MSE News: Benefits shake-up to introduce Universal Credits

Sixer

Becles wrote: »

Maybe "self employment" is too big a variable.

It may be better if it were split into "self employed A" who are people running businesses such as a shop or manufacturing something where they are actually building up a business.

Then "self employed B" for people who are doing Avon, dog walking etc, to earn pin money or to work restricted hours.

Each group could have appropriate rules on how benefits could be claimed.

Or would that not work?

I don't really think it would. Benefits aren't there to subsidise a business start-up. The whole entrepreneurial system relies on those who take risks and succeed being rewarded for it. If people want to start a business but lack the capital to keep them going until it turns a profit, then they need to do what businesses do: borrow it. If their business succeeds, then they pay back the debt and enjoy the profits. If it doesn't, well, that's the risk. That's the entire point of starting a business. It's why, as Jowo said, people often take part-time employment and build up a business on the side. Those who don't want to take a risk don't start a business.

I truly fail to see why the benefits system should provide the equivalent of seed capital for an individual to make a profit from in the future.

In any case, Universal Credit isn't being disallowed for self-employed people. It's simply saying that if you say you work 30 hours, the system will not accept a declaration of less than NMW for the hours you say you work. It's hardly draconian.

parsons

At least something in my life has turned out for the better!!

I will be 65 in June 2014 and thank goodness none of this nonsense will have any affect on my life.

However I do feel so sorry for those who are a lot younger than me, that are having to have their lives turned upside down with these new benefits. The uncertainty of it all is the worst part about it.

I have never received any sort of benefit in my life, apart from that is, Family Allowance when our children were younger.
Looking back, as I can now, benefit claimants have had it good for the past 40 odd years. They have in general had the security in knowing what will be coming in every week. Not really having any worry about the loss of a benefit. Not really been affected by the changes that have happened over the past 40 years +.

Would I like to be young now, out of work or sick - definitely not!!

My heart goes out to those in society that have no option but to live/survive on benefits.

JuicyJesus

Sixer wrote: »

In any case, Universal Credit isn't being disallowed for self-employed people. It's simply saying that if you say you work 30 hours, the system will not accept a declaration of less than NMW for the hours you say you work. It's hardly draconian.

It makes a lot of sense. In my view doing otherwise would be fraudulently claiming benefit.

I can't find much to disagree on with Universal Credit. Extending tax credits (effectively) to under 25s has been a long time coming.

Doesn't change the fact that this government is a shower that will run this country into the ground based on idiotic dogma, but it sweetens the bitter pill a bit.

ska_lover

Graham29 wrote: »

ska_lover wrote: »

All the single parents I know (several) are in that situation as they have had children very quickly in a new relationship and not gotten to know the other person well enough, that is irresponsible. Help should be there for single parents who find themselves unable to provide, I don't feel they should keep getting more benefits for having more children though, contraception is free from the family planning clinic. Benefits need to be a lifeline for a short period, not a way of life for many years.

Oh yes, I totally agree, benefits should be a lifeline for a short period, a way of getting back on your feet.

I am not sure what kind of circles you mix in, but please dont insinuate that all single parents are the same as your friends. I do not know anyone who has had children after being together for a short while -i.e not married for a few years. There are break ups of marraiges after 30 years aren't there. Parents of teenagers break up after being together for decades.

I do totally agree that people should not keep getting more benefits for having more children, to get pregnant whilst on benefits is definately irresponsible.

sunnyone

Oh yes, I totally agree, benefits should be a lifeline for a short period, a way of getting back on your feet.

what about the seriously ill and disabled, many cant work at all for long periods or even forever for the most seriously ill/disabled.

ska_lover

sunnyone wrote: »

what about the seriously ill and disabled, many cant work at all for long periods or even forever for the most seriously ill/disabled.

Yes I know... we were talking single parents on this occasion. This has been taken out of context - if you had quoted the whole post that would have been obvious

sunnyone

ska_lover wrote: »

Yes I know... we were talking single parents on this occasion. This has been taken out of context - if you had quoted the whole post that would have been obvious

There are seriously ill/disabled single parents too, I know of several on this site alone.

flight747

I am a disability lone parent with my disability son. I am happy with benefits. I earn £1000 a month and it work out better than not find a job. What the point of go to work and earn less and got nothing to live on, no holiday, no life for my son. No thanks David Camerson. Do your maths again and Tory will going to lose next general election and bring back Labour and we all will go back to benefits better off again.

flight747

sunnyone wrote: »

what about the seriously ill and disabled, many cant work at all for long periods or even forever for the most seriously ill/disabled.

They staying on the benefits, or otherwise Tory will be throw out of government for breach of human rights act in EU European court!

dmg24

flight747 wrote: »

I am a disability lone parent with my disability son. I am happy with benefits. I earn £1000 a month and it work out better than not find a job. What the point of go to work and earn less and got nothing to live on, no holiday, no life for my son. No thanks David Camerson. Do your maths again and Tory will going to lose next general election and bring back Labour and we all will go back to benefits better off again.

You do not earn £1000. You receive £1000 in benefits.