in thinking that the Government cannot possibly ensure people are better off working than on benefits unless they increase wages massively?

[TheJollyPirate]

TBH I cannot see how the Govt are going th achieve their aim to make sure "nobody is better off financially on benefits than in work".

I work part-time as I have a son with a disability. I take home £849 and get Tax credit of £190 plus Child benefit of course - Working Tax credit adds another £50 - all in all just over £1100. I am just over the limit for housing benefit and all other help although if DLA is approved for my son that may change a bit.

One of my families gets housing benefit of £700 a month plus tax credit, plus income support, plus child benefit. On paper at least they out-strip me and unless wages drastically improve (oh - was that a recession I just saw over there) then nothing much CAN change. The Govt are talking big but cannot deliver no matter what they say.

I will stay worse off financially than the family I work with who will remain unemployed because wages are NEVER going to amount to enough for them to get work and maintain their home. Not their fault and I am more fortunate in other ways but financially - nah - they are doing a bit better than me (but probably only just).

I am watching the Govt but not holding my breath on this one.

Or do you know different?

If so - explain because I am being a bit thick about it.

and you must have a big family if they're all living in 4 bedroom houses that are being full paid for by HB......as that's at least 5 kids to get a 4 bedroom house.

I suspect benefits will be reduced, or in order to get benefits it will be necessary to work for them.

well they'll be topping up the extra rent out of their other benefits then, or have managed to find somewhere ridiculously cheap to rent

My sister's friend exchanged with someone who wanted to downsize and has two children in a four-bed. They have a playroom. HB covers the rent for a three-bed and the absent fathers pay cash undeclared to the CSA which covers the extra

Mind you that's legal now isn't it? Has been going on for years even when you were only allowed to keep a certain amount of maintenance and still receive full IS.

how on earth is she getting LHA (as it's properly called now) for a 3 bedroom house when she has 2 children

'We can't afford to pay the benefits we are paying at the moment, especially if tax revenues fall.'

This is going to have to include pensions.

Hence, the age will need to rise and, as the government has stated, it will need to rise rapidly.

To 70. At least.

Because it was never designed for the state to keep people for years and years.

'Retirement' was supposed to be about 5 years before you expired/average life expectancy.

And, as someone pointed out, people used to start work earlier, at 14 or 15.

Nowadays we have people starting at 21-22 and expecting to retire in their late 50s or early 60s and it's just not going to happen for hte vast majority.

And I know a single man living in a 3 bed flat - unemployed (and has stated does not understand why anyone would want to work when there are benefits0, HB pays his rent, all of it

ahh - don't worry - it's just occured to me she's probably got 2 children aged 10-15 of opposite sexes

I'm suprised if it's being done through the CSA and she's on IS that she hasn't been caught out - as they "talk" to each other

Actually it must just be enough to cover a 2-bed. Th children are a boy and a girl but there are only two years between them so they should be sharing?

'Not always toccatanfudge, I know of 4 people in 3/4 bedroom HB, with only 1/2 children.'

I do, too.

In fact, I can think of two families like this right here in this block of flats.

I also know families who have a pretty nice lifestyle on benefits adn they are not on the take/fiddling or in debt or have parents who fund it nor disabled or with disabled children.

Their lives include a house with front and back gardens in a nice area, car, Sky, gym membership, holidays, etc.

They're younger, no CSA involved.

Anyway she will be needing the extra space very soon as the youngest is six and she's planning another baby to stay on IS.

yes - unless they're aged 10-15yrs old?

this is a three-bed flat and the former tenant was a single, unemployed male.

god you must have loads of properties up there then

I dread to think how long I'd have to wait for a 3 bedroom house round here if I were to ever find myself having to need social housing

Minthumbug - Yeah but a lot of jobs you do get more a month if you live in London. I have a friend that got £1200 a month to work as a nursery nurse in London! I cant believe she got that much and that wasnt even in Central London. She gets paid nearly £400 more than a 40 hour a week girl here.

Toccatonfudge - Thats not true at all I know familys of four in 3 beds and the family that I was on about is a family of 5 and they have a four bed detached. It costs HB - £850 a month. Its my auntie and uncles place and he is one of the only people I have ever known that even has his own garage! Most single mums here live in 2 bed houses with just 1 kid.

Tocca - the single man in a 3 bed flat I know lives close to central London so not in an area with empty properties

Tocatto - These arent 15 they are 18 months, 3 and 6!

ermmm yes 2 bed house with 1 kid is what is deemed nessecary by LHA

The LHA Bedroom Calculator is here

Sunshine - well in that case unless they have SN they would get LHA for a 3 bedroom house.

Toccatanfudge - Well I live a family of four in a 2 bed flat but I have self respecta nd pay my own way. If I became a single mum I would move me and the kids in to a bedsit before skanking a house for free and I would carry on working. I dont believe in claiming benefits and I am on the minimum wage and always have been. I have a work ethic and unless the person is sick or just needs temporary help then I believe they should be working. I have done care work, childcare, chambermaiding, waitressing, flyering,paper rounds etc in order to never have to claim and what is to stop any other healthy person doing this? When people say childcare just put the kids in nursery as you get that paid for you on low income. I dont mind anyone claiming that as at least they are paying their way by giving something back to society. Its my views and I stand by them if you live in an area with a very high benefits culture but a high standard of living I guarntee youwould feel this way to.

40hrs a week minimum wage is £1005 (before tax) a month

and £1200 is going to get you that far in terms of rent and council tax in London........