To think benefits need to be cut to fund increased spending on defence

[Viviennemary]

This is absolutely necessary. Keir Starmer shouldnt have backed down the last time. But now with the current situation with Russia drastic steps need to be taken. We simply can't afford to sustain the current benefits bill with the armed forces so depleted. The money is needed to increase defence.

What benefits due you consider to be simple handouts?

It is my personal experience though and you clearly have none if you think the equality act means sick and disabled people can get jobs and aren't discriminated against. The equality act doesn't force employers to employ anyone they don't want to employ.

Which benefits are handouts?

Look upwards as others have said. Close the tax loopholes that allow Amazon and very wealthy individuals to get away with paying relatively small amounts of tax. There should be a harder tax on inherited property wealth - this is not earned income. Collect more from the wealthy instead of scrabbling around for scraps from poorer people.

Well yes, that would be wonderful - especially if we get rid of the ridiculous 'brand licensing' loophole that allows a company like Starbucks UK to not make a profit in the UK because all its revenues are gobbled up paying licensing fees to Starbucks US.

But the US government have made it very clear that there will be extremely serious repercussions for the UK if we tax US companies. So we dare not and instead it is UK companies that have to pay more and more tax.

Labour are so unpopular at the moment that they should just bite the bullet and get rid of the triple lock. Bring in a double or single lock to replace it. The only way you are going to seriously be able to cut the welfare bill is going to be to look at pensions.

There should not be any benefits paid to someone working FT at min wage. Min wage should be the min amount needed to live on. That’s the biggest flaw in the system.
Either we increase min wage or - preferably - we let the market correct itself: if people have less to spend then prices will go down.

The sum of all benefits that someone can receive should be less than min wage. Same goes for state pension vs pension credit. For both the difference needs to be significant enough to account for the fact that people go to work all day vs having all day at home.

Social housing should be means tested. No right to stay there for life or to transfer tenancy to others. I include in this people who pay rent but conveniently forget to acknowledge that it is lower than market rent, ie subsidised by taxpayers.

Bring back the 2 child cap.

Introduce a small fee for NHS access and penalties for missed appointments.

The OP said nothing about going to war with Russia, although clearly the threat of war from Russia is why defence spending needs to be increased. Russia has, does and will "aim at war with the West". They've been at war with us for years, just not a troops on the ground and missiles type of war.

OP - defence spending absolutely needs to be increased. No, benefits shouldn't be cut.

Necessary though not sufficient.

Hopefully you can find a great team who can get his balance of medication right, to limit further seizures?
Every pupil at our school, with seizures, participates in every thing at school. There are no boundaries or limits.
They go on school trips and play every sport.
You cannot discriminate against disability unless the activity could cause harm. Or put others at risk.

Even Rachel Reeves, who'd gladly remove everything from pensioners, agreed that non means tested state pensions should continue - the consequence of removing it would be catastrophic for economy because of behavioral impact.

and continue with ever growing working age related benefits? seriously?

Yes that could be a factor.

The original poster said benefits should be means tested. State Pension is not a benefit, it is an entitlement. Pension credit is closer to a benefit. I’m not being pernickity here, but you should understand more about the welfare system- it would better inform your opinions

If there is no discrimination why is it a fact that a certain amount of autistic individuals can't find a job? Isn't it 40%?

Only 3 in 10 are in any kind of paid employment.
It will never be 100% in employment anyway as some simply will never be able to work.

What do you mean when you say you can't discriminate. It is pretty easy not to give a job in the first place.

Yep, and doing sports at school and trying to get a job are totally different things anyway.

He's had seizures all his life. It doesn't matter how well medicated he is there is always a risk of further seizures. Well if they are on school trips that involve height based activities they can't do those...or do you not do risk assessments at your school.

All of them are handouts surely unless they are contributions based like state pension or contributions based ESA or JSA. handouts isn't a very nice term though.

I am sure those whose children get DLA would rather they didn't qualify for it.

Yep, it's a pejorative term in this context, intended to denigrate those in receipt of them.

But that is not true - 21.3% of my income was spent on welfare & 11.9% on state pensions. Are you suggesting that those of us who have always worked should get next to no pension? I was back at work when my first was 4 months old. Someone who has never worked would then be eligible for a full pension? According to my tax calculator I still have to contribute another 3 years to even get full pension. Yet had I not worked not only would I automatically get full state pension I would likely also get some sort of pension credit. It would just be unfair. I’ve never been a high earner nor has DH but we probably get an average income. So we would likely get nothing in retirement. It takes away the incentive to ‘do the right thing’ if you are constantly subbing those who don’t go out to work.

Students are safer doing that on a school trip than going out with mates and getting drunk!
they would be fully protected. But not many would choose to do it or be permitted to do so.
I am assuming you have 24 hour escorts for your husband?

I know lots of people with epilepsy with film time jobs…..
maybe it’s more his age.