MSE News: George Osborne to make £10bn welfare cuts

princessdon

Tottyshouse wrote: »

I find it bizarre though that getting your husband of say 40 years out of bed - or making your wife of the same duration breakfast can be considered "care" that requires payment. Isn't that what you do in a marriage or committed relationship? In sickness and in health and all that? My nana had severe angina so my granda did all of the "heavy" work around the house. My granda had a lot of falls before he died so my nana never left him alone. They would never have expected payment for their commitment to each other. Mind you both have been dead for 25 years now so maybe that "old school" way of thinking is dying out.[/QUOTE]

No I think it is claimant related and open to abuse. Eg I care for my GM as she needs help and I wouldn't dream of claiming money for something that I see is being a caring family member, any more than she expected payment for being my gran and caring for me over the years. I'm not in my 4th decade of life yet and I think it stinks for some cases.

But .. If I had to give up work to care for her 24/7 then I wouldn't rule it out as I would need to live somehow.

Eg a mother in a well paid job who has a severely disabled child I think needs this payment (and more), a wife who gives up work to look after a partner following a stroke who cares 24/7 (again deserves this and more), someone who is being a wife/husband and doing a bit more housework is a different kettle of fish to me.

There are those that completely take the micky out of this and abuse it though and I agree this and IS (and passported benefits) need a real overhaul and looking it. You see posts on here of people who will work right up to the £100 limit - rarely does anyone talk of "I need to get carers in to look after them whilst I am at work" - so I often wonder what happens to that person whilst they work 2 or 3 days a week, I hope they make alternative arrangements.

mazza111

No need to quote me, I've said I find it wrong too. And it is definitely open to abuse.

I could have claimed it 7 years ago before my dad died but didn't. I could claim it for my mum now, but I don't (don't quite make up the hours, but could still claim it and diddle them), the one that I spend more doing for is my dd, who I can't claim for, not that I would, but because she only gets LRC...I can't anyhoo, even though, I'm sure if I added it up, it would add to more than the required hours.

Think this is something they should be looking into instead of putting genuinely sick people off benefits and forcing them onto job seekers.

The thing that's worrying me is if my health gets much worse, who's going to do for my dd then. The other day my own knee went out and didn't want to go back in, so had to get take away ordered and her brother to help her into bed etc.

Bayblue

It does need a huge overhaul, both the claiming for care and so called 'passport' benefits system. But, I am not confident that it will get looked into any time soon and that's' because the largest group in receipt of these benefits is that group that no political party wants to be seen to upset...pensioners. Nope, better to review and make changes to benefits for younger people claiming to be too ill to work at all and to the lowest of the low.. those claiming job seekers allowance.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that those benefits don't need looking at and changes cannot be made, but TBH this 'pensioners shouldn't /cannot be affected by any changes' is nothing to do with kindness or perceived fairness and everything to do with vote-bagging. Nobody wants to be the party that takes away anything from 'poor pensioners'. And all the while pensioners who have saved for their retirement, get less than those who didn't bother.

I honestly don't know what to do about my own retirement, not yet- in a few years.. alright 20!) because with my fairly limited resources I wonder if I may be better off spending it all now and getting my rent, council tax paid for me when I retire thankyouverymuch. But then that's not me, doesn't feel right somehow. And also I expect that resources will be a lot more scarce in the future. Then again maybe not, because as I said, nobody wants to pee off the pensioners..

princessdon

Bayblue wrote: »

It does need a huge overhaul, both the claiming for care and so called 'passport' benefits system. But, I am not confident that it will get looked into any time soon and that's' because the largest group in receipt of these benefits is that group that no political party wants to be seen to upset...pensioners. Nope, better to review and make changes to benefits for younger people claiming to be too ill to work at all and to the lowest of the low.. those claiming job seekers allowance.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that those benefits don't need looking at and changes cannot be made, but TBH this 'pensioners shouldn't /cannot be affected by any changes' is nothing to do with kindness or perceived fairness and everything to do with vote-bagging. Nobody wants to be the party that takes away anything from 'poor pensioners'. And all the while pensioners who have saved for their retirement, get less than those who didn't bother.

I honestly don't know what to do about my own retirement, not yet- in a few years.. alright 20!) because with my fairly limited resources I wonder if I may be better off spending it all now and getting my rent, council tax paid for me when I retire thankyouverymuch. But then that's not me, doesn't feel right somehow. And also I expect that resources will be a lot more scarce in the future. Then again maybe not, because as I said, nobody wants to pee off the pensioners..

I so agree, I'd bet my mortage that I won't get a state pension when I retire in nearly 30 years. Even though I have paid 22 years of stamp to date with 30 potential to go. I'd be happy supporting myself - if they gave me an NI rebate - but I know my generation will paying for the extravagance of the last few years.

It annoys me when I can't go on holiday as often as friends (they don't have private pensions) to think that it will be held against me in the future. The whole system is wrong and I totally agree re pensions but probably because of personal reasons. My GM is pennies over the PC limit. I never batted an eyelid - she had enough to live on and owned her home.

Then she needed to move into a "care home" - Ie sheltered Accommodation where there are carers and a pull cord due to illness. She now pays £600 a month (circa) for that rent because she is pennies over. Someone who never worked or had a small pension would get their rent paid.

Also for HB reasons there is a 26 week disregard if up for sale, but not for PC. Strange system we have.

Don't work in life and we will look after you in pension, work in life - put into a pension and you are on your own.

mazza111

It is shocking and don't doubt the system is needing looked at, but as usual it's the wrong people that it's targeting imo. And you're right, they won't target where it's needed because they are voters. Many under 25s don't vote. Sick fed up telling the dd it's because she and many others don't vote that these changes will affect them most.

System

mazza111 wrote: »

It is shocking and don't doubt the system is needing looked at, but as usual it's the wrong people that it's targeting imo. And you're right, they won't target where it's needed because they are voters. Many under 25s don't vote. Sick fed up telling the dd it's because she and many others don't vote that these changes will affect them most.

It annoys the hell out of me that people my age and younger just don't seem to vote...they seem to think it won't effect them. Last election i spent ages going through each parties manifestos and the like before making a decision and voting (some good that did but that's another story! ). I think its important to be aware of politics and make the most of your oppurtuinty to contribute to change

princessdon

I think politics should be on the PSCHE curriculum at school. Eg today my eldest (11) has been doing complex brackets and algebra. Her home work is to expland and contract sums like 4(3x-12)+5(2x+24)-6(3b--4b).

Not sure how that sets her up in life when she didn't know who George O was with the Virgin story.

mazza111

totally agree with both Messedup and PD.

The only time anything to do with politics is taught in schools up here, is in Modern Studies. And tbh it's a bit lackluster to say the least.

And yes MU, that's why they are the easiest targets when it comes to cutting benefits, because they don't vote unfortunately.

I think we can all see a few places where changes could be made that might save a bob or two, but the under 25s and the sick are not ones that I'd be targeting. Notice I did leave disabled out of that, as there are some there swinging the lead too, especially when it comes to CA.

MUMZ2BEE

topaziem wrote: »

And clearly racist!

No I am not racist get that right!!

Dunroamin

princessdon wrote: »

I think politics should be on the PSCHE curriculum at school. Eg today my eldest (11) has been doing complex brackets and algebra. Her home work is to expland and contract sums like 4(3x-12)+5(2x+24)-6(3b--4b).

Not sure how that sets her up in life when she didn't know who George O was with the Virgin story.

Isn't it mainly a parents' role to encourage their children to take an interest in current affairs and politics?