universal credit?

Vincent_Buenisedes

zagfles wrote: »

Why would someone paralysed down one side be incapable of working? I could do my job, and would want to. I'd struggle with other stuff but working would be the least of my worries.

Obviously the scope of jobs such people could do would be limited, but there's nothing wrong in the principle that people should seek work despite disabilites, rather than be chucked on the scrapheap of lifelong benefits dependancy.

Have a read of "A Brief History of Time" if you want to see what far more seriously disabled people are capable of.

Are you having a laugh?

sunnyone

zagfles wrote: »

Why would someone paralysed down one side be incapable of working? I could do my job, and would want to. I'd struggle with other stuff but working would be the least of my worries.

Obviously the scope of jobs such people could do would be limited, but there's nothing wrong in the principle that people should seek work despite disabilites, rather than be chucked on the scrapheap of lifelong benefits dependancy.

Have a read of "A Brief History of Time" if you want to see what far more seriously disabled people are capable of.

Vincent_Buenisedes wrote: »

Are you having a laugh?

No he isnt, I want to work but being a full time electric wheelchair user (NHS provided so not an ebay crip) who also has very limited use on the primary hand and limited use of the other hand who is also profoundly deaf, what job can I do?

My nephew is on JSA, he has R hemi CP and is a Total so he has more job prespects than me even though I have the education and he is only on has level 3.

real1314

Won't start until 2013, probably October of that year afaik.

Issues around ability to work are not exclusive to UC though, those changes are coming anyway.

A lifetime in work for those that can, to whatever degree, will be better than a lifetime on benefits - economically, socially, psychologically, physically, etc. :cool:

zagfles

Reiwxib wrote: »

Thats very fast, I can not see such a big change happening so quickly.

There will be huge changes if the max any household can get is 500 per week. It sounds a lot but most of that will be housing and council tax ben. Then after all bills, gas, water, electric, phone and TV licence have been paid there will not much left to live on.

There will be this mass exodus from London and other expensive areas. Because rent and council tax would be most of that 500wk for any family with a couple of kids.

The UC won't include CTB, that's going to be replaced by some local scheme.

The LHA rates for 3-bed houses in places like Hillingdon, Lambeth, Southwark are well under £300, so it leaves over £200 for everything else. Gone are the days of £700pw HB for living in Westminster!

Sixer

I very much doubt the benefits cap will go ahead.

zagfles

Sixer wrote: »

I very much doubt the benefits cap will go ahead.

They will almost certainly water it down - it was a bit of a sledgehammer and would result in some strange anomilies. It was a populist headline grabber, but the underlying principle will be maintained ie not paying vast amounts in HB etc in places like Westminster, City etc when people could live half a mile across the river for half the rent!

nogginthenog

Lady_strange wrote: »

Having spoken to someone who helps people deal with the dwp on a regular basis, this is something we want to take a looooooong time.

It is going to screw so many people over. Apparently under the proposed changes, somebody who is paralised down one side will be classed as fit to work.

Forget any issues which affect people working, 99% of people will be classed as fit to work. Even if you suffer with mental health issues, fatigue, mobility issues, what ever the dissability you will be told you can work.

You should not be allowed to post this claptrap on a help foum and scaring people..

The Univeral Credit is about putting a multitude of benefits under one umbrella in a bid to simplify things.

It is not about being fit for work,although ESA will be a component of the Universal Credit.

zagfles

Reiwxib wrote: »

Why do some doubt this 500 per wk cap will go ahead what do you base your opinion on?

Yes there will be huge changes and huge amounts of people will move away from London, but this is not a reason to say the universal credit will not go ahead.

There are various rumours about "exceptions" to the cap eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13747598

Nobody said UC won't go ahead - it will, even Labour are in favour in principle. That's a different question to the cap.

Adereterial

Lady_strange wrote: »

Having spoken to someone who helps people deal with the dwp on a regular basis, this is something we want to take a looooooong time.

It is going to screw so many people over. Apparently under the proposed changes, somebody who is paralised down one side will be classed as fit to work.

Forget any issues which affect people working, 99% of people will be classed as fit to work. Even if you suffer with mental health issues, fatigue, mobility issues, what ever the dissability you will be told you can work.

Details of the conditionality requirements have not yet been decided, so you're either making this up or the person you have spoken to has.

real1314

The real thinking benhind UC is not Incapacity for Work / Ability to Work and it's not the Benefits Cap. Those things might well happen / be happening, but they are not really what UC is about.

UC is all about resolving the horrendous mess of benefit tapers and disregards, and the numerous different benefit types and components that make the system such a confusing and incoherent system

At present if you get HB and CTB and Tax Credits, when you earn an average of £10 extra per week, say by working 2 extra hours, your tax credit goes down by about £5.50.

This leaves you £4.50 better off overall, but then HB look at the £4.50 and reduce HB by 65% of that, i.e they take £3.

Then CTB lookat the £4.50 and take 20% (?) of that which is £0.90.

The £3 taken by HB and the £0.90 taken by CTB leave you £0.60p per week better off.

So, if your employer offered to increase your hours from 25 to 35, at £6 per hour, of the extra £60 a week you'd see your income rise by £3.60. By comparison, someone on £60k a year who gets an extra £60 a week keeps £36 of it; 10x as much.

I *think* UC intends that you should see about 55% of the extra earnings, i.e £33 a week.

That is the key point of UC, not caps, and not ability to work. :cool: