Benefits and the deficit: what would you cut?

SingleSue

PasturesNew wrote: »

How much is spent on free school dinners? And on teaching assistants (never used to have them)? And the £250 child trust funds?

No ideas on school dinners but without teaching assistants, my youngest and middle sons would have to have gone to a special school which would have cost way more than the teaching assistants helping them out.

Never got the child trust funds, they were born too late.

jetta_wales

Kohoutek wrote: »

No, I meant 'slashing everything' is how the government is currently planning to reduce the deficit in terms of cutting 23% of budget of the transport, defence, education department etc. Can you imagine how many job losses that will cause?

They haven't proposed to cut the benefits budget to my knowledge.

I'm clearly not suggesting that we don't cut anything or that we don't cut benefits at all I'm just saying that some pleoples attitudes are not in the slightest bit realistic or constructive.

sjaypink

Kohoutek wrote: »

No, I meant 'slashing everything' is how the government is currently planning to reduce the deficit in terms of cutting 23% of budget of the transport, defence, education department etc. Can you imagine how many job losses that will cause?

They haven't proposed to cut the benefits budget to my knowledge.

Yes, I meant I read the post:

but people need to realise that slashing anything and everything 'they' think costs too much really isn't going to be the right thing for the country...

Peoole just talk as though it's just that easy, they know how to fix it lol, no you don't and I think there needs to be a little more respect for the complexity of the situation and the consequences of whatever cuts are made

by jetta wales to be in response to people suggesting 'all jsa scrapped' etc etc, rather than meaning that a bit be cut from various sectors

Just saying I read it differently. Personally I think it is right that money is cut from many areas- and for what its worth think some benefits 'perks' should be included in that

SingleSue

The one thing that appears to come out of all discussions on benefits, is the amount of posters who automatically assume that those on benefits have never worked, never paid into the pot, who basically, are just lazy.

There are oodles of people now claiming benefits (of all different kinds), who have worked for years and years and have suffered a job loss or an illness to themselves or to a loved one....a job loss could mean they are back in work fairly quickly (in a good employment area) but those who are experiencing an illness or who have had to become carers, could mean that they are pretty much stuck for a longish time on benefits.

Being a benefit claimant through no fault of your own is not a nice life, some have worked extremely hard over the years yet possibly one thing (or a combination of things), has completely destroyed it...the impact on your pride, your feelings of self worth and yes, your ego is soul destroying.

I don't know what the answer is to be honest, I know cuts have to be made for the countries' financial future but exactly where and to what extent is so much harder to assertain.

baxter1978

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Cut 30% from every public sector worker earning more than 20k


My husband is a prison officer. He often gets assaulted, spat at, verbally abused, bullied by management, and has to hear details of crimes commited that no person should have to hear.

After his pension, tax etc, he brings home about 1550 a month. Train drivers earn more than he does, and dont come home with stitches on a monthly basis.

Does he really deserve to have his pay cut?

treliac

baxter1978 wrote: »

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Cut 30% from every public sector worker earning more than 20k


My husband is a prison officer. He often gets assaulted, spat at, verbally abused, bullied by management, and has to hear details of crimes commited that no person should have to hear.

After his pension, tax etc, he brings home about 1550 a month. Train drivers earn more than he does, and dont come home with stitches on a monthly basis.

Does he really deserve to have his pay cut?

He deserves our greatest respect. There are many who will agree and will thank your husband very much for the service he gives. Please ignore the rest, they aren't worth the bother.

And, welcome to the board baxter.

Radiantsoul

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I would stop the benefit payment for those who don't work and have mutiple wives. It's something like £60pw for the first wife and £50pw for each wife after that.

I would hate to have to cut back on my harem.

vivatifosi

I go along with a lot of the more moderate posts made so far - cutting the £250 per child savings, not paying for children who aren't living in this country, etc. However I feel that pretty much every government department ought to be able to save between 2-5% of their budget, through cutting consultants, pointless large IT projects and large scale capital projects, scaling back on some management and cutting those posts that serve purely to be politically correct or a bit goody two-shoes. If you've worked in the public sector several years and aren't diversity-aware, then you're probably never going to be, no matter how much training you get.

PayDay

No public sector pensions to be paid out until age 65. Cut in wages for management. Trim admin staff numbers.

Remove all the additional state benefits that have been added in the last 10 years.

PayDay

vivatifosi wrote: »

I go along with a lot of the more moderate posts made so far - cutting the £250 per child savings, not paying for children who aren't living in this country, etc.

Can't remove that one as the courts ruled that those who pay their taxes to the UK can have the same benefits for their families, even if they aren't living in the UK. Its remove it all or all can have it.