Welfarisation has made people utterly entitled and unable to take responsibility for themselves and their families.

[hagchic]

I grew up in a working class family. The values I was taught were that you stood on your own two feet and it was no one else's job to do what you could do for yourself.

If you were hurt, you were expected to get up and go and clean yourself up - and stop whining about it unless it was actually serious. If you were ill, you went to bed and if you were lucky some magic lucozade appeared.

If you were sad, then you were sad. If life was unfair then that was just how life was and you needed to deal with it.

You never ever sought charity or took benefits when you were able to work or put up with less. You lived to your own means, not to what you saw on TV or at school - and if you wanted that lifestyle it was up to you to get it.

Today everyone has the expectation that someone must help them, that they are obliged to help them - even before they have made any attempt to actually do the work of helping themselves. They expect luxuries like holidays, pets, new clothes and treats when they do nothing to earn this.

I think self sufficiency is a value that needs to return to our society.

I don’t think UBI would lead to mass unemployment, as people would be free to take up part time work, creative roles, volunteering etc . I also don’t think it would cost much to implement as most DWP roles would suddenly be obsolete.

volunteering, creative roles and part time work do not generate tax receipts. And you are suggesting it will be paid for by job loses in the DWP?

I am doing, I'm keeping receipts for everything such as the dentist.

There are strict rules about 'deprivation of capital', I will have to prove where any and all money goes.

So, for instance I could replace my washing machine in a few years, that would probably be OK. Replacing my mobility scooter, again in a few years. Those are considered "reasonable in your circumstances".

My parents ashes are being buried together in a few weeks, I have no idea if those costs will be 'reasonable'.

I'm sorry but I don't see any problem with any of that. I don't see how you think it could be right to keep your inheritance in the bank and continue to claim means tested benefits.

I don't see how the funeral expenses can be considered unreasonable. I'm sorry for your loss, you don't really need to be having to deal with benefits admin on top of that.

Yep, if you are not on benefits and inherit money, you have free reign to do with it what you want. Go on a round the world cruise, have a summer house built in your garden, buy a flashy car, give some to your kids, put it in a savings account etc

If you are on benefits, even though coming into money over a certain amount will stop them, you are expected to have a very modest lifestyle and then show all your receipts for everything when you apply to go back on them. And in that time, you are liable for dentist, full council tax etc.

I remember reading about someone on benefits who had come into some money, and was waiting to hear from the DWP if she was allowed to use it to have her teeth sorted out.

That's what happens when you live off the public purse. What would you rather happened? That the public gave you money even though you didn’t need it?

We don’t have - and never will have - UBI as the tax increases on any worker in order to fund it would be utterly vast.

ifs.org.uk/articles/economics-universal-basic-income

Why are you asking me? It does not apply to me.

But you are no longer on benefits if you are living off an inheritance. The same rules apply to you as anyone else. If they gave their house away to their child it would still be deprivation of assets if they needed benefits eg if they went into a nursing home and needed fees paid, or if they packed in their job and decided to claim benefits when the money ran out.

Yes, but if you use up your inheritance and then need benefits again, the DWP will go over every penny of what you spent it on.

Fair enough. If people want benefits they have to follow the necessary rules.

Even though they are not on benefits at the time?

It’s their choice what they spend their money on, but it’s also their choice whether to make themselves ineligible for benefits in the future too. People have to take responsibility for their actions. You can’t waste all your money having fun and expect the state to pick up the tab for your day to day expenses can you? That’s taking the piss out of tax payers.

My point was that someone that was not on benefits does not have that restriction on "fun", hence why someone on benefits who say comes into £20k could find it a hindrance rather than a help.

I agree it's ridiculous. Welfare was never intended to be used the way it is now, it was meant for avoiding tragedies like in An Inspector Calls. We have birth control for free in the UK, there is no reason to have children before you even have a job and a house. The middle class are being absolutely rinsed to provide luxury accommodation and holidays to those who don't work when they can't even afford their own homes or holidays.

Benefits and social housing should be there to help women who have been impregnated screwed over by men, not a lifelong career.

You probably pay wayyyyyy more in tax than you get back in PIP, lets be real. It's more like tax relief than anything. So ridiculous anyone would take issue with you getting PIP as a net contributor.

Luxury accommodation? 😆

I will tell my friend that then. She is on benefits, has a little lad who is unwell from the damp and mould in her high-rise flat. Oh, and the whole building is about to be de-commissioned as it is not fit for people to live in... and they have no idea where they are going.

Welfarisation? Well that’s a new way of dressing up a good old benefit bashing thread lol

Has your friend considered renting privately? I personally couldn't live with myself if my housing conditions made my son sick and I would pay whatever it cost for a safer home.

She can not afford it. She is on benefits due to disability and has recently had some cut. The LHA in our town will not cover what private rents cost... about £200 difference. Also huge competition for property here. Took my DP a few months to get a place and he expressed interest in every one he viewed.
The council did house her family in a hotel whilst they "fixed" the issues... which have just come back.

What's the disability? Depression and a bad back?

Neither, and not your business either. Why be so nasty?

I'd say that this thread is a worked example of why Reform are struggling to pick up female voters.

If she moves to private it's going to be much harder to get back into social housing

I had a similar situation a few years ago - we complained about the damp and they refused to do anything. They then said we need to move out. We were given a home loss payment and they paid for removals. I didn't have this but I remember a neighbour saying the HA contacted her and said they had a house she could move into.

Exactly. Giving up a council place to go private is madness.

The building she is in is one of six that are due to be de-commissioned and demolished. 170 families that are going to need new homes. All the people living there are in limbo as they have not been given a date.