Boom-time on benefits: The 140,000 families who claim £20,000 a year in handouts

amcluesent

"An astonishing 140,000 households are pocketing more in benefits than the average take-home wage.

The families are living on handouts worth in excess of £20,000 a year, official figures show. The enormous payouts dwarf the incomes of millions of hard-working families who are struggling to cope with the recession and the rising cost of living."

No wonder tax need to be sky-high for Clown to feed and water his block-vote.

Anyone still glad they studied, worked hard and tried to better themselves in Britain? No, thought not.

England is finished this time.

mvengemvenge

I think these are nearly always families with several kids. Once you have enough kids, even Tax Credits don't make it worth working.

SingleSue

Here we go again....not getting involved this time.

piggeh

2.8bn to stop the scallies mugging everyone they come across is a small price to pay imo

Zagu

140,000 x 20,000 = £2.8b.

2007/8 Public spending was £586b.

It's not great that we have that level of families dependant on the government for handouts, but I very much doubt it means that "England is finished"!

dmg24

Should this board be renamed 'The Daily Mail Readers Board'?

beingjdc

The Mail on Sunday, a new low...

So even the article admits that it's almost entirely housing benefit, people with a lot of kids, and the seriously disabled.

I wouldn't swap being reasonably healthy for being seriously disabled in exchange for less than the national average. In fact the seriously disabled should probably get the national average wage rather than less.

Housing benefit, if it's being paid out at above the going rate for housing, is a subsidy to landlords not tenants, so it's very nice for the Mail to demonise the people claiming, but I bet plenty of people who read that newspaper are raking it in from HB payments.

Kids are the biggest red herring out. I have some sympathy for setting a maximum after which you get no more benefits for having extra kids (though on the other hand it's hardly fair to punish the kids for having stupid parents), but Child Benefit is universal, so it's idiotic to compare someone's income from work excluding CB with someone's benefit income including it - the person with a job would get the benefit too!

Gorgeous_George

I'm happy to support anybody who finds themselves unemployed or unable to work through ill health.

However, I'm not so happy to support the unemployable or those who make themselves ill in order to claim benefits.

I know of a couple who lived on benefits until their children fled the nest and the benefits stopped. They adopted a grandchild to kickstart the benefits again.

We need a system that is seen to be fair to all - claimants and taxpayers.

GG

Generali

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

I'm happy to support anybody who finds themselves unemployed or unable to work through ill health.

However, I'm not so happy to support the unemployable or those who make themselves ill in order to claim benefits.

I know of a couple who lived on benefits until their children fled the nest and the benefits stopped. They adopted a grandchild to kickstart the benefits again.

We need a system that is seen to be fair to all - claimants and taxpayers.

GG

Trying to stop the free loaders is a process that's been going on at least since the Poor Law of 1601 in England. My feeling is that if you have any sort of welfare state people will try to game the system to get something for very little effort.

Airwolf1

There is a problem here too. Example. A chap I know is currently earning around £0.25 in the £ due to WTC. I want a second job, but if I got one, my WTC would suffer and I'd be earning too little so it wouldn't be worth the while. This is a huge problem, people try to do better for themselves, but get penailsed in the process. It is like the government don't want you to earn more.

Generali

Airwolf1 wrote: »

There is a problem here too. Example. A chap I know is currently earning around £0.25 in the £ due to WTC. I want a second job, but if I got one, my WTC would suffer and I'd be earning too little so it wouldn't be worth the while. This is a huge problem, people try to do better for themselves, but get penailsed in the process. It is like the government don't want you to earn more.

The cut off point for WTC is set very high for that reason IIRC I was earning more than 50k and could claim. The higher it is, the more gentle the taper. In the 1990s, some mothers faced an effective marginal tax rate > 100%!