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.

I don't, i hope they would as that is what it's intended for but if they were spending it all on adjustments in whatever form for their disabilities why would they be better off than someone working full time?

I don’t want to pay 50 years of contributions and get nothing back. Call me selfish but absolutely not. I also pay income tax, council tax and all the other taxes, so no - I don’t want to.

Who said they are better off than a healthy non disabled person working full time?

I haven't wrote that. I wrote that if there were changes to benefits including disability i would want those with the most needs to be still supported, removing the lower rates seems an easy (in terms of admin to do that). That doesn't equate to that those on lower rates aren't disabled it just means that i think those who are so disabled that they cannot support themselves in anyway should continue to be supported.

There will be changes to benefits, MP's are calling for it left, right and centre. It's discussed a lot in the press, sm and in person (changes to benefits).

I'm not backtracking, i've continually wrote the same things. I've been misrepresented and misquoted repeatedly. I've also disagreed with people and I do think that there should be benefit reform. I don't think disability benefits should be held like some holey grail that isn't looked at when all other benefits are. If you really want to go through my posts you'll see i'vewritten that i think some people with profound disabilities should recieve more than they do (i didn't write it at the time but i mean more for them to spend not to pass to the la's for their care package), i've wrote that carers allowance should be better assessed (not just using qualifying benefits and income threshold) and those who qualify for it should get more among other things.

A friend of mine works part time and receives the standard rate of mobility PIP. It is only 29 pounds a week and in no way fully covers her extra costs. Do you seriously begrudge that?

and that's the reality.

Even with getting the highest rates DLA for my son, it doesn't come close to covering his extra costs.

Having just heard a Russian warship fired warning shots near a yacht off the coast of the Isle of Wight. .we definitely need to find the money from somewhere

I said that people working full time should be better off than those on benefits. I have said this again and again. Nobody on benefits should have better standard of living than those who work. I've then been questioned a very lot about disability which I've answered and for the most part apart from with one poster who has been repeatly insulting and childish done this in ernest.

I've posted more than a couple of times saying that this thread is a general thread about benefits not just disability. I even posted this morning trying to explain why people would feel that benefits (all of them) need to be reformed in a general sense and included that many people have been defensive about disability benefits, probably because they feel they have to justify them or something similar.

I think these discussions should be had, not having them is silly especially when the subject is on the news etc. I resent being told what I can and can't say or what views i can hold.

I have not hid the fact that i think things need to change and clearly that hasn't gone down well.

This thread is another great example of why this country is heading straight to hell. Tribalism, ideology and small-mindedness have been cranked up to the maximum.

You don’t seem to know how PIP works. It isn’t that easy at all.PIP is split into two completely separate parts: Daily Living and Mobility. You can be awarded one, the other, or both depending on your needs. So which in your incredible knowledge and expertise are you deeming worthy of support?

No i don't but if it comes down to it and they make changes and people lose out which there will be people who do lose out, I'd want those who really can't support themselves in anyway other than benefits ie those with the most needs to still be supported.

Disability benefits are not meant to be spent on ‘adjustments’ for disability. They are paid as a contribution to the extra cost of living with a disability, whatever form that may take. That’s why they are universal and paid in cash - because disabled people are not idiots. They deserve to have control over the spending of those benefits to support their disability in the best way that works for them. Some may have higher bills because of incontinence, resulting in more washing/bathing. Some may have to put equipment on charge, meaning they also have higher bills. Some who live alone may spend it on extra help in the form of cleaners/handymen/gardeners etc.

It’s not intended for medical spending, but to make social inclusion easier and to enable disabled people to access goods and services we all take for granted, but are not that easily accessible for disabled people, and when they are, they’re inevitably more expensive.

You have specifically said that standard pip should be removed though and many of the people receiving this will be working.

And also this is a debating forum. If you resent people not thinking your opinions are very nice perhaps don't debate.

It’s annoying how everyone lumps benefits claimants in one pot.

Of course there are people with genuine need, and people who can’t work for whatever reason. However there are people creaming the system.

Everyone I know who claim benefits do not need them. Where I grew up most of the people in my street didn’t work after they got laid off. My dad owned his own business and my mums friends used to ask her to get my dad to employ them, but they said it was too hard work (construction).

One of my relatives has not worked for 25 years, gets benefits, new door, insulation, gets PiP (anxiety and depression) and works on the side. Just started claiming their pension with very little work Ni paid in.

At my place of work many of my colleagues reduced their hours when we hit the new minimum wage level as it took them over the threshold, and it affected their benefits. They do this every year. Instead of taking the pay rise, reduce hours. There’s no pride in working harder and earning your money. I’ve got my own thread on the go about how my flexible work request was denied due to people cutting their hours to save their benefits.

I’m working 2 jobs, paying NI, Income tax, council tax, etc. etc. and scraping every penny into my private pension I can and here people are on this website begrudging me my triple lock pension that I’ll have paid 35 years Ni into, whilst other able bodied people in this country sit on their backsides and milk the cow dead.

Totally sick of it. Make benefit claimants work for their money like the rest of us do.

Both parts are split into different rates depending on point scores. One rate is set at a higher amount than the other which is a lower amount. If someone didnt reach the high rate point requirement it wouldn't be awarded. That does seem easy to amend in terms of admin as it is already point scored. Just less people would be paid.

I never said it was intended for medical purposes i wrote adjustments in whatever form. It's you that is limiting the term adjustment to just medical.

I also didnt say they shouldnt have control.

I've wrote repeatedly it should be removed if it comes down to it as id want those with the most need who cant support themselves any other way to continue to be supported.

Yes it is a debating forum, ive not said people can't have different views ive said i resent being told i cant have mine. I have posted a few times today that i'm allowed my views as others are allowed theirs even though i have been told that i shouldnt have mine. I obviously dont care if people think my opinions arent nice.

Agree. I’m stepping back from this thread now. Attitudes like this posters’ just make me angry. The statements are badly thought through, show a very limited understanding of the way disability benefits work and a complete disregard for the people who would be seriously affected if the standard rate of disability benefits were to be withdrawn. Many of their suggestions, including that one, would result in significant extra cost - there is no understanding of the fact that because you stop supporting a need, it doesn’t mean that need disappears. People still need support and that support will just be shifted to social care at greater expense.

I’d be very surprised if this poster has a disability - if so, their ideas are akin to turkeys voting for Christmas and some of the suggestions expressed generally on the thread make me very concerned for the future of disabled people in this country.

PIP is split into two completely separate parts: Daily Living and Mobility. You can be awarded one, the other, or both depending on your needs. Somebody on standard DL & M could be getting more than somebody on just enhanced M. Are telling me somebody who qualifies for enhanced mobility shouldn’t get it because it works out less than somebody in standard DL and M?

So the disabled people who use PIP to get taxis to work and other cost associated with their disability will not longer be able to work. Brilliant

Yep.

It's incredibly short sighted and I fail to see how it would save money as people would lose their jobs.

What is the most need?somebody on standard DL and mobility is just as needy as somebody who is only entitled to enhanced DL which is £8 more.

Disability doesn’t come in a neat tidy box.

‘Adjustments’ is a term used to describe aids, adaptations and equipment disabled people use. I’m not limiting the term - you don’t know what it means.

Or how PIP works.

Admin ???? What about the bloody people ?????