Tax credits down £280 per month

somethingcorporate

sniggings wrote: »

where is the self respect in leaving your kids paying fuel, parking and all the other expenses involved in working and be £10 worse off!

Playing the self respect card no longer works as people see through it now, it is just plain silly to work for less than you can get if you don't work.

When the Government wakes up and sees the min wage is not a living wage then things might change.

Or that benefits are far too generous and need to provide an incentive to work. Hopefully the government will wake up and do something about this.

carebear13

completely agree- i'm not against people getting help if they cant work or even if they wont work albeit at a very reduced rate for the latter, but there needs to be more help for working people of any age. at the end of the day those of us paying our taxes are out there doing our bit, providing for ourselves and we just keeping getting a smack in the face with our budgets being squeezed,yet we are the ones who need the help, we get nothing for free. i understand that as things are getting tighter that everybody wants a helping hand, but what really pees me off is when people want that helpimg hand when they give nothing in return.

sniggings

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Or that benefits are far too generous and need to provide an incentive to work. Hopefully the government will wake up and do something about this.

I agree in some cases they are, when someone has 5+ kids and get extra money because one can't speak correctly etc then the money starts to get silly.

But for a single person like me £70 a week does not make it worth while to not work.

They will never lower benefits enough to where £6.08 seems a good wage to aim for, if you hope the government will ever do that you are living in another world, look how hard it was for them to get to a 26k cap! £500 a week and the min wage gives to £220 a week! see that difference!

carebear13

exactly- wages are taxed , benefits arent, so how the hell the managed to work that one god only knows.

falko89

zagfles wrote: »

You'd only get JSA for 6 months (contribution based). After that it'd be nothing based on above.

You might get housing benefit working. Check on entitledto https://www.turn2us.entitledto.co.uk/entitlementcalculator.aspx. The way all those benefits are tapered means you should never be worse off in work (not accounting for travel costs etc).

Problem is if you earn in or around the min wage your never gonna be any better off, Say my wife worked full time for example, add another £100 per week on, take of £100 per week of tax credits. And no not entitled to HB, free school meals, school clothing grant, dental care, the list goes on.

banner188

I am surrounded by people on benefits and their lifestyle is very similar to ours.
They have mobile phones, sky television, in some cases a cheap car, smoke and drink and no problem having a take away now and again. Admittedly this is more so for those with multiple kids.

The fact remains that the purpose of benefits is to provide the basics for survival. The problem is the skewed nature by which money is deemed to be spent on. For instance, it is deemed that 2 parents with 2 kids need £120 for food. We spend about £60, and still buy plenty we could do without. The clothing element is probably £20 per child a week, which no-one on low incomes spend, we go to car boots, charity shops etc...
This is why people have spare cash for the luxuries I mentioned. Only working people should have spare cash for luxuries.

The Government need to wake up to reality, reduce benefits and use it to help businesses. This will drive the economy and create more jobs for those out of work.

sniggings

carebear13 wrote: »

completely agree- i'm not against people getting help if they cant work or even if they wont work albeit at a very reduced rate for the latter, but there needs to be more help for working people of any age. at the end of the day those of us paying our taxes are out there doing our bit, providing for ourselves and we just keeping getting a smack in the face with our budgets being squeezed,yet we are the ones who need the help, we get nothing for free. i understand that as things are getting tighter that everybody wants a helping hand, but what really pees me off is when people want that helpimg hand when they give nothing in return.

a helping hand would be daft if you didn't need the help.

You say you are working but want help? why not ask for more wages, would that not make more sense? bet the people you work for are making a profit but you ask the tax pays to make up a wage you can't live on!

No company should be allowed to make a profit if they pay heir employees less than a living wage.

zagfles

falko89 wrote: »

Problem is if you earn in or around the min wage your never gonna be any better off, Say my wife worked full time for example, add another £100 per week on, take of £100 per week of tax credits. And no not entitled to HB, free school meals, school clothing grant, dental care, the list goes on.

What makes you think tax credits are tapered at 100%?

If you earn £100 more you won't lose £100 in tax credits.

somethingcorporate

sniggings wrote: »

I agree in some cases they are, when someone has 5+ kids and get extra money because one can't speak correctly etc then the money starts to get silly.

But for a single person like me £70 a week does not make it worth while to not work.

They will never lower benefits enough to where £6.08 seems a good wage to aim for, if you hope the government will ever do that you are living in another world, look how hard it was for them to get to a 26k cap! £500 a week and the min wage gives to £220 a week! see that difference!

Yep, massive difference. But do you think the issue with the maximum amount of benefits or the minimum wage?

Almost certainly a little bit of both but I'd suggest the benefits is the one where the biggest change should be expected. £26k net income is equivalent to a much higher gross salary and is ridiculously generous.

sniggings

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Yep, massive difference. But do you think the issue with the maximum amount of benefits or the minimum wage?

Almost certainly a little bit of both but I'd suggest the benefits is the one where the biggest change should be expected. £26k net income is equivalent to a much higher gross salary and is ridiculously generous.

A family with 2 or 3 or 6 kids dont stand a chance on the min wage and again if you think benefits will ever be lowed to make the min wage seem good your crazy.

Take me, if I still worked (have done all my life until this year) I would be looking at a min wage job which is about £220 a week, with a job comes extra expenses such as travel etc etc.

On benefits I get my rend paid £100
My Council tax paid £20
free other bits and bobs such as denist etc
ESA $72

so £30 worse of not working but thats before travel costs to work etc etc so for me about the same.

do the same for a family and you see why working is not an option some take.