If benefits stop as the government have no money

Loopy_Girl

Ah yes but I know that and you know that...but they don't do they?!! back to the old life skills not getting passed down...they think opening a jar IS homemade!!!!

Oldernotwiser

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Ah yes but I know that and you know that...but they don't do they?!! back to the old life skills not getting passed down...they think opening a jar IS homemade!!!!

And of course manufacturers play to the pretence of things being home made.

Interesting (well I think so) bit of trivia. When cake mixes first came out in the States, all you had to do was add water and they were marketed as being effortless; nobody bought them. They then took out the dried egg and milk and changed the marketing to "Add an egg and milk - YOU bake it!" and they sold like, well, hot cakes!

Sorry for going off topic.

red_devil

why try and solve problems before they exist. There never will be no welfare state either so waste of time trying to solve as i said a problem that dosent and wont exist.

You could say what would you do if you employer was unable to pay you too or what would happen to prisoners if there was no tax money to keep them inside why just pick on allowances anyway.

Penny-Pincher!!

This thread has really been playing on my mind over the past 24hrs.

TBH, it would probably be cheaper for OH to put me in some kind of home than to pay for a FT nurse/carer coming in to look after me. At least this way he would also get some quality sleep as he wouldnt need to care for me through the night.

It really is quite scary thinking about it. My folks are quite well off but we are not very close.

Loopy-I know what you mean about wanting to take children home with you. I dealt with many child abuse cases and had to give evidence on many of them. I have spent many hrs sobbing, especially when writing reports up. I am lucky though that most of my cases were removed from their homes and put into a safe enviroment.

PP
xx

Chrysalis

mitchaa wrote: »

IIRC around £30-£35bn of the £161bn was pension related.

That does not = vast majority:rolleyes:

I see no reason why a British government could not cap child related benefits to 2 children.

Something needs to be done about benefit spending and the tories have already stated that they are willing to sort it out.

They would lose too many voters.

Chrysalis

krisskross wrote: »

Problem with trying to save on Retirement pension is that it is actually an entitlement with criteria that have to be met. Take me for instance, although I worked and paid NI from age 16 to 59 I only get £52pw pension as I was silly enough to only pay the small married woman's stamp. Most people claiming SRP will have to meet the criteria and most will have paid in for many many years. So as I said not so much a benefit as an entitlement.

Child related benefits on the other hand merely call for the existence of a child, actual child benefit is completely non means tested and child tax credits are paid up to a very healthy income level. There is no requirement to ever have to pay any contributions to receive these payments and surely this shouldn't happen?

I agree, when I say a government wont dare touch it I mean that there is too much public sympathy for children and hence a government wont risk it because they will lose an election over it. Child related benefits need to have the same scrutiny and tight rules that other benefits such as IB and DLA get.

Chrysalis

bestpud wrote: »

I agree something must be done, but why do you think capping the rate to two children should be first?

Surely those who choose not to work have to be first on the list - even if they are the most difficult, and possibly most expensive, group to sort out?

The cuts have started already imo (no need to wait for the tories) but it is always the easy targets!

I would give my support to the govt that has the guts to deal with the tougher cases and also start clawing a bit back in from the top too!

Welfare spending is not the only dent on the public purse after all. It is also worth noting that those at the bottom may take more out in benefits but they are also pay more in, proportionally. Of course, the tories won't be looking at that end of the problem.

Because although it may not seem so the soft child related benefit system is actually a more expensive problem, recently we are already seeing crack downs on all other benefits like JSA and IB so what you suggesting is already happening anyway.

Chrysalis

Titch89 wrote: »

Not true. I was diagnosed with something at the age of 4 years old. (when I believe not much was known about the illness) I applied for DLA last year and got turned down because they believed there was 'nothing wrong' with me - even though I'm registered as being partially sighted and will never be able to legally drive. I know many people who are in the same situation - same diganosis as me and got turned down, because apparantely, there's nothing wrong.

Yeah I never said it was easy even when you do have a diagnosis.

Chrysalis

krisskross wrote: »

I feel that often our generous benefit system perpetuates and encourages poor parenting. Whilst we continue to reward the birth of a child with cash payments then I'm afraid it acts as an incentive. Go to any shopping mall and you will see loads of bored young women with fretful children that are screamed at on a regular basis. i have on occasions remonstrated with these young women when their children are being so obviously cowed and frightened. The level of invective then aimed at me has been unbelievable. 'Mind your own business you f***ing old cow. My f***ing kid and I'll do what I like' is a very mild example.

Its the impression I defenitly have, there is kids roaming the streets here till midnight, clearly the parents dont care enough that they have to roam the streest to be occupied and out the parents way. Would these parents have had these children if the state didnt pay for them?

The_Dragon

Thanks for this Lil-me, I am on IB and higher rate mobility of DLA and trust me I am not well off! Dr Dragon has been put on SSP and we have just applied for CTB and IS, we have some savings but if Dr Dragon does not get another job (he is trying to get another job as the one he is in is killing him - he is being bullied and there is a family history of heart attack, his father, grandfather and uncle all died from heart attacks and that is both sides of the family) we will lose the house (and we went for an affordable mortgage only 3.5 times Dr Dragon's salary), I cannot afford my prescriptions for pain killers (which I need to take in order to function) and more importantly I cannot afford to buy my epi-pens that I need for my nut allergy.

I would love to be off benefits and working again but at the moment that is not going to happen - I need to fill out yet another form (trying to get the care component of DLA as I can no longer make myself food so when Dr Dragon is not here I do not eat), I am scared though that they will take away the DLA and IB I already get if I apply (this happened to a friend of mine)