To see benefits as a safety net, not handouts?

[ForGreyStork]

It’s the way benefits are talked about. To me, they’re part of a social security system -a safety net that people may need at different points in life, rather than “gifts” or handouts.
I also wonder whether increasing conditions and restrictions risk undermining that safety net over time.

AIBU?

So what?

It’ was still fraudulent and dishonest.

So who would work the low paid jobs you know like all the crucial jobs that carried on during covid and couldn't shut down as they're so important and needed.

What from that 1 email you see over 20 years ago that you have no details about but for some reason remember the wording of the email 20 plus years later. Sure sounds totally believable

How exciting…an agenda!

Nope, just a person with a master’s in statistical analysis (a while ago, now, though) who gets a bit riled up by data being misrepresented. A misrepresentation you yourself have demonstrated so beautifully…

Tax their benefits - like they do in Scandi countries. I’m afraid conditions like ADHD claiming PIP payments is a nonsense we cannot afford. Defence spending needs a massive boost, currently there is no money to do this, the NHS and many educational facilities are grossly underfunded. Something has to give.

I remember my first day at school and further back, I can remember being in the hallway of our house aged 2.
I have an excellent long term memory and am quite renowned for it.
DC1 has inherited this trait from me and can remember things from when they were 2, unprompted.

I remember it as the wording was quite dramatic, that she could “bolt at any moment.”
I didn’t say that I remembered the entire email.

She showed ME. I didn’t ask about it. She wanted to tell me that she had got the fence for free.

I merely said,
“Oh that’s great, good for you,”

I don’t really care whether you believe me or not.
You obviously have no problem with people working the system.

AI is set to replace many of these processing jobs: customer services, retail, cleaning. Which professions do you mean? Maybe we could dovetail anyone under employed into defence roles?

I'm not arguing that she didn't get the fence installed for free. I'm arguing that it is far from simple than just a quick email to a councillor, evidence is required.

I've seen that it was years and years ago so it is possible that things were more relaxed then but even so, that most definitely is not the case now.

I had to move only at the start of last year due to my son's disability so quite recent and it was only decided based on evidence such as an OT assessment which included visiting the previous property and letters from his consultants.

My apologies if I made it sound as though a single email clinched the deal.
That’s just what she showed me and told me about.

I have absolutely NO problem with people getting the help/benefits that they need and deserve.

(However, what she did was fraudulent, no matter how she achieved it in the end up. That was my issue.
I didn’t say a word to her, though!))

(I am seriously out of pocket here due to helping people/lending them money and I’ve emptied my cupboards/fridge plenty of times to help people. Complete randoms, at times.
I am NOT a benefit basher by any means. I’d give anyone the shirt off my back but I do object to fraud/dishonesty.)

I’m sorry that you have had such a difficult time.

Carers really low pay very much needed. I don't think ai will take the unskilled jobs first id be way more concerned if I had a high paid computer based job. How is ai going to take a cleaners job.

If you’re on a decent salary, they are far from a safety net hence why a lot of people have to create their own safety net.

Actually, I think we need to address the cost of housing and the utter lack of genuinely affordable housing before anything else.

What a steaming pile of bullshit.

UC actually encourages employers to pay minimum wage, because they know UC will make up the shortfall.

No one, NO ONE is content or financially secure on a minimum wage job with UC top up. You can’t save to buy a new car, or deposit for a mortgage, you’ll struggle to pay big or unexpected bills, you have to budget very carefully to be able to survive. Doing overtime is pointless because you’ll just work extra hours for no extra money because your UC will just be reduced.

Also, we need people to do the minimum wage jobs, if they don’t we won’t have anyone working in shops, restaurants, cleaning offices or hospitals, ancillary healthcare staff will disappear. Teachers won’t have assistants, carers will not look after the elderly. These are the minimum wage jobs you seem to think are such a doss, but are actually hard graft and vital for the running of our society.

You dont get disabillty benefits because you have a diagnosis ;you get disabillity based on how that diagnosis impacts you
And ADHD like other neuro developmrntal disorders can vary greatly on how it impacts a person.

We could fund our benefits bill and free up money for the NHS etc with a 2% tax on assets over £10 million. We could fund all kinds of things if we stopped allowing multinationals like Starbucks etc from using loopholes to get out of paying tax. Removing support from vulnerable people is not the answer, funding it from excessive wealth is.

The nhs isn't underfunded its badly run

Hear hear. Why some people deny this is an issue are delusional.

The elephant in the room is that there are not enough jobs for everyone who might need one. This has been true since Thatcher closed the mines.

The post above is entirely correct, why has there been such a push for full time and more full time work instead of enabling everyone to do what they can? To keep those who might care too busy to think and allow a new aristocracy of the feckless who won’t seriously challenge the aristocracy of wealth and power (they think)?

It completely depends on the reason people are claiming those benefits in the first place. For those who cannot work, and will never be able to work, a good state should support those individuals to have a reasonable quality of life.

For those that cannot work, they shouldn’t be in a position whereby they can afford an equivalent (or better) lifestyle than people that do. However, the fault is that of the actual system not those individuals. If your choices are to be able to spend more time with your young children and work 16 hours a week, or go full time and be worse off, I can’t think why people wouldn’t pick the former.

I also think there’s a lot to unpick in terms of the economy. None of these are standalone issues - spiralling housing costs and lack of jobs is a huge factor. 20 years ago, I earned around £14k and could afford to rent a small place on my own, run a car, feed myself reasonably well and still have a social life. I don’t think people on that equivalent salary could do the same today.

At what point is the non-verbal, non-mobile disabled person supposed to make a different "lifestyle choice"?

Is this true? That there are more part time jobs than full time? The vast majority of people I know are in full time employment, but I accept that is likely confirmation bias. Are there any stats on full vs part time?

I wondered how long it'd take the what about crowd. Don't be so obtuse, you know perfectly well I wasn't referring anyone with a serious disability. Those aren't choices of any kind.

I would imagine that the entire range of what the government spends our money on needs a proper overhaul. The problem is though that many policies would be incredibly unpopular and nobody would vote for them.
How many people would welcome the state pension being means-tested for example?
There was an interesting thread the other day about people earning over £100k going part time so they don’t fall foul of the cliff edge in terms of how they are taxed and/or have childcare help taken off them. If this didn’t happen, many more of those earners would keep earning above £100k and therefore be putting even more tax back in to the system. But nobody would vote for that, either.

But you wouldn't be able to work 16 hours and claim benefits unless disabled a carer or have a child under 3. Benefits are not like they use to be people need to get their heads out the early 2000s

They are forever tinkering with the benefits system but they never look at what they could do to help people.

I'm disabled and I have worked on and off since I became disabled.

The 16 hours and NMW is what they seem to be obsessed with.

At one time I could not get tax credits because I was working part time, but because I received about £20.00 per hour I wasn't eligible. Had I been on NMW I could have claimed. My weekly income was the same as if I was on NMW for 16 hours.

I did supply teaching and that made things difficult, whilst I was claiming benefits my rent was paid via housing benefit, but the day I started work that stopped, even though I would not be paid for a month. There was no slack in the system.

I know if you are working then you pay your rent, council tax, etc but a loan for a month would have made such a big difference to me. I almost lost my home due to moving from HB to work and back again.