the UK, so the state benefits need to fall in line with those - and be reduced.

I'm not pitting anyone against anyone and I don't know what Chamberlain has to do with anything unless you are thinking we should go to war with the rich (who are already fleeing the country in their droves).

Disability benefits have reached an unsustainable level and are set to rise further. Something needs to be done as the tax burden associated with keeping the system going will become too much, the working population will strruggle and resentment will grow. It's not a narrative thought up by the rich. It is reality. The welfare state was never intended to have this many dependents and so few contributors. I want mature sensible discussions about this which don't involve ridiculous notions of a wealth tax coming in to save the day and what maintaining the system as it currently stands would actually cost each of us in the short, medium and long term. Servicing the National Debt is costing us two thirds of the NHS budget each year. We can't keep borrowing money to hide from the real issues.

Heard of inflation?

But that would never work. All company’s will do is cut staff to cover it. There is already huge amounts of automation already. When I worked at Tesco 30 years ago we had one person per checkout, now 20 can be supervised by 1 person.

less people employed. More benefits to pay out.

Whos to say I’m not angry?

I’d agree with this I was earning £40k had to give it up as had a toddler and twins and childcare for 3 would of wiped me out. Sahm. Got divorced, series of school hour jobs taking home over 1200 subsidised by UC by £600 or so a month. Kids are older so childcare not an issue and have clawed my way back into professional job.

Had there been decent subsidised childcare I’d of been able to remain employed and carried on earning at 40k plus so wouldn’t of had to claim anything.

I think I’ve had about £30k in universal credit over the years.

Subsidised childcare is a long term investment though like investing in social housing. Might be cheaper to pay a private landlord or give UC in the short term. Politics is often about short term decision making though.

Ds doesn't get PIP anymore because he lives in supported living. That costs thousands a week. Perhaps those who are anti disability benefits would prefer more of this.

I agree but it feels like some kind of absurd flow chart has been installed in the hive mind and every possible problem to do with the economy just comes back to blaming the disabled!

Heard of Universal Credit?

People are already living on a higher amount than the NMW, but the difference is being paid by UK taxpayers instead of the employers.

Forcing massively profitable businesses to pay their own wage bills will not cause mass inflation.

Direct your anger appropriately then

Workers on minimum wage per hour can also be the same people claiming PIP. The 2 groups are not exclusive, there is overlap.

My daughter has cognitive disabilities. She is also a shop worker getting the minimum hourly rate. Shops tend to offer part time contracts, full time is rare. There is no way she could afford to live independently nor could she care for herself on her own without support. Her friendship group is made up of similar ND young people with learning disabilities. They are the minority. Only 5-6% of people with learning disabilities are in paid work. A few are still unemployed but want to work. The jobs they do are shop worker , shelf stacking, pot wash, waitress , cleaner and labouring and gardening. Some live in their family home, some in supported living.

These young people are some of the least well off and do the grottiest of jobs yet some posters here would begrudge them any enjoyment. They are people with similar aspirations as non disabled young adults

Then that goes back to the argument above should a “basic standard of living” include an annual holiday?

It is awful for your DH aside from his illness,
2500 a month is a decent monthly income, more than most people who are working full-time.

PIP is slightly different other benefits as well as it has a specific purpose to aid you to live you life as independently as possible and potentially go out to work. It is not an income Benefit and it shouldn’t be spent on anything that isn’t specific to your disability. It shouldn’t go on holidays or rent, for example.

PIP is paid to address the increased costs attached to being disabled. That might mean enabling someone to work part time when they can’t sustain full time employment, for additional costs of travel, special diets etc.

The government doesn’t specify what it should or shouldn’t be spent on or how so I doubt anyone here can.

Completely agree. We can’t sustain an extra 5000 plus people a month claiming every month because of depression or anxiety.

No one would disagree with the OP and frankly I wish there was more for you. But the system needs addressing.

I’m not angry though - I can see the logic in the points raised here, doesn’t make me irate.

Then that goes back to the argument above should a “basic standard of living” include an annual holiday?

And according to research by the Rowntree Foundation it should.

you have repeated what I said. I agree!

That’s not true - I can’t remember the exact stats but pregnant then screwed have done some maths on this. It actually pays - and significantly so - to subsidise childcare. Women stay employed, have higher earnings over a lifetime, don’t have to rely on benefits etc.

Subsidised childcare is a cost to the government, it’s a benefit in kind that brings wider benefit in keeping women economically active, strengthening GDP, and over time brings tax benefits.

In that sense there are clear parallels with disability benefits that promote independence and empower people to work with resultant benefits to the economy.

There's always a poster on one of these threads claiming to know someone who successfully claimed PIP by claiming to have a bad back while simultaneously being the world limbo-dancing champion or getting the higher rate of PIP for depression just because they're a bit sad. In these stories the claimant in question, who I am sure is always absolutely real and not a figment of the poster's fevered imagination stoked up by hysterical Daily Mail headlines, is always awarded PIP no questions asked, no medical documentation required.
These surely not-at-all imaginary fraudsters also seem unusually garrulous and willing to share the exact details they supposedly put on their PIP forms with the posters. These same posters, being omniscient, are also apparently privy to the entire PIP assessment process as they know for a fact no medical evidence was required and no due diligence undertaken before granting the claim. All seems a little unlikely but I'm sure all these scammers going aroun claiming PIP fraudulently and then merrily sharing the exact details of their fraud with every nosy parker they know are surely 100% real and existent

PIP is slightly different other benefits as well as it has a specific purpose to aid you to live you life as independently as possible and potentially go out to work. It is not an income Benefit and it shouldn’t be spent on anything that isn’t specific to your disability. It shouldn’t go on holidays or rent, for example.

You said PIP shouldn’t be spent on holidays or rent, the government makes no such stipulation, I wasn’t agreeing with you. I’d love to see where you get the idea it shouldn’t be spent on anything not specific to the claimants disability.

Sometimes it’s pretty obvious - prime example. Someone at work manages 30 hours a month, claims disability, can’t work anymore. Needs regular breaks as she can’t be on her feet too long at work. Invited colleagues to her hen do and was videoed doing the worm and dancing on tables. Sometimes it really is just that obvious…!

That’s the issue with it - it only has a meaningful impact if the additional income enables the recipient to spend money on their needs. If their needs were met anyway and the extra money is just that, extra and they’re able to spend it on things which are not related to their disability, it makes it a redundant payment.

Do you think that these businesses would just absorb the wage increases and higher costs or pass then onto the consumer? That's what drives inflation. Also do you also think they would employ as many people if wages increased. Another factor to consider.

Also the most obvious direct impact would be on disabled people that use carers. Who would suddenly pay for their increased wages? The disabled people themselves?