MSE News: Government considers tougher benefit sanctions

Morlock

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Many subprimers were offered a low start interest rate and then went onto a higher fixed rate after a set time.

Rubbish, the majority of subprime mortgages were adjustable rate, not fixed rate mortgages. Hence, why so many people defaulted when interest rates rose.

Dunroamin

RuthMarianna wrote: »

How is saying that we should protest in support of people less able to do so defeatest and condescending? Isn't helping those weaker or less able to do so part of being a civilised society. It is not saying they are unable to do it al all but should we all not care enough to want to do something about it.

Your posts were very much implying that you need to do this for disabled people because they can't do it for themselves. I feel that people need to be empowered rather than protected.

Dunroamin

RuthMarianna wrote: »

I must say that I fail to understand your remark.

My husband is well able to make his own protests as he has a physical disability and neither a mental health problem nor a learning difficulty and I am not claiming to fight his fight or speak on his behalf. But there are others who are not in a position to either fight or even understand the system they are fighting. Surely the rest of us should have enough compassion to want to fight injustice on their behalf. After all joining a protest group or going into politics should be about an ideology you believe in and not just to feather your own nest.

Ignore my stalker, wattdallas' remark was aimed at me rather than you.

RuthMarianna

Dunroamin wrote: »

Your posts were very much implying that you need to do this for disabled people because they can't do it for themselves. I feel that people need to be empowered rather than protected.

I absolutely agree but saying they need to be empowered implies that first they need some help before thay are empowered. But also there will always be those who are unable to speak for themselvs and who need an advocate to speak for them.

wattdallas

RuthMarianna wrote: »

I must say that I fail to understand your remark.

My husband is well able to make his own protests as he has a physical disability and neither a mental health problem nor a learning difficulty and I am not claiming to fight his fight or speak on his behalf. But there are others who are not in a position to either fight or even understand the system they are fighting. Surely the rest of us should have enough compassion to want to fight injustice on their behalf. After all joining a protest group or going into politics should be about an ideology you believe in and not just to feather your own nest.

My post was not aimed at you ,sorry for the confusion.I agree with your statement

kingfisherblue

I think this should be in Discussion Time, rather than on this board. I just have one comment to add, though. Someone posted that everyone can vote (it was quite early in the thread and I can't remember the exact wording). There are some disabled people who can't vote, such as those with learning difficulties deemed to be severe enough that they don't understand the process. My son isn't old enough to vote yet, but he will come into this category. However, I realise that most disabled adults do have the ability and right to vote.

RuthMarianna

People always talk about food stamps as a solution. Maybe they feel that people in receipt of benefits are misspending - say buying cigarettes and alcohol rather than feeding their children.

This overlooks the fact that food is only one part of a household budget and at a time when other costs such as gas and electricity are on the increase one of the few essential parts of the budget apart from clothing which can be squeezed when other bills have to be paid. There are numerous threads on here about how to budget to make your money for food go further. If a family were in receipt of food stamps it would not only depend on a government department getting that proportion correct but it will also take away the opportunity for people to use their wits to take advantage of savings and economies on food to help other parts of their budget. People may join a food buying co-op or grow their own fruit and veg, or find a cheaper source online or even forage for free food. Should these people have the initiative taken away from them as I am sure those who are determined to spend their money on smoking and drinking will find someone to buy the stamps from them in order to continue their habit except that they will have to sell the stamps at less than face value and feed their children even worse than they do now.

Morlock

BigAunty wrote: »

The fact that Labour led us into a situation where more was paid out in benefits than received in income tax receipts was of no concern to anyone receiving benefits who are now paying the price of Labour's spree and negligent banking system - the conservatives will be spanked for correcting an unaffordable benefits spree.

Why are you so obsessed with benefit costs exceeding income tax? Income tax is not the only source of revenue for the government.

Rather than lowering the standard of living for benefit claimants, which incidentally includes a large percentage of the working population, how about clamping down on offshore tax havens where hundreds of billions are stashed to avoid paying tens of billions in tax each year?

BigAunty

Morlock wrote: »

Why are you so obsessed with benefit costs exceeding income tax? Income tax is not the only source of revenue for the government.

It's true - there's VAT and corporation tax, plus stamp duty, capital gains tax and other forms of income.

But in the main, apart from brief blips, the benefit bill has never exceeded what employees pay in income tax and is therefore seen to be a measure of economic health, a sensible baseline.

Labour led us into a benefits abyss where the expenditure was set to exceed what is paid in income tax as the norm.

The govt should claim down on every form of tax evasion which is far, far higher than the sums lost to benefit fraud or errors. Look at Greece to see what happens when there is rampant tax evasion.

But the nation has to get used to the fact that our economic growth isn't coping with the ever expanding costs of the welfare state.

I don't like the Tories one bit but we are in an economic hole which is the worst for 80 years - you can call it an attack on the poor and vulnerable or you can accept that govt policies have led to a high cost/low wage economy with an ever increasing pool of benefit claimants and changes have to be made.

kingfisherblue

RuthMarianna wrote: »

People always talk about food stamps as a solution. Maybe they feel that people in receipt of benefits are misspending - say buying cigarettes and alcohol rather than feeding their children.

This overlooks the fact that food is only one part of a household budget and at a time when other costs such as gas and electricity are on the increase one of the few essential parts of the budget apart from clothing which can be squeezed when other bills have to be paid. There are numerous threads on here about how to budget to make your money for food go further. If a family were in receipt of food stamps it would not only depend on a government department getting that proportion correct but it will also take away the opportunity for people to use their wits to take advantage of savings and economies on food to help other parts of their budget. People may join a food buying co-op or grow their own fruit and veg, or find a cheaper source online or even forage for free food. Should these people have the initiative taken away from them as I am sure those who are determined to spend their money on smoking and drinking will find someone to buy the stamps from them in order to continue their habit except that they will have to sell the stamps at less than face value and feed their children even worse than they do now.

I belong to a food co-op run by the local social housing group. I live in a mortgaged property, and you don't have to rent from them to join.

Every Wednesday I order and pay for my fruit, veg, salad or eggs fort he following week. £3 a bag for fruit, salad and veg, or £1 for six free range eggs - all locally sourced where possible.

A typical fruit bag contains
4 oranges/tangerines/clemantines
4 apples
4 pears
4 bananas
6 kiwi fruit
1 melon

A typical veg bag contains:
1 bag of potatoes
1 cauliflower
1 large head of broccoli
4 large carrots
2 onions
1 leek

This would cost a lot more in the supermarket. You don't have any choice in the contents of the bag, but that doesn't worry me. if anyone has a similar scheme in their area, it's well worth joining - the food is lovely and fresh, as well as inexpensive.