Extra £4bn welfare cut

Bob_the_Saver

Two year's ago the family in a house near to me (I won't say where) moved in whilst unemployed. The house is VERY VERY nice, very large and if the slightest thing needed upgrading/repairing the Landlord had to sort it out. Why should they be able to MOVE-IN to a large expensive house (at the tax payers expense) like the one that their neighbours had worked decades to buy.
They are still there and show no sign of finding a job, or for that matter looking for one - why would they? The whole system is rotten and should be scrapped.
Employment based benefits are there to tide you over in time of need not as a life-style.

One of my first jobs was working with a chap with only one leg, we used to do basket-transfers to Oil Platforms together. That used to involve holding on to one hoop whilst standing on another with netting between. We were then craned between the rising and falling deck of a ship in the North Sea and an oil Platform high above, I don't recall him moaning about having that as a job.

SingleSue

365days wrote: »

In just one secondary school 48 laptops have been given (actually a grant of £500) to each family on Income support.

My maths makes that £24,000 for one secondary school. Mulitiply that by all the secondary schools in Uk Plus all the Key stage 2 children who were also eligible.

Another set of funding for this year is a Grant of £80 for each child of parents on Income support to attend after school activities.

Instantly that must be at least a £1m that can be 'cut' from the budget.

Maybe it can be given to working parents who after paying their rent/mortgage/childcare/income tax etc find themselves unable to afford to buy their kids a laptop or pay for ballet lessons either!!!!!

2nd attempt...grr blooming machine!

Our area was one of the trial areas for the laptop scheme and although it may seem a little eek to do it, it has changed and improved my boys education out of recognition. Before we received the laptop, we were all fighting over one very wheezy desktop, homework would be late to be submitted, my study (and that of my boys) suffered and the arguements.....they were not pretty.

Since the receipt of the laptop, my eldest son has been able to concentrate and study properly for his GCSE's, resulting in previously predicted poor results turning into very good ones and the resultant acceptance into 6th form to study for A levels, something seen as not being possible just 2 years ago. I have also been able to do my study properly (albeit at silly o clock usually) and the two younger boys have also seen an improvement in their education.

My one niggle with the scheme is the restriction on where you can get the equipment from....I could get a super duper laptop for £475 (the amount our grant was) on the open market but all that will get you from the approved suppliers is an Intel Celeron 1gb ram which you could get from PC World for less than £250 (I paid an extra amount to upgrade to a better processor)...to me, that is a blatent waste of money and someone is profiteering from the scheme somewhere down the line.

I'm not moaning about it as it has been great for us but it could have been more cost effective..just how can they justify charging £475 for a £250 laptop?

Re the after school activities....new one on me! Is that just your area as certainly nothing has been said here.

Graham_Devon

SingleSue wrote: »

2nd attempt...grr blooming machine!

Our area was one of the trial areas for the laptop scheme and although it may seem a little eek to do it, it has changed and improved my boys education out of recognition. Before we received the laptop, we were all fighting over one very wheezy desktop, homework would be late to be submitted, my study (and that of my boys) suffered and the arguements.....they were not pretty.

Since the receipt of the laptop, my eldest son has been able to concentrate and study properly for his GCSE's, resulting in previously predicted poor results turning into very good ones and the resultant acceptance into 6th form to study for A levels, something seen as not being possible just 2 years ago. I have also been able to do my study properly (albeit at silly o clock usually) and the two younger boys have also seen an improvement in their education.

I hope you can understand however, that there are workers out there in the same position as yourself, making ends meet, who also don't have a second machine, or even a machine, but as they do not qualify, their kids have to go without.

Not having a go. I'm sure the laptop scheme has helped many families. But ultimately many other families in the same boat get nothing, literally because they work or do not fit the criteria.

My one niggle with the scheme is the restriction on where you can get the equipment from....I could get a super duper laptop for £475 (the amount our grant was) on the open market but all that will get you from the approved suppliers is an Intel Celeron 1gb ram which you could get from PC World for less than £250 (I paid an extra amount to upgrade to a better processor)...to me, that is a blatent waste of money and someone is profiteering from the scheme somewhere down the line.

I'm not moaning about it as it has been great for us but it could have been more cost effective..just how can they justify charging £475 for a £250 laptop?

Wasn't just the laptop cost. There was also a helpline involved and a better warranty.

I can look at machines at work, and cost them up at £800. On specifications alone, you could get one elsewhere to the same spec for £500. However, what you don't get with the £500 machine is a 3 year warranty as standard, with a courier sent to your business with a part for you within 24 hours.

With the laptop there was also a 12 month broadband package. Whether you used it or not, it all had to be paid for within the £475.

SingleSue

The grant here was £475 for the laptop plus an additional grant of (I believe) £125 for the broadband, so £600 for laptop and broadband (I didn't take up the broadband part so my grant was lower than a lot of others who did). We also do not have a helpline nor collect and repair warranty (yes it is a 3 year warranty but it is a drop off and repair one)...maybe they changed a few things when they rolled it out nationally?

Saying that though, I agree with the rest of your post and it is one of the reasons why I have kept so quiet about it as it seemed a little insensitive to mention it (could be seen as gloating perhaps?) when others worked very hard and yet are not able to afford the same....to say I felt incredible guilt would be an understatement.

sjaypink

From what I have heard so far this leaves me feeling pretty uncomfortable :cool:

Not saying I'm against cuts, not saying the amount is particularly huge tbh .....

......its the way its being 'sold', its all so sickeningly TORY

Graham_Devon

SingleSue wrote: »

The grant here was £475 for the laptop plus an additional grant of (I believe) £125 for the broadband, so £600 for laptop and broadband (I didn't take up the broadband part so my grant was lower than a lot of others who did). We also do not have a helpline nor collect and repair warranty (yes it is a 3 year warranty but it is a drop off and repair one)...maybe they changed a few things when they rolled it out nationally?

Saying that though, I agree with the rest of your post and it is one of the reasons why I have kept so quiet about it as it seemed a little insensitive to mention it (could be seen as gloating perhaps?) when others worked very hard and yet are not able to afford the same....to say I felt incredible guilt would be an understatement.

Well the 3 year warranty will deffo make up the price on a laptop.

Dell for instance charge approx £140 for a 3 year collect and return warranty on a basic laptop.

I believe they were Toshiba laptops? Therefore basic price of around £299 + £150 3 year warranty = £449. Then add delivery.

I expect toshiba would have made sure they could sell a 3 year warranty as part of the deal!! Certainly bumps up their profits.

smk77

Bob_the_Saver wrote: »

Two year's ago the family in a house near to me (I won't say where) moved in whilst unemployed. The house is VERY VERY nice, very large and if the slightest thing needed upgrading/repairing the Landlord had to sort it out. Why should they be able to MOVE-IN to a large expensive house (at the tax payers expense) like the one that their neighbours had worked decades to buy.
They are still there and show no sign of finding a job, or for that matter looking for one - why would they? The whole system is rotten and should be scrapped.
Employment based benefits are there to tide you over in time of need not as a life-style.

One of my first jobs was working with a chap with only one leg, we used to do basket-transfers to Oil Platforms together. That used to involve holding on to one hoop whilst standing on another with netting between. We were then craned between the rising and falling deck of a ship in the North Sea and an oil Platform high above, I don't recall him moaning about having that as a job.

Yes, the system sucks...but i'd rather have one that is abused by the minority (and it IS the minority!!!!) than one that punishes those that really need it...

SingleSue

I must admit I hadn't accounted for the warranty in my calculations Graham.

Not all of them were Toshiba's (although again, that may be different for the national roll out)...I also had to pay for delivery although can't for the life of me remember how much I had to pay!

Somehow I wish I hadn't posted on here now....I was trying to point out the good points and the bad points of the scheme as a recipient of it and I still believe it could have been administered more cost efficiently.

Another bad point - My sister in law got one too (she works but was just under the limit for the scheme at that particular time), since she got it, it has sat in its case doing nothing...the broadband was wasted and the laptop is gathering dust as she doesn't understand how to operate one and didn't trust the children to do it either. I offered to get it set up for her and show her the basics but she and my brother were getting divorced at the time and she felt uncomfortable with the idea.

Maybe there were more like her and that is why there is now a helpline on the national roll out?

sjaypink

All these stupid schemes (such as the internet) were pretty disgusting really. A complete waste of money, I don't know what the real deal was with this (other than to prop up pc worlds turnover!) but it wasn't really to incease internet access to all as they knew full well that 80-85% of the qualifying familes already had internet.

What they should have been targeting (& perhaps, tbf, were trying to do, although in a completely inefficient way) is those few who were not already on the net & genuinely were not in a position to do so - either through parental neglect, or perhaps debt etc - and targeted THEM ONLY. Best way probably would ahve been through a school/ college loan system or similar.

PasturesNew

doire wrote: »

It seems benefits ae in for a battering. Will the government hit the rich as hard?

Hopefully the woman who lives down the street is given a wake up call. Her mother gets a car through the DLA. Yet its her thats drives it all day and everyday. Its even parked in her drive at night. Not only that but her son has just passed his test and him and his mates are in the thing most nights.

While i worked hard and saved hard to buy my own car.

Now tell me how that is fair?

They wouldn't if they got the cars that used to be handed out:
http://www.motability.co.uk/Image/Motability/Trike.jpg