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

mewbie_2

!!!!!!? wrote: »

You can throw all the money into sink estates that you like - but it won't fix anything.

The problems in those places aren't resulting from poverty - it's social breakdown. Putting endless amounts of money in is just enabling people to abdicate all responsibility for themselves, making the overall situation worse as well as placing a burden on the system.

Ok then. How do you fix social breakdown?

edit: If not social breakdown, then whatever you call it - how do you fix it?

Generali

mewbie wrote: »

Ok then. How do you fix social breakdown?

edit: If not social breakdown, then whatever you call it - how do you fix it?

What's happened is that more money has been spent on control and the problem has (in some ways) been reduced. That has happened at a particular cost.

MrsE_2

mewbie wrote: »

Ok then. How do you fix social breakdown?

edit: If not social breakdown, then whatever you call it - how do you fix it?

Well I think it would help if their was more help offered to youngsters regarding education that becoming teen mums.

I think it would also help if it wasn't profitable to churn out children while on benefits.

I think it would help if the family unit was valued for financial purposes & it not made more attractive to appear as as single parent.

Benefits should be lower than wages & childcare should be freely available to those who work.

Many unemployed parents get childcare paid for them, while parents on low income struggle with childcare costs. Whats that all about, they don't need free nursery places unless they are working or in education.

olly300

MrsE wrote: »

Well I think it would help if their was more help offered to youngsters regarding education that becoming teen mums.

I think it would also help if it wasn't profitable to churn out children while on benefits.

I think it would help if the family unit was valued for financial purposes & it not made more attractive to appear as as single parent.

Benefits should be lower than wages & childcare should be freely available to those who work.

Many unemployed parents get childcare paid for them, while parents on low income struggle with childcare costs. Whats that all about, they don't need free nursery places unless they are working or in education.

To you and I that is common sense but to the government they only think that spending xx amount will lift children out of poverty while not thinking about the long term consequences.

Edited to say: some of the saddest things I've seen is teenagers only thinking they are worth something or will have someone who loves them if they have a baby.

leveller2911

mewbie wrote: »

Ok then. How do you fix social breakdown?

edit: If not social breakdown, then whatever you call it - how do you fix it?

Well weve tried the governments approach of giv ing to all who say they need it, lets put the emphasis on those to "prove" they need it.....

You get 6yrs of social care during your working life(retirement excused) and if you have had your quota before you retire then you have to take care of yourself until your 65 when you should get a pension, which is NI stamps related................Lastly if you dont have a "PROPER" disability and im afraid "BAD BACK" just doesnt count,along with stress and all those other crazy excuses NOT to work...........................HARSH???? Yes ,but finances are finite and the pot of money is getting smaller and It Cant go on........:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

baileysbattlebus

MrsE wrote: »

Housing benefit is still income
Still part of the benefits package

Workers don't get free lodgings:rolleyes:
My roof comes out of my income, I don't class our income as whats left after housing costs:rolleyes:

I agree about landlords reaping taxpayers money, which is why i say housing benefit should be capped at the equivalent council rent for that area;)

people who work are still entitled to claim housing benefit - in areas of high rent - where we are it's £850 to £1000 for a 3 bed house - you need to earning a fairly decent amount of money to be able to afford to pay that rent and bring up, say 2 or 3 children.

If you are a single parent with 2 children under 10 you are able to rent a 2 bed house, where we live the maximum they will pay towards your rent is £193 per week for a 2 bed, obviously the bigger the house the more they will contribute. If the rent on a property is more than the maximum you have to find the difference - that is the most they will pay.

In North Tyneside it is £106 per week for a 2 bed - this probably fairly accurately reflects the difference in private rents.

My daughter claimed housing benefit for a while - single parent, worked 30 hours - had about £750 + child benefit for one child, per month income, her rent for a 2 bed flat was £650 per month - cheap for here. She paid £400 of the rent and the council paid the rest. She wasr very little better of than if she had been on income support, plus she had to get to work and back. Then she got tax credits, every £1 she got in tax credit was added to the rent she paid - it's not a life of luxury regardless of what you might think.

In the end she came home where she could work and have a life above the bread line.

MrsE_2

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

people who work are still entitled to claim housing benefit - in areas of high rent - where we are it's £850 to £1000 for a 3 bed house - you need to earning a fairly decent amount of money to be able to afford to pay that rent and bring up, say 2 or 3 children.

If you are a single parent with 2 children under 10 you are able to rent a 2 bed house, where we live the maximum they will pay towards your rent is £193 per week for a 2 bed, obviously the bigger the house the more they will contribute. If the rent on a property is more than the maximum you have to find the difference - that is the most they will pay.

In North Tyneside it is £106 per week for a 2 bed - this probably fairly accurately reflects the difference in private rents.

My daughter claimed housing benefit for a while - single parent, worked 30 hours - had about £750 + child benefit for one child, per month income, her rent for a 2 bed flat was £650 per month - cheap for here. She paid £400 of the rent and the council paid the rest. She wasr very little better of than if she had been on income support, plus she had to get to work and back. Then she got tax credits, every £1 she got in tax credit was added to the rent she paid - it's not a life of luxury regardless of what you might think.

In the end she came home where she could work and have a life above the bread line.

OK, some people who work get benefits.

I was talking as myself & my family, who don't get benefits. As many (most) don't.

MrsE_2

olly300 wrote: »

To you and I that is common sense but to the government they only think that spending xx amount will lift children out of poverty while not thinking about the long term consequences.

Edited to say: some of the saddest things I've seen is teenagers only thinking they are worth something or will have someone who loves them if they have a baby.

Amen to that.

treliac

olly300 wrote: »

Edited to say: some of the saddest things I've seen is teenagers only thinking they are worth something or will have someone who loves them if they have a baby.

And one of the reasons why the cycle of disadvantage is perpetuated.

WTF?_2

mewbie wrote: »

Ok then. How do you fix social breakdown?

edit: If not social breakdown, then whatever you call it - how do you fix it?

You can't press an economic button to fix that sort of a problem. Society needs to pull itself together and get a grip. This will mean a change in attitudes and morals. Community spirit needs to be fostered.

Beyond that I have no idea. Certainly a decade of unparalleled prosperity, easy credit for all, cheap consumer goods and a generous welfare state doesn't seem to have done anything to make those places any less dysfunctional so I very much doubt it is a money issue.