Is receiving £30k pa on benefits “living in poverty”?!

[ChumpWizard]

Amol Rajan BBC R4 Today was in Colchester this week. Great interviews but one thing had me wondering.

Is receiving c£30,000 pa on benefits “living in poverty”? That’s the equivalent of a FT job earning c£40-£42k Pa.

You dont get a rent allowance, your benefits will include a housing element, and depending on the situation you will get an amount towards your housing. No-one get their rent paid in full.

free prescriptions are available to people not on benefits if you qualify. Some councils either don't reduce council tax.

Check your facts before spreading lies

I remember some clickbait newspaper article on FB listing legal aid as a benefit people on UC get... like it should be counted towards their "income" and compared against working people.

People in social housing will get their rent paid in full if they do not work and assuming they don't have spare bedrooms?

That is true, but a lot of people on UC rent privately and have to make up the shortfall from the small amount they get in benefits.

But surely once you get to three or four, all with disabilities, it becomes obvious that there is some kind of genetic link and further children are likely to be affected? And instead of their child caring for them in their old age, all eight of them will be dependent on the state forever.

I don't know. Desperation leads people to make decisions that might seem odd to the rest of us sometimes. It's not great for the taxpayer, obviously, but we've opted for a system that lets people make their own reproductive choices so we have to support the children that are born as a result of that regardless of their parents' situation. I'm not sure if there are any society-level solutions in these cases other than to support the families. Some of the kids might go on to be high rate tax payers or even just regular contributors and balance it all out again despite their own disabilities. I haven't listened to the programme but it does at least sound like they're being brought up with a lot of love surrounding them.

Exactly.

I've got no issue with people who are disabled being supported with benefits, but the system is flawed when people who are reliant on benefits and who can't work choose to have 6 children.

The problem is, once the children are here, they shouldn't suffer for the choices their parents make. I was very anti the 2 child benefit cap but then cases like this make me doubt. I really don't know what the answer is.

They had some of the kids during the 2 child cap though, did they not? So it doesn't look like it made any difference in their case.

It’s just selfish

Of course it is. It’s the epitome of “I’ll do what I want and everyone else can manage things to make sure I get what I want, and if you don’t cheer and support you are evil and clearly don’t want me to exist!!”

A couple where all 6 kids have SN probably have SN themselves. They might not be capable of making measured and sensible decisions about something like the impact of multiple disabled children. If a whole family is SN, then it tends to be their normal.

I said upthread about a couple I know with LD who keep having kids and having them taken away. That is because they love kids and really want to have them, but they can't look after them.

The couple having 6 kids may have the capability to look after them, but not to know that having more is a bad idea. If that makes sense. The kids should not suffer for that via their parents having benefits cut. What will that achieve? The kids are already here.