The recession, benefits, the safety net, and the learning curve

dopester

Max_Headroom wrote: »

Would you like to explain how I'm exaggerating?

What I am able to claim just about covers my basic expenses (and they are basic, no mortgage, no rent, no Sky TV, no mobile phone contract, no video club, no social expenses, no pub outings, no fags, no booze, no holiday expenses).

So with those covered and the money gone, there is no cash left for food. That's not an "exaggeration" matey, that's a plain simple fact.

Glanced through this thread. Are you receiving full JSA or whatever that £60ish a week is called? Wasn't there any redundancy? If you are claiming and receiving full JSA, just 2 months after work finished, after you've done 25 years of work since leaving school - I'm amazed you don't have more in cash savings .

£60ish a week is a safety net. It is set at a level for the basics, so you have an incentive to get off benefits and get better paid employment. Surely you have stuff you can sell? Antiques, collectibles. This is the real world. You own a house outright. Sell it. Downsize. This is cold, but it is the real world. You've known what was coming for ages, having read this forum.

Max_Headroom_3

dopester wrote: »

Glanced through this thread. Are you receiving full JSA or whatever that £60ish a week is called? Wasn't there any redundancy? If you are claiming and receiving full JSA, just 2 months after work finished, after you've done 25 years of work since leaving school - I'm amazed you don't have more in cash savings .

Most of my redundancy went on buying a secondhand car and clearing the last bit of the mortgage I'd been seriously overpaying to try and clear. There is some left, and I am living on that, as I said in my initial post. However, what if I needed that for something (roof falls in just as an example)? What happens when the savings run out? Right now I'm alright, I said that. But the fact is, the "safety net" of benefits won't even afford me the most basic meagre existence.

£60ish a week is a safety net. It is set at a level for the basics, so you have an incentive to get off benefits and get better paid employment.

I can assure you I don't need an "incentive" to work, I've managed to motivate myself to work for the last 25 years perfectly well on my own thank you.

Surely you have stuff you can sell? Antiques, collectibles. This is the real world. You own a house outright. Sell it. Downsize.

No. Frankly. I'm not claiming (or asking to claim) any actual housing expenses, only wanting basic living expenses. I've worked damn hard to put a modest roof over my head, and it's a basic need. I'm hardly going to throw that up now am I?

This is cold, but it is the real world. You've known what was coming for ages, having read this forum.

I have known what was coming, you're quite right. And that's the only reason I'm able to survive for a while on such a tiny amount. Plenty won't be able to.

And for all your "real world, deal with it" nonsense, you've not addressed the point of the thread, which is that plenty out there have made a career out of living on benefits. Shouldn't you be suggesting that they get motivated to get a job? Shouldn't you be suggesting that their benefits ought not to cover their outgoings so they're "motivated to find work"?

My point is, the whole thing is upside down. Many that sprog out a couple of kids and hurl themselves fully at the state get supported. Completely. Those that make their own way and pay in instead don't have that luxury, they (I!) can't claim enough to live on temporarily.

That strike you as ok?

dopester

Max_Headroom wrote: »

No. Frankly. I'm not claiming (or asking to claim) any actual housing expenses, only wanting basic living expenses. I've worked damn hard to put a modest roof over my head, and it's a basic need. I'm hardly going to throw that up now am I?

When did you buy your first house? Working since you left school, for 25 years. If you bought 10 years or more ago, I suspect it has risen furiously in value, without you doing much at all. So I compare that to what would-be FTBs of recent years have been up against.

I've noted your points and other peoples about career claimers on the dole. It is funny how it becomes more of an issue when people find themselves on it themselves. It has long needed reform, even though we've seen the decay it brings to society for many years.

I wasn't being deliberately unsympathetic to your circumstances. Other than the reform needed for long-term career claimants, I just think the system is fine. £60ish pw.

fc123

Hi Max H...long time no read....sorry to hear about the job. The trickle down effects of this downturn are just begining to seep through to many.


The benefits system doesn't work...OH has a sister who has made a careeer out of claiming but her life isn't that great on the whole.

She got done for fraud last year (very serious too) but still gets all sorts of payouts. Still finds an excuse not to find a job despite some kids having left home (yup, 1 had a baby @ 17 + flat and the rest) and the remaining 2 being teens.

Her problem now is her lack of skills/ work experience after 20 years out of job market. I do recall at one point, family worked out she needed a gross income of 30k pa to be 'better off'....except, once last 2 kids leave home, and the benefits are cut to the basics, she won't be able to manage basic bills in a 3 bed house (council). Her EX pays support via CSA plus top ups on the side but that will stop when last 2 kids are 18.

Living long term on benefits (10 yrs +) is pretty much impossible and, from personal experience, those I have known to do so, had all sorts of other things going down, whether a bit of cash work/selling on EBay, not declaring live in partners (~fathers of kids) etc etc.


Good luck on the job hunting front though........you could always log in on here inbetween sending out CV's? It's getting quieter by the day.;)

mardatha

But if nothing else then this recession might make people look again at the system, and might make people less quick to condemn people for being on benefits - because it can happen to anybody . I'm like Sue in that we both worked for millions of years, albeit in low paid jobs. And when I got ill, then I was like you Max. I found the benefits system an absolute shock - degrading, depressing, and pure hell. Until I decided to fight back and make the best of it ! Found this forum and the OS cooking threads etc and now am enjoying it.

needahome_2

personally i think anyone who owns their own home and claiming benefit, should be made to sell it and live off the money until it uns out and then claim benefit.

if you own your home, and are an "average" homeowner then you have about £150k of equity and the tax payer is paying for you to live!

if someone had £150k in the bank, they wouldn't be entitled to benefit till they had spent it, so why should you keep your money just because it tied up in your home?

as for a lot of people who over the years who have slagged off benefit claimants fo being lazy and not taking the minimun wage jobs out there,these people are going to face reality when they are forced with the fact that these are the only jobs available to them now.

its a lot different story when they work out their own budget and realise you cannot live on these jobs.

SingleSue

You are quite correct in that it can happen to anyone....I was one of those sort of people when working who would look down on anyone who claimed benefits.

Beginning of the last recession, I just couldn't understand what people were moaning about and just came out with stock answers the like we see on here all the time.

fc123

needahome wrote: »

personally i think anyone who owns their own home and claiming benefit, should be made to sell it and live off the money until it uns out and then claim benefit.

if you own your home, and are an "average" homeowner then you have about £150k of equity and the tax payer is paying for you to live!

if someone had £150k in the bank, they wouldn't be entitled to benefit till they had spent it, so why should you keep your money just because it tied up in your home?

as for a lot of people who over the years who have slagged off benefit claimants fo being lazy and not taking the minimun wage jobs out there,these people are going to face reality when they are forced with the fact that these are the only jobs available to them now.

its a lot different story when they work out their own budget and realise you cannot live on these jobs.

Whilst I don't think it would be very practical to 'make'Max H sell his house and live off the cash...I can see your point.
A regular poster has her 'house' currently in the bank.
It looks like cash and feels like cash but, it is actaully her 'house to be', her only security for the future.
Because the 'house' is temporarily cash, she can claim nothing at all.

Max_Headroom_3

dopester wrote: »

When did you buy your first house? Working since you left school, for 25 years. If you bought 10 years or more ago, I suspect it has risen furiously in value, without you doing much at all. So I compare that to what would-be FTBs of recent years have been up against.

I've said on this board many times that I have every sympathy with current FTB. I've even said in this very thread that the principle difference between me and the homeless guy that was mentioned in a quoted newspaper article was that I was lucky enough to have been born earlier and therefore able to afford a house.

But that's a whole other issue, we're talking about benefits here.

Indeed, the fact that I have been "lucky" (it wasn't just luck, there was some planning in there too but I accept I was lucky to be able to do the planning, if you see what I mean) and own my own house only makes the situation worse. Because even with my "luck", I still can't flippin afford to exist!

I've noted your points and other peoples about career claimers on the dole. It is funny how it becomes more of an issue when people find themselves on it themselves. It has long needed reform, even though we've seen the decay it brings to society for many years.

Yes!! Correct! Exactly! You've got it! That's one of the main points I was making in post one, you're going to find that suddenly many people like me will find themselves at the sharp end of the benefit system that they've been supporting for many years, and shocked at what we're due.

I wasn't being deliberately unsympathetic to your circumstances. Other than the reform needed for long-term career claimants, I just think the system is fine. £60ish pw.

So it's all good that many are able to milk the system without giving anything back, whilst previously hard working types who find themselves in genuine need are not given it?

Fair enough, you're certainly entitled to your view.

I'm afraid you've not convinced me that it's a reasonable or balanced view however.

Max_Headroom_3

fc123 wrote: »

Whilst I don't think it would be very practical to 'make'Max H sell his house and live off the cash...I can see your point.
A regular poster has her 'house' currently in the bank.
It looks like cash and feels like cash but, it is actaully her 'house to be', her only security for the future.
Because the 'house' is temporarily cash, she can claim nothing at all.

I agree that's unfair, although I can see the logic to it.

It's ironic really, I've been furiously overpaying my mortgage rather than saving simply because it's financially the best way forward, no point having savings earning interest whilst you're paying more interest elsewhere on debt (especially since that interest earned will be taxed).

However had I saved that money instead and still got my mortgage I wouldn't even be entitled to the tiny amount I am due.

It all spins toward the same point though. The harder you try and provide for yourself, the worse off you'll be if you encounter a problem like job loss.