MSE News: 'I'm on benefits but I'm no scrounger'

mummymanchester

MSE_Helen wrote: »

This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

"Headlines about benefits claimants being scroungers are common. Here, one recipient with a rare tumour hits back


"My heart goes out to Ross and his obvious incapacity. If only all benefit claimants were as honest. I am glad he uses his obvious talents as an advocate to help others, as this will increase his self esteem and quality of life despite the money situation. My husband has lung cancer, but the children are grown and the house paid for. Macmillan nurses are absolute mustard for seeing a patient gets everything they are entitled to, even a car disabled badge and car tax exemption. (I drive my husband around as he never has driven.) Though disabled myself, I work part time. Check with Macmillan. Best and warmest wishes."

zigzigzag

iamthedoctor77 wrote: »

Please remember, my article was about quashing the myth that we all get £26k a year and the discrimination some of us have to put up with. I wasn't bleeting about not getting enough. That doesn't alter the fact that it is harder to keep a family afloat on £11k a year than it is a full time wage.

Ross I really do want to be able to put myself in your shoes and know what it's like for you and your family to be on benefits. I am appalled that you face any discrimination, that is wrong.
But I feel that I can't fully understand the situation because the figures given aren't comparing like with like - the £26k is a total (including housing and council tax credit), but your £11k figure is an unknown; and I can't compare your £11k with 'a full time wage' because people need to pay housing out of their full time wages, and I don't know (but I doubt) whether housing comes out of your amount. So I can't compare these figures, and I'm left confused.
As someone said above, if we could just clear this point up then we could all move on to discuss the other important issues you write about.

jgriggle

littlerat wrote: »

Just done an entitledto check, on min wage @ 40 hours a week, 1 partner working, 2 kids who can share a room (so 2 bed HB). Working on local council tax rates and LHA rates, so a bit of variation. Pretty sure I've screwed it up though...

We have:

Working tax credit: £39.81
Child tax credit: 108.29
Council tax benefit: £4.61
Housing Benefit: 71.88
Child Benefit: 33.70

That's £258.29 a week - £181.80 in your hand, so to speak.



That cannot be right. If it is I'm finding a bloke and knocking out a kid or 2. :eek:

Don't forget though that to get all that you'll have to move into a rented house that's much smaller than where you live now. That rented house will cost you maybe £200 - £300 more per month than your mortgage does now.

So all that lovely extra cash will in fact go straight to your landlord, and you'll actually have a worse standard of living overall. Good luck!

Mrs_Arcanum

Flyboy152 wrote: »

:huh:

What are you on about?

You changed it to THEIR as a correction. :cool:

Paul_Herring

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

You changed it to THEIR as a correction. :cool:

Actually he didn't. He inserted it.

Original:

...kicking people when they're down sells papers.

'Correction':

...kicking people when they're down sells their papers.

burky1959_2

I work a 40 hour week, I have 2 children, 1 at college, 1 doing voluntary work which the company has agreed they will train him, So he isnt entitled to any Job seekers, my daughter recieves nothing watsoever for attending college. I get Child benefit £20.00 and Child tax credit £7.90 per week for her, so after paying my bills I am left with £200.00 per month for food. I walk too and from work every day as I just havent got the fare, this takes me 55 mins there and back. my 17 year old has never had a holiday in her life, we dont have a flat screen tv, mine is a second hand one. Life seems so unfair. If your cant work then that I can understand but when Im flogging myself day and night and they have more than me and mine, then the system needs to be changed

qetu1357

burky1959 wrote: »

I work a 40 hour week, I have 2 children, 1 at college, 1 doing voluntary work which the company has agreed they will train him, So he isnt entitled to any Job seekers, my daughter recieves nothing watsoever for attending college. I get Child benefit £20.00 and Child tax credit £7.90 per week for her, so after paying my bills I am left with £200.00 per month for food. I walk too and from work every day as I just havent got the fare, this takes me 55 mins there and back. my 17 year old has never had a holiday in her life, we dont have a flat screen tv, mine is a second hand one. Life seems so unfair. If your cant work then that I can understand but when Im flogging myself day and night and they have more than me and mine, then the system needs to be changed

Well said.

The $64,000 question (or should that be £26k question) is how the government can engineer things so that those who work are better off than if they didn't.

The only way is to either increase pay (including tax credits) and/or decrease benefits.

I don't think we will ever get to a position where work always pays more than not working, but we need to get to the point where it is an notable exception when it doesn't.

Currently too often it pays not to work.

scootw1

zigzigzag wrote: »

Ross I really do want to be able to put myself in your shoes and know what it's like for you and your family to be on benefits. I am appalled that you face any discrimination, that is wrong.
But I feel that I can't fully understand the situation because the figures given aren't comparing like with like - the £26k is a total (including housing and council tax credit), but your £11k figure is an unknown; and I can't compare your £11k with 'a full time wage' because people need to pay housing out of their full time wages, and I don't know (but I doubt) whether housing comes out of your amount. So I can't compare these figures, and I'm left confused.
As someone said above, if we could just clear this point up then we could all move on to discuss the other important issues you write about.

I wonder why Ross has disappeared as soon as we have asked him to clarify his posting concerning the amount he gets?

zagfles

qetu1357 wrote: »

Well said.

The $64,000 question (or should that be £26k question) is how the government can engineer things so that those who work are better off than if they didn't.

The only way is to either increase pay (including tax credits) and/or decrease benefits.

I don't think we will ever get to a position where work always pays more than not working, but we need to get to the point where it is an notable exception when it doesn't.

Currently too often it pays not to work.

That's another myth - most people are better off working. In many cases not much better off, but better off nonetheless.

The main exception is those who claim SMI (mortgage interest support) where there is a cliff-edge rather than a taper. But the other major means tested benefits are all tapered so from an income point of view your total income doesn't drop when you start work. Of course once you start adding travel to work costs and other costs associated with working (more ready meals/takeaways etc) the picture can change. Also of course childcare, though even then people are usually better off in work provided they earn more than the childcare costs, as there's a lot of support in tax credits for childcare.

But the marginal "tax" rates are very high for those at the bottom, so people will often end up working for a wage of less than £1 an hour (after tax/NI/tax credits & benefits withdrawal are taken into account).

The new UC will make this better, the marginal rates will be a bit lower.

Personally I'm in favour of a radical solution of abolishing all means testing completely and having a "citizen's income" payable to everyone, with a flat rate of tax. Basically incorporating benefit withdrawal into taxation. This would also remove the stigma associated with claiming benefits - since everyone is entitled (eg there's not really any stigma associated with claiming child benefit, or the state pension).

But it won't happen as tax rates will clearly have to go up, and for the last 30 years successive govts have been obsessed with lowering tax rates, not increasing them.

troubrs

Regardless of the amounts, numbers etc, this article brought tears yo my eyes. I know from my own experience how hard it is to reduce your income dramatically, I am now earning 4.7% of the income I used to earn. I had almost 3 months on JSA & signed off after then, even though I was still entitled to receive it. because it just felt so awful - being treated like a scrounger, hissed at by the people who worked there, told to produce 'evidence' of my recent job hunting even though I had told them I had got a new job which couldn't start for another 6 weeks. I'm lucky, my husband has now got a new job - much worse pay than before, & I have a new job - only a few hours a week, but I no longer have to pay massive childcare bills & I get to have the time with my kids. I was in a far better position than Ross, but had a taste of the attitudes etc. I wish him all the best & hope things turn for the better for him & his family soon!