Labour increase benefits bill. AIBU To think what’s the point in working?

[topicalaffair]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15520831/Labours-push-lift-two-child-benefits-cap-hand-25-000-windfalls-thousands-Britains-biggest-jobless-families.html#

‘Official estimates suggest the cost of scrapping the cap will total £13.6 billion over the next five years.

The Tories said families currently affected by the cap are in line to receive windfalls worth an average £25,000 each over that period.

But the biggest families will gain far more. Thousands of families with five children will receive around £10,900 a year while those with six children will get an extra £16,600 a year.
Almost half of the families involved have no one in work.‘

It is possible to be concerned about the cost to the taxpayer of the two child cap, PIP, skyrocketing claims for disability AND the triple lock you know.

By making spending on SEN and Adult social care statutory, you have created your own problems.

Private Equity sees that "statutory spending" and immediately buys up care homes and specialist schools to raise prices.

Those higher prices eat up taxpayer funding, and makes it impossible for more specialist schools and care homes to be built.

Its a market failure that has been created by statute, which is why Labour is likely going to remove it.

"Most UC claimants work" is false.

Its 38%.

"Trust me bro" is a reference to using anecdotes only which you just described. It's not evidence. If they are getting something, this information is available, it would be good to know because I cant find it.

Asylum seekers are under immigration control and have no rights to public funds. They do get a small amount of money, but not from the benefits system.

Refugees can access disability benefits, as they have a right to be here officially.

But I will gladly learn from new information. I can't learn from "trust me bro, but I can't prove it any other way than giving someone else's personal information for some reason".

I absolutely agree with you about the perverse incentives @Seelybee , but I find it surprising that so many people manage to meet the criteria for DLA - which ostensibly requires so much evidence from schools and health professionals - if they are acting dishonestly.

The increase in ASC and ADHD diagnoses is probably not explained only by better detection, but it's difficult for those of us whose DC have classic (or "severe" if you prefer) autism to avoid being tarred with the same brush. (If you met DS, it would be clear that he is disabled and not just high-energy or quirky or naughty or any of the other adjectives that we used in the olden days to describe some DC!)

Lots of families are on universal credit because employers don’t pay them a living wage and we as tax payers subsidise those companies that do this. Those companies prioritise paying out to shareholders and big exec bonuses than they do to ordinary working people.

The biggest welfare cheats are large and medium companies who avoid paying their fair share of taxation in this country. The owner of the Dailymail is worth £1 billion pounds and has non dom status which is why he hates Labour so much as they have got rid of those protections. He holds his wealth in some overseas tax havens. Which is not illegal but is it moral?

Is it moral that billionaires such as the owner of the dailymail that the OP quotes doesn’t pay his fair share of taxes and uses his media influence to direct voters to hating on welfare claimants, many of whom work? There fixed it for you, OP this should have been your AIBU.

Caffè Nero for example should be boycotted by UK citizens because they don’t pay their share of corporation tax in this country. Perhaps we should have a boycott list of media, tech and other companies that don’t pay their fair share of taxation in this country and we by consumer power can force them into it.

I get it. Of course it's dependent on circumstances. I also think upbringing has a role to play in your work ethic. I've worked in minimum wage jobs and I'm now a teacher. My job is stressful and hard but equally I couldn't cope being at home all day. My mind needs to be kept busy and I am proud of what I do. But I understand why people are disillusioned.

Oh, I see you've just edited your post. It didn't make sense the first time, makes even less now.

Ok sorry. But why are there people on here who think of benefits claimants as one homogenous mass of identical people hell bent on never doing anything even vaguely useful to society?

It's pure prejudice. And snobbery.

It's not necessarily that it's better to be homeless, but that for some people, they simply do not want the responsibilities that come with being housed or are not able or willing to engage with it.

They don't want rules or expectations and either won't or can't co-operate with that.

The same as some people with substance misuse issues are not willing to engage with the help available.

Same as some people who could work don't want to and won't engage with it.

And so long as the state provides the lifestyle they're willing to continue with, they never will.

Her post makes perfect sense. Yours, however, are utter bollocks and you know it.

Asylum seekers do not get any benefits, much less PIP or DLA.

Why do people keep trotting these explanations out?

You cannot "pay people more" if they are not productive enough for it.

Businesses are not charities. They have to compete not only domestically, but also with businesses abroad.

Have you not learned anything over the last few years?

Jacking up the minimum wage with ZERO increases in productivity has led to much higher inflation and job losses at entry level (specially for young people).

Wages are a function of productivity. If you "want to be paid more" you have to invest in productivity-enhancing infrastructure.

Right now the UK doesn't. Which is why UK inflation is over 3% and in the EU it is hovering around 2%.

I'm not sure who "you" is in this context, but children (especially disabled ones) should not be paying the price for eminently foreseeable policy failures. I am appalled that Labour is trying to dismantle the legal safety net for some of the most vulnerable children in society, but heartened by their abject failure (up to now) to implement any of their welfare reforms, even the modest ones. FWIW DS' needs are so significant that I doubt he will be impacted - sadly there is now very little chance of him coping in MS or living independently.

So you're obviously not the 'some' mentioned who can't be arsed to earn anything at all and contribute.

And people wonder why the UK is floundering?

You are actually happy that welfare keeps growing unsustainably.

Amazing. I have heard it all now.

It's getting to be a bit monotonous.

I wonder if the poster works for the press office of the Tories, Reform or the Daily Mail.

But do you think it is acceptable that in order to avoid paying benefits to those not actually in need, some people in need will miss out?

Because that is the reality. A system strict and rigorous enough to catch out the fraudulent grifters, is so strict and rigorous it will also deny benefits to genuine claimants too.

I know which I'd rather see happen, and unfortunately there is no way of ensuring 100% genuine claims, 0% fraud.

And.. as ever, we're all being pointed to look in the wrong direction. Yes, some people are better off on benefits than they are working.

Not because benefits offer a lavish lifestyle, but because working pays very badly, with outrageous expectations (eg that you're not unwell for more than x days a year, as if anyone actually has control over that, zero hours contracts, toxic expectations and work culture), for many people.

Does it make sense for the last line to happen? If someone is high earning enough to pay a certain amount of tax should there be a claim?

We are currently paying £57 billion per year for government employee DB pensions. We need to scrap this and phase in DC pensions like they have in the private sector.

This ^^

Some ARE working - delivery drivers, building sites. But black market and claiming, so officially they're not working. I know this for sure because I ran up against some people like this who were friends with my ex.

Asylum seekers get free accommodation, free healthcare and their kids get free education all funded by workers.

They are not allowed to work.

Asylum seekers can't claim disability benefits but they 100% receive the care they need via the NHS and their care often includes e.g social housing and other 'benefits'.

No, you've misunderstood. As a taxpayer I recognise that welfare spending as a whole is unsustainable. My DC was given an independent specialist school (and related transport) because the LA had nothing else to offer him, after arguing with me for 3 years. I will fight tooth and nail to avoid further disruption to his education, because we have suffered enough at the hands of the incompetent NHS and the weaponised delays of the LA.

I believe that the UK has the worst of all worlds - high taxes, and shit services that taxpayers resent contributing towards. However, I simply do not believe that Labour will actually implement most of the SEND reform "kites" they are flying at the moment (which - selfishly - can only be a good thing for children like DS who have suffered enough at the hands of our woeful state).