Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Call to end "middle class" benefits

292 replies

AtheneNoctua · 22/10/2009 08:09

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8319646.stm

"It defines middle class as a household where every adult has an annual income of at least £15,000 and every child £5,000. "

OP posts:
Original poster
AtheneNoctua · 22/10/2009 12:37

But, there needs to be a balance peachy. Help those who genuinely need it (which is the same as means testing), but also allow that hard working people who support them keep SOME of their reward.

Help those who are genuinely in need and genuinely unable to provive for themselves. But don't punish the mum who works 50 hours a week and ask her to support the neighbor who doesn't work at all (because she/he doesn't want to) because the mum earns £40k but is actually much worse off than the neighbor once she has paid all the bills which are required for her to go to work. Surely if you want to evaluate my worth you have to subtract my costs from my income. You want to treat me like a big profitable business (and Grodon Brown does treat working parents like profitable businesses)? Then take the costs into account too. Not just the income.

OP posts:
Paolosgirl · 22/10/2009 12:38

No - it doesn't work like that, Bobbing - Edinburgh still remains v expensive! Remember to factor in the biggest population growth since the mid-1800's - land close to an established infracsture and economy has become like gold dust.

Original poster
AtheneNoctua · 22/10/2009 12:38

Help those who genuinely need it (which is NOT the same as means testing), but also allow that hard working people who support them keep SOME of their reward.

OP posts:
becstarlitsea · 22/10/2009 12:38

Actually, despite my pleadings of poverty I don't agree that life is shit.

We are stony broke and can't afford to buy a house, shop for clothes or whatever. And maybe the govt will cut our tax credit.
But I had wealthy parents and a miserable childhood. DH had poor parents and a happy childhood. It's hard to be cheerful when cold and hungry, but it is possible to be cheerful and a tiny bit chilly and peckish.

It's easy to think 'I'll be grateful when...' eg I'll be grateful when we can buy a house, when DH finds a better job. But it's a bit harder to be grateful right now (especially as I am GAGGING to put the heating on!!!). But I should be grateful. DS is healthy, DH is healthy, I'm healthy. We volunteer at a homeless shelter where people are not just cold and hungry but unloved. There's no benefit on earth can sort that problem out. Which is why I'm glad we 'chose' to have a child despite being a bit broke and living in an expensive city. We can't offer him much stuff but we can offer him a happy childhood.

THEFRINGE · 22/10/2009 12:39

Oh yes it works like that everytime Gracie, which is why every single home owner is minted

Paolosgirl · 22/10/2009 12:41

Gracie - I'm in awe of your grasp of the economy, the house market in this area and the job market. Simples!

Gracie123 · 22/10/2009 12:42

You can't have it both ways fringe. You said moving to a cheap area wouldn't work because it wouldn't stay cheap.
I said that's a good thing.
Now your saying it would stay cheap?
Also a good thing, if your reason that you shouldn't move is you think the price will increase

The point is you want to stay living in your expensive area. Fine. But it's a choice. The option to move to a cheaper area is available to you.

pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:43

gracie - you're all for people giving up everything because they can't afford it. Live in a shit area, have no children, whatever. Does your logic also apply to people with no jobs, or are only the deserved of help?

Paolosgirl · 22/10/2009 12:43

In fact, the house market in any area. Of course - sell and make a mint. Why didn't we think of that? Oh I know - because the house market is in recession meaning that no-one is actually buying?

pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:45

gracie - you're making a very big assumption that everyone struggling with their mortgage can just move. Maybe you've missed this, but there is something going on called on a recession, part of which has resulted in falling house prices and negative equity. Selling the house does not necessarily help. I think you blinkered approach is why people are suggesting you may not live in the real world

Gracie123 · 22/10/2009 12:45

Not quite sure what you are saying allnew.
I think everyone should have children. They are a blessing to society.

The reason I was saying move to a cheaper area is that people were saying they can't afford their mortgage payments in the expensive areas where they have to live because of their jobs. They should therefore be entitled to the same housing benefit as someone who doesn't own a home and may or may not have a job.

I was merely pointing out that they have more options than the person who doesn't own their home/have a job in a fancy area.

pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:45
pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:47

'fancy area' - dear god. You think only houses in 'fancy areas' are expensive? And btw if everyone took your advice there would be no benefits

Gracie123 · 22/10/2009 12:47

BTW - your house will sell, just not at the price you want for it.

You can accept negative equity, or you can ride it out, or you can rent it out and rent somewhere smaller. Still a lot more options than someone who just rents has.

PrincessFiorimonde · 22/10/2009 12:47

I agree with scaryteacher at 12.14, and with the couple of other posters earlier who made the same point in her 1st para.

Gracie123 · 22/10/2009 12:48

I don't think all houses that are expensive are in fancy areas. You've joined a thread halfway through where I was replying to specific posters.

I'm not sure why you think there would be no benefits...

pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:48

and what would then be the point - sell to make a loss to save money? hmm

emma1785 · 22/10/2009 12:48

I'm not saying you shouldn't have children at all what I am saying is that if you do have children you should be able to support yourselves financially. This has nothing to do with being a banker or a northerner, I know it?s more expensive to live in the south and not everyone in the south gets a higher wage so if that means traveling an hour or 2 too work then so be it. Obviously I would not make a great politician because I have no tact whatsoever but in my defense I have been poor and I have managed to pull myself out of it, I?ve had to give everything up and start over its horrible and I wouldn't wish it on anyone but now that my family are doing ok I don't think we should be getting benefits just to get by. Benefits should be there to help those who can't survive without them and should not just be a way of topping up your salary.

becstarlitsea · 22/10/2009 12:50

Lol 'fancy area' - have you been to Kilburn, Gracie? Someone got shot outside our flat last week. And they found a headless corpse in our wheelie bins a while back.

When your 3 year old DS says 'Careful, Mummy, don't step in the blood!' as you walk him to nursery, you know that you don't live in a fancy area.

I repeat: £1,200 pcm for a teeny tiny flat with no garden.

And fancy, it aint!

pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:50

actually gracie I've read the whole thread, including the post where you suggested people could remortgage if they couldn't afford repayments on their current mortgage . I think that's were your posts lost credibility

pleasechange · 22/10/2009 12:51

emma "I'm not saying you shouldn't have children at all what I am saying is that if you do have children you should be able to support yourselves financially"

So basically, unemployed people or those on low incomes shouldn't reproduce? Is that actually what you believe?

Gracie123 · 22/10/2009 12:52

And how much money do you suppose a renter has paid over x number of years? Is that not negative equity?

Living somewhere costs!

As I said before, if you can't afford to accept the negative equity, you can ride it out, or you can rent it out and rent somewhere smaller.

All options. More than a renter has if they can't afford their rent.

Paolosgirl · 22/10/2009 12:52

What do mean about not being able to afford their mortgage payments in a fancy area? If you live in your own home, the bank doesn't put your mortgage payments up simply because it becomes a 'fancy' area! There are plenty of us out there who live in an area which became 'fancy' and are now simply paying the mortgage payments, not daring to move and incur any removal costs, and hoping to God that council tax, food, utilities, interest rates, petrol etc etc etc doesn't go up.

Gracie, your suggestion of moving as a way of answering the OP is so far removed from sense that it's ridiculous.

Gracie123 · 22/10/2009 12:54

sorry becstar. That doesn't sound nice.

Fancy area was the wrong word to use. I just find typing 'expensive' quite long on my phone, so I attempted to shorten it.

Allnew, you can remortgage to get cheaper payments. My parents have just done it. They will be paying their mortgage for longer, but it is possible. So you can say I lost all credibility, but I'm wondering why something that's possible seems so laughable to so many...

BobbingForPeachys · 22/10/2009 12:55

Well Athene by that I would agree with you- that is precisely the middle road I think most people desire.

As a carer I think I am entitled (and I know so do most people here Athene, not saying you don't LOL) to support, and I don't think my life should be so poor I am scrabbling around either becuase of the alck of choice (I did try get a place for ds1 in after schoolclub actually but we are back to the parents banging on door with pitchforks about ds2's aggression at school etc so a no go....again, arrgrggghhh)

People who can work should, as long of course people also accept that can doesn't mean can when there are limited jobs out there. Redundancy is a terrible relaity for many atm.

Middleroad, every time. Which I think is best achieved by punishing fraudsters as what they are- criminals (and that covers those who say they cannot when they can or ahve toehr beenfit scams in place) and not simply lumping them into a general catch all of benefits claimants.

Swipe left for the next trending thread