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.

She also appears not to have a full time job with the amount of time she spends on here everyday telling everyone they should be working full time

In regards to my split comment. Some people are incredibly disabled in that they will never have the cognitive ability to work/ don't have the level of understanding and require high levels of support with all activities of daily living regardless of physical impairment (qualify for PIP mobility on not being able to go somewhere familiar by themselves)- paraphrasing). Another person may have a severe physical impairment and requires some help with AODL but can work, socialise, have some independence (I'm aware that dla/pip is awarded on what support is required by assessment rather than what is given), adult with severe anxiety awarded high rates for similar reasons. All 'can' recieve high rates of care and mobility but aguably one requires more support and is more disabled. Dla- two children child at three qualifies for hrm due to physical needs, child at three qualifies under virtually unable to walk due to behaviour.

I don't believe the rates reflect the levels of disability and in some cases it is about form filling qnd knowing what to write especially if claiming dla for a child under smi due to the tests that have to be proven.

I'm not saying that these people aren't all disabled, I'm saying that there are times when the assessments aren't reflective. I believe that there should be higher rates again for those who do require round the clock substantial care.

In regards to demonstrating evidence for PIP/ DLA diaries are allowed as evidence which are easily fabricated, letters from family members/ friends can be used which can be embellished. Evidence required should be substantial and from medical or social care staff.

Carers allowance is given too easily in my opinion and not always for the level or hours of care that it should be awardes for. I do think this needs tightening.

Those posts are matched by the threads where poster after poster insists that individual workers who earn more than them should pay disproportionately more tax, not just on their earnings but also on almost every other aspect of their lives. They show little interest in whether government spending is efficient, effective or delivers value for money. They simply want those who earn more to pay disproportionally more tax. They have completely bought into Labour's politics of envy.

The focus is always on redistribution, never on wealth creation.

THIS!!!

Housing costs are too high.

PIP/child DLA money isn’t meant to be spent on things to medically help a condition. It’s a contribution to the cost of actually living with a disability. If you have mobility issues life is a lot more expensive. Taxies if you can’t use public transport for example. If you have bowel/bladder issues your energy and water bills will be significantly higher due to increased bathing/showering and laundry. And if you live alone, virtually everything cost money - help with cleaning, keeping the garden tidy, and for some just changing a lightbulb is a challenge. This is just the tip of the iceberg. I’m surprised someone with your username needs to have this explained, or would suggest reducing every disability related benefit when there are other available options that don’t disproportionately impact the most vulnerable in society.

But you know enough about their cases to say that they'll need a significant amount off. So either you do know enough about their cases or you're being stereotypical and saying that people with invisible illnesses can't work because they'll need a lot of time off.

I've already stated that ideally I'd like to see work pay so that those who work have significantly better standard of living than those on benefits. While the economy is as it is and the majority of people are dealing with COL then yes I think the disabled should have enough to live off but not to excess, that's fair.

If you're severely disabled enough to claim pip you will need a lot of time of work you wouldn't meet the criteria if you was able to go about normal life everyday

Are you not at work again today?

People on these threads make me laugh telling everyone they should be working full time while they sit on mumsnet day after day not working

Benefits aren't compensation though and shouldn't be used as such. The world is vastly unfair to all sorts of people for all sorts of reasons, it doesn't mean that some should be allowed to have a better standard of living without working.

People with disabilities who are able to go to uni can and are supported more than the average student via DSA and hall allocation etc and in some cases lesser entry requirements for the course.

Not always true. My brother in law qualifies for high rate care and mobility, he goes to 2 x yearly neurology appointments and that's it. All his other appointments are regular appointments that we would all attend ie GP. He may very well need to increaae his level of appointments in the future, the nature of his illness is that it's unpredictable, but as it stands, and has it has stood for quite some time now, he attends 1 appointment a year with his consultant and 1 appointment a year with his specialist nurse, both for review.

Why do you think people on benefits have a better standard of living is it because the daily mail told you

How is carers allowance awarded too easily ? It’s awarded on the basis of a PIP/child DLA to the person being cared for. What else do you think should be taken into consideration given that for a mere £86 per week, the carer is expected to provide 35 hours of care, often on top of a full tome job. That’s less than £3 an hour. The cost of policing it would be more than the allowance itself.

And diaries and support letters from friends/family aren’t taken as stand alone evidence of disability. They are considered alongside medical evidence and the assessors’ own opinion where they have interviewed the claimant. I’m not suggesting the system is perfect - far from it. But what you’re suggesting is a tightening up of the system that will disadvantage genuinely disabled people and those who know how to play the system won’t be impacted at all.

Who is talking about appointments i assume he is actually ill and has high care needs so will need more time of if neither of these are true then he is claiming pip fraudulently

How would you have different minimum wages for some companies than others? In an industry like food service with low profit margins, they'd have to raise prices, which leads to fewer customers, which means fewer jobs.

Sorry, should have said people don't get PIP because of mild anxiety or depression when they don't also have more severe conditions as well.

It's like people get outraged about babies being aborted for cleft lip or talipes when the reality is that the small number of babies being aborted because of these conditions also have other much more severe medical problems as well.

Agree. Straight out of the Daily Mail playbook. And disability benefits are compensation. They are meant to level the playing field between disabled and able bodied people by contributing to the recognised additional cost of living with a disability. The poster does seem to be displaying a level of envy of the benefits and concessions available to disabled people. I wonder if they also envy the disability itself. No ? Thought not.

Also I haven't advocated for a complete cut to disability benefits. I've wrote that if all benefits are to be reformed disability benefits should be included, i've wrote that I (me personally) would get rid of the lowers rates of dla and pip, i've wrote that carers allowance should be increased but with better assessment and that I believe the pip/ dla assessments aren't good enough and that there should be better distinction to reflect disabilities and in some cases higher rates awarded than there is currently(paraphrasing).

I have commented on invisible disabilities and why some people see them as unfair, i've wrote about tax thresholds and i've commented on state pensions and housing. I also commented on schools and wrote that I don't believe the changes to SEND which are likely to be brought in are helpful.

As the world is now yes I have wrote benefits need to be cut to fund other areas.

The welfare tax (especially the element of housing or working tax credits) is being used as a sticking plaster to cover up our dreadful productivity rates, weakened pay bargaining and fucked-up housing market. It's easier for the politicians to pay out a top-up than try to sort out the fundamental problems that leave people in full-time work under the poverty line.

Please note: I'm not bashing disabled people: that's another problem entirely. I do think we need to be more creative about the built environment and the way we supply care, as the demand is going up and piecemeal services are the worst of all worlds.

How would the benefits bill be cut though? It's not as if there are loads of jobs available. So are you suggesting that people should receive even less money than they already do?

Why do you struggle to have a reasoned debate or conversation without resorting to insults?

And all of the comments you’ve made seem to be equally ill informed.

Maybe because all of your arguments are straight out of the Daily Mail playbook.

A friend of mine gets the lower mobility rate of PIP. It is 29 pounds a week. She can only walk a couple of meters with aids and uses that money for taxis, mobility aids etc. Do you really begrudge that?