To think people should be able to discuss and debate how public money is used for disability and otuher benefits

[Eatinghurts]

there are for our country a number of competing things happening
desire to have a functioning society which supports everyone
rising goverment spending in part brought about by rises in diagnosids of conditions and an elderly and sick poppulation
shifts in disabilituy expenditure with tech AI etc.

debatoing this leads many to argue posters are ignorant of disability and othering on the othrside assuming disabled people and their families do not pay tax.
I would hope as adults we could maturrely explore this.

That’s true, when there’s no money left. It is the survival of the fittest on that environment.

Not sure which part of ‘if there isn’t enough net contributing taxpayers to pay for other people’s benefits, then eventually there will be no benefits’ is so hard to understand for people on this thread.

Like many others, I unfortunately can’t go back in time and prevent the pregnancy that resulted in DS so a fair and humane way needs to be found to support people who will never be able to be net contributors.

I’m sure as I can be that certain people on this site would have been on the side of Nazi Germany during world war 2. At least the eugenics part.

Surely most decent, sane people would, if there were no money left, find alternative ways to support one another and ensure the most vulnerable were equally supported. Only the seriously disturbing people on these threads would turn against their fellow human beings as you suggest.

Am I the only person who finds the idea that high net earners will base their decision on whether to leave the country on whether a person gets disability benefits or not highly laughable?

Nations are, rightly, judged by how the most vulnerable are treated.

Relatively speaking we are a wealthy nation. Money can be saved but taking from the vulnerable is not the answer.

I totally agree with you, but would add it would also be helpful if those who do (or who hope to) receive disability benefits also acknowledge that the system can be and is abused by some, and that it is fair to try to eliminate that abuse.

I think most people look after thier own as much as they are able and many people volunteer or give to charity. Feed the poor and so on.

But you must see other pooer countries where life is very hard? Little children scavenging rubbish tips, disabled people begging on the streets etc. Short life expectancy.

I dont know why people seem gleeful about that, or want to scare disabled people online with that as a threat. I personally think there is a long way to go between where we are and that situation.

But I dont think the uk is some superior moral place. Its just had a period of wealth and relative equality.

There is no method of resolving this issue that would cost less than the current set up.

What you see as 'abuse' is often legitimate use of the money in accordance with the guidance/law. The government doesn't determine how it should be spent so why should you? It's not means tested for the same reason that other benefits are not means tested.

Any fraud or criminality can be dealt with under the current system.

What i can categorically tell you is that the costs of being disabled / parenting disabled children vastly outweigh any benefits that may be received in the overwhelming majority of cases.

It's not just that benefits are inadequate to cover real costs / loss of employment in my case, services are also inadequate. Costs would undoubtably be less if services and schools were set up to properly meet need.

On these threads people will cling on to the occasional poster who doesn't spend in the 'approved way'. Arguing whether a fridge is necessary!

As someone who used to work for the DWP, then as a benefits advocate, and now disabled and retired, there is one thing that needs to happen.

And that’s for commentators to realise that each disabled person understands their disability/needs (or those of their children), far better than random commentators, electing themselves into a position to decide whether others are deserving/how they should be using their disability payments. 🙄

That discussion will never be productive. 🤷‍♀️

Any suggestions on how to extract taxes out of imaginary non existent taxpayers?

Lots of socialist governments have been looking for this formula for decades but haven’t found one. Maybe you have an answer.

Found, how? What’s this magic solution?

Obviously, if there's no more money to pay for people to survive, people will die unless we find alternatives. So, it's imperative we find alternative means of survival. The suggestion that we let people die is really not an option.

Who suggested to let people die? And what’s the answer to the running out of money problem?

agree its important that people acknowledge abuse.@Swiftie1878 those with the most to loose from cuts have most to loose were it my system I would introduce more levels with highest over the current tier. I would also change carers to have a small income top up for people needing 16 hours of care a week and larger for over 30.

Why is it benefits around disability that are so often targeted? Where's the outrage at taxpayers money topping up wages because wages are too low to live on?

Benefits paying the interest on the mortgage of a house the mortgage owner lives in = bad, benefits paying the mortgage of landlords = fine apparently.

Human nature I think.

Since becoming disabled, I have come to realise people really struggle to imagine how that might feel, how it might happen, how they would cope.

If you can start to see how it could very very easily happen (some people literally wake up paralysed, some people trip over a low step and break their necks... its not all super dramatic stuff or doing incredibly stupid stuff, or being born that way)... and start to think about how you might feel... those are very unpleasant, scary thoughts. Most people do not want to think them.

Those who really can't imagine it, will just see that someone else is getting something they don't have -extra money, fancy things, shiny new car. Simple monkey greed and jealousy there.

Those who can't and really don't like the thought (the number of times I have had someone tell me with all sincerity that they'd not cope, they'd kill themselves if they were in a wheelchair like me is unreal, truly) - push it away, deny its a thing, that people exist with the needs and discomfort and struggles they have - and so if its not a thing, its not real, its not happening... then they must all be liars and cheats claiming something they're not entitled to.

And the current media phase of highlighting real or perceived benefit fraud and portraying disabled claimants as scroungers, shirkers and cheaters... plays into both mindsets very nicely.

Some of them of course will tell you that they would never want a genuine claimant to lose their support...

But of course, they believe if someone loses their support, has their claim denied they were never a genuine claimant in the first place, they were a liar and a cheat, so thats just fine, no suffering is occurring...

So when we end up with disabled people back in institutions (which will cost the taxpayer billions of course) or begging on streets - the lucky non-disabledz can fend off any guilt or icky feels by telling themselves 'its ok, its their own fault, they aren't genuine, they could just try harder, they probably brought it on themselves, what a shame but not my problem'...

Government and media, also like to point the masses one way, so they're not looking another way, and the media like click-bait of course. If they can get thousands of click-throughs to their articles by leading people to believe that benefits claimants are getting free money for having a wonky toe or being shit at maths, or are all driving around in luxury cars, at zero cost to them in any way - of course they will!!

Oh, I am very glad that somebody has started another thread, after the previous post was filled up with forty pages of ill-informed and hateful comments about disabled children, there definitely needed to be another thread for these delightful folks to spew their bigotry. Since MN did nothing about the recent thread which advocated removing disabled children from their parents and disabled adults from their homes, rounding them up and forcably placing them in state-run institutions, like the good old days, the likelihood of the mods doing anything at all about this thread or its predecessor is, frankly, non-existent. Still, nice to have it confirmed that the MN authorities are completely cool with really quite blatant hatred aimed at disabled people, including children, simply because of their disabilities. Depressing but nice to know where we stand and that MN are perfectly tolerant of the type of outrageously offensive ableism exhibited on the last thread, and that this site is neither a safe nor welcoming place for disabled people. Many of us reported the thread advocating the forced segregation and detention of disabled kids and were told by mods that it was no big deal, so it's not like nobody is making MN aware of what is happening.

Sadly it is a long running issue on MN. See this thread and the comments from MNHQ. They don't seem to care very much.
www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/5066800-disability-hate-on-mn

Rachel Reeves is considering scrapping tax breaks for disability benefit claimants to raise £1.2bn a year, The Telegraph understands.

Around 800,000 claimants who qualify for a brand new car under the taxpayer-subsidised Motability scheme are currently exempt from VAT and insurance premium tax (IPT).

But the reliefs are set to be axed as the Government scrambles to fill a black hole in the public finances of as much as £50bn.

A senior Labour source told The Telegraph “lots of things” were being looked at ahead of the Budget on Nov 26.

The Motability scheme allows certain welfare recipients to trade their benefits for a new car. They must pay upfront for any cost that exceeds the value of their benefits.

Removing the tax breaks would mean more claimants would need to make an advance payment for their cars, which would boost tax receipts by an estimated £1.2bn. The scheme currently costs taxpayers £2.8bn a year.
The charity responsible for the scheme, the Motability Foundation, said that the average lease price would increase by £6,500.

More than 800,000 claimants have a Motability car and the number eligible for the scheme has risen by more than half a million since 2019.

.

Arnold Schwarzenegger.

A share token or two so posters can read the actual articles would be a nice gesture.

I have copied the salient part - that will have to suffice.

I think the salient points are that there is nothing concrete that has been decided. The Telegraph is obsessed with budget scares right now.

Ah, to diminish how people really feel about this government, and the forthcoming budget. I think that’s disrespectful.

Read the room, read the media, look at the data.

But deep down, you know this, of course - I know you do.