If benefits stop as the government have no money

bonnie_2

Dla cars aren't free you have to give up your mobility allowance for them and pay a deposit.

Penny-Pincher!!

I am disabled and my husband is my FT carer. If our benefits were cut....I dont know what we would do ...we would be in a catch 22 situation as OH would work then he would have to pay someone to care for me FT which would cost a fortune.

An agency carer costs approx £15ph. Multiply that by 40 hrs (aprox FT hrs OH would do) and thats £600 before we start. I am on 16 types of medication in a typical day and more on other days...so thats £115 on each perscription minimum. That doesnt account for dressings, injections etc either. My husband would then have to care for me on top of working FT through the night.

I do have a very good pension when I become 60 but I am 33 and that is a long way off.

TBH...I dont know what we would do. We are VERY grateful for all the help and support we receive.

PP
xx

krisskross

Conor wrote: »

...assuming you call a family of five living in one room during winter because its all they can afford to heat and having egg and chips for tea on a very regular basis because they couldn't afford anything else managing. That was my childhood and it was crap and certainly not what I'd call managing by any stretch of the imagination unless you count not dying as managing.

Funny how memories are. This was my children's childhood, mine as well. However if you speak to any of our 4 children they never knew we were poor. Perhaps they didn't have meat everyday, sweets only once a week and I made their clothes.Presents ONLY at birthday and Christmas. They still remember their childhood as full of happiness and a time they have tried to recreate for their own children. There was never any danger of them dying for lack of a Mars bar or a TV in their bedroom or the latest trainers.

bestpud

The problem with stopping working tax credits is that the NMW is not high enough to keep a family.

I would argue people did not used to manage without benefits! Do we really want to go back 100 years?

If we are going to start cutting benefits, it may be better to start with those on full benefits, but able to work! Why do people think they are more worthy of full support than those working for a living but getting a top up?

Re disabilities - shoot me down in flames but I really do not believe those on disability benefits are poor under the current system. I am not saying they should be though - to make that clear!! It is absolutely right that people with disabilities can lead a reasonable existence on benefits and it would be wrong to leave them without an income and unable to work should there be any benefit cuts. But I do not believe they are poor as it stands at present. *Takes cover*

Interesting question OP.

We were turned down for a loan (Nationwide) a few years back on the basis that tax credits could be withdrawn at any given time and thus they only counted our wage!

pipkin71

bestpud wrote: »

The problem with stopping working tax credits is that the NMW is not high enough to keep a family.

I would argue people did not used to manage without benefits! Do we really want to go back 100 years?

If we are going to start cutting benefits, it may be better to start with those on full benefits, but able to work! Why do people think they are more worthy of full support than those working for a living but getting a top up? I think those who are able to work, without any valid reason why they are not should be targeted bestpud. Of course, there are those who want to work but are unsuccessful in finding a job, but we all know there are those who simply don't want to.

I think the comments were, rather than leave someone with nothing because benefits were stopped, that top up benefits were looked at first. It's not fair, I know, but I don't think anyone was implying that a person on benefits was more worthy IYSWIM.

Re disabilities - shoot me down in flames but I really do not believe those on disability benefits are poor under the current system totally agree with this statement [edited to add: maybe though, it depends on what level of disability benefits they are receiving]. I am not saying they should be though - to make that clear!! It is absolutely right that people with disabilities can lead a reasonable existence on benefits and it would be wrong to leave them without an income and unable to work should there be any benefit cuts. But I do not believe they are poor as it stands at present. *Takes cover*

Interesting question OP.

We were turned down for a loan (Nationwide) a few years back on the basis that tax credits could be withdrawn at any given time and thus they only counted our wage!

Pipkin xxxx

krisskross

bestpud wrote: »

I would argue people did not used to manage without benefits! Do we really want to go back 100 years?
/quote]

But we DID manage and I am talking about approx 25-30 years ago. A lot of people in Britain are totally soft and rely on handouts when it comes to providing for themselves and their own wants and needs. I remember when our youngest grandson was born. My daughter-in-law was totally amazed to find out that the Government was going to give them best part of £30 a week for the upkeep of the child they planned and saved for.

DaisyFlower

I agree Bestpud, if benefit cutbacks have to be made it should be IS and JSA. Both are benefits paid to people capable of working. WTC/TC could be next as those who claim will have some other form of income.

IB and disability should be looked at to see if the person is capable of doing any form of work. If not, then a reduction could probably be got away with as disability is a genourous benefit.

The whole benefits system needs a good overhaul, it needs to go back to being a welfare state rather than a lifestyle choice. The amount needs to be looked at as well so that the phrase "why should I work when benefits pays the same/more" wont be banded about as often.

Some countries work on the basis you have to have paid x years into the pot before claiming, seems a good idea to me. Perhaps school leavers would have to work and not wait for their ideal job to land in their lap and teenage pregnancy rates may drop as well.

healy

dmg24 wrote: »

I haven't studied Economics since A Level (long time ago !), but from what I can remember an increase in the money supply would lead to an increase in the rate of inflation, hence the amount received in benefits or wages would not go as far as it would have before.

I could have got that completely the wrong way round. Can any economists confirm?! x

That does sound right to me as it does sound logical. I did my Economics A Level a very long time ago so have probably forgotten more than you!

Titch89

DaisyFlower wrote: »

I agree Bestpud, if benefit cutbacks have to be made it should be IS and JSA. Both are benefits paid to people capable of working.

Not everyone on IS can work.

peediedj

DaisyFlower wrote: »

I IB and disability should be looked at to see if the person is capable of doing any form of work. If not, then a reduction could probably be got away with as disability is a genourous benefit.

The whole benefits system needs a good overhaul, it needs to go back to being a welfare state rather than a lifestyle choice. The amount needs to be looked at as well so that the phrase "why should I work when benefits pays the same/more" wont be banded about as often.

Some countries work on the basis you have to have paid x years into the pot before claiming, seems a good idea to me. Perhaps school leavers would have to work and not wait for their ideal job to land in their lap and teenage pregnancy rates may drop as well.

what about my son he,s 12 and gets high rate dla,both myself and my wife work,but in catering the wages are very low and crap,my wife only works 25 hrs a week,cant work anymore because of our son,so if dla stopped we would be knackered