Where is the money going to come from to meet the UK people expectations?

[Pandersmum]

So assuming that:

• everyone who receives disability benefits needs them and may actually believe they should be entitled to more
• pensioner benefits are non negotiable and again many believe they should be greater than current
• working people (most) believe they are already taxed highly and believe they cannot be taxed any more without further impact to their feeling of unfairness and resentment of the system
• it is unreasonable to expect young people with ADHD or other similar ND disorders / mental health challenges to work, even if they have qualifications and therefore they must be financially supported by the state
• Mental health challenges are very real in any age of person and therefore they must be financially supported by the state and if in work, by their employers
• rent (whatever level) should be supported by the state because it is a basic right to have a home
• NHS treatment (& the best treatment) should be free be all, no matter how expensive it is or whatever their age because people pay their taxes
• businesses are businesses and are there to make profits for their owners - therefore they can choose which country they operate in / pay their taxes in - if they don’t like the UK tax system, they can move somewhere else
• ’in work benefits’ are necessary to support ‘low paid workers, often in essential jobs’ to gain similar amounts of financial remuneration to those on benefits
• high net worth individuals can move if they don’t like the UK tax system

So just where is the money going to come from to fund the UK population of financial expectation of what the state should provide?

@Foddplqf literally nobody has said the rich should have it "all taken away".

The richest people in this country and the world have been taking an ever growing share of our collective wealth, even as incomes have stagnated for many and the opportunity to build wealth has been taken away due to our failure of a housing system.

The sort of wealth taxes that have been mooted as a corrective to this are at the 2 per cent a year mark. That clearly leaves plenty of wealth left for the richest. Inheritance tax leaves plenty untaxed below the threshold at which it's levied. Nobody is suggesting taking it all away - but wealth needs to be spread more fairly because without it, the social contract starts to fail and society ceases to function, as various aspects of the discussion on this thread have shown.

Because in order to build a business you may need educated workers, you need a transport system, you need a health service that can restore the health of your staff...roads so you can deliver your product...

Who should pay for all of this? your poorly paid workers or the company out of their substantial profits?

This of course is before we get to the business owner who had a free education..... assuming state ed but even if private, the teachers there will have gone to a state school and been educated all for free....

When you die, you don't pay IHT, your children will, you'll be dead, you really wont care anymore.

But who would welcome them in ?

Which utopia welcomes the poor from another country today.

And here you go again. More excuses.

If you care so much about encouraging people into work, have you considered starting a business that pays all its staff salaries which are enough to live comfortably on?

Really? So what does the person of under 35 with no parents who can accommodate them do?

It's not a question of making excuses. I agree with you that fit, healthy people should work. I think the huge majority of people agree with this statement.
My point is that the whole system disincentivises work. I made this point quite clearly earlier.

You seem to have either not read or misunderstood everything that @Alexandra2001 wrote. Your family with private healthcare and children in 'top grammar schools' is totally irrelevant to her point. So much so that your comment just reads like a brag.

From personal experience: sofa surf, sleep in your car, housesit, give up on life...

I’m far too old for that to even be a possibility. And how would it help?

Minimum wage for a 37 hour week gives you take home pay of £392.96 a week. That’s as much for a week as a single benefit claimant gets for a month. That allows £1100 a month for rent and council tax.

My point is that the whole system disincentivises work

How does it do that when benefits are paid at a level nobody can live on?

Yet many people do… and that’s because they get other benefits such as free prescriptions, housing benefits etc etc

And also some people choose to have loads of children so they can get more benefits

How do they manage that when there's a 2 child benefit cap?

I agree with PP. I am a middle earner but even what I earn doesn’t seem worth it for the stress I endure in my job. The cost of living in this country really needs to be addressed.

As a PP said, housing benefit often does not cover the rent. Also, not everyone rents. And not everyone is on medication. Anyone who is on regular medications can get a pre-payment certificate for about £10pm. I doubt anyone is staying on benefits just so they don't have to pay for prescriptions.

£4 better off and with their self respect intact. That's the problem isn't it - there is so much entitlement that people no longer garner respect or suffer shame.

It has to be better to earn one's money than to receive it from the state. Also whilst in a job, examples are being set for children and there is hope. Stick at the job for a couple of years and a pro.otion might ensue, that £4 may swiftly turn into £25. Pension Contributions will be made.

£4 a week extrapolates to £208 in the bank or to spend at Christmas.

I want to give everything I can to my children. I don't want the state to take it.

Not excuses - it's reality.

It’s not. You get your rent paid and a reduction in council tax. Out of that £400 a month you have to pay the remainder of the council tax, utility bills and feed yourself. You try living on £400 a month and ask yourself if you wouldn’t rather work a minimum wage job.

Good on them for making more money. Why would it be spread around more "equally". Make your own success in life

@BIossomtoes surely what this discussion is showing though is that benefits are shit, but work is really not much better? Both barely keep people out of destitution, which is insane when we live in such a rich country in 2025.

Then you have to compare the experience of them. Sitting at home being unemployed doomscrolling Mumsnet, crying and day drinking is pretty grim, but what if the alternative is having to get three buses to a zero-hours contract for a shift of indeterminate length, where might be told when you can and can't go to the loo, screamed at by customers because the company you work for is ripping them off (private sector) or not meeting their complex needs (public sector), micromanaged by a boss and expected to keep smiling the whole time and pretend you're grateful for the job?

It feels like this thread has become a race to the bottom on the subject of whether being out of work or in a shit job is worse, when the point is that they both are, and that needs to change if our society is going to get out of the angry, shouty malaise it's currently in.

Because society stops functioning if we underfund public services and don't pay people enough to afford somewhere to live?

If you are physically healthy (and I stress physically healthy) then if your first job isn't making ends meet. Get a second job. Do Uber/Uber eats on the side. Have a side hustle.

I remember being with DH in the tough times. He wanted to teach himself new technical skills. He took a loan from a university friend, did the course, paid back the loan and used his new skills to progress.

Life is a circle of wants/needs/expectations /disappointments.

No one ever has or gets all they want.