MSE News: Welfare reforms 'to hit disabled'

clemmatis

krisskross wrote: »

Indeed it doesn't but a recent poster saying he receives £1100 a month on disability benefits as opposed to the ~£300 he would get on JSA would seem to show why people are anxious to stay on disability benefits.

But if he receives DLA then if he applied for JSA instead of ESA he would receive £1100 a month minus the difference between JSA and ESA (if any), so, would receive, what? £1000?

Anny_2

Personal care costs approx £10 - £15 per hour and help with housework is £7 - £10 per hour, so for 10 hours personal care and 4 hours help with housework it would cost £128 per weeks high rate care is £77.45 - med is £51.85 and low rate is £20.55, so even on high rate care there is a deficit of £50.55 on the lowest cost of care and help with housework, the benefit rates are national but the care costs are not, so if you live in London, for instance, the care cost will be greater.

Severe disability premium is £58.20 per week (eligible if med or high rate care) and enhanced disability is £14.80 (high rate care only) again national rate.

Single person aged 48 -

101.35 (inc disability prem/IS)
58.20 severe disability premium
14.80 enhanced disability

---

174.35 Total

DLA
77.45 HR care
54.05 HR mobility

---

121 .40

£174.35 + £121.40 = £295.75

Those with no disability have no disability costs and their benefits are therefore lower, so a single person on JSA will get less. I am using the lowest costs here and assuming the highest DLA awards and also that the person can drive (so no taxi costs), :-

295.75
128.00 - costs for personal care/h/work help
54.05 - mobility car

---

113.70


So £113.70 per week for food, cleaning products, toiletries, utility bills (heating/gas and electricity for washing machine costs possibly higher depending on disability ), water rates, insurances, petrol, any disability aids, replacement of household items,clothes, birthday/Christmas/anniversary cards / presents, stamps, postage. I am not adding social events here or even a cup of tea in a cafe. Granted, there are no prescription charges, but if you have 4,5,6 + items on prescription on a regular basis as opposed to one or two every few months, if that, for a non-disabled person, then surely it is obvious why they are free on certain benefits and this is also assuming there is no 'top up' rent to pay.

The fictitious person in the above example NEEDS - not wants or desires personal care/ help with h/work and NEEDS - not wants or desires a mobility or NEEDS not wants transport at high cost (eg taxis) and certainly did not NEED or WANT a disability!

The fictitious person is also assumed to be genuine and the low quotes of the numbers who are fraudulently claiming disability benefits would seem to support that many disabled people are genuine and are being 'scapegoated'. Half of disabled people are living below the poverty level threshold, after making adjustments for their disability related costs and even without the adjustments two in five are found to be in poverty.

We now have a system more obsessed with someone getting what they shouldn't, than looking after those who need and deserve help. Some of the posters on this thread would appear to be obsessed in exactly that way.

Disturbingly, whilst nothing new, the scapegoating of disabled people for society's ills has intensified and become more brazen in recent years, especially on the internet. Cries of "burdens to society", "drain on taxpayers" and "scroungers", eerily echo Nazi slogans used to condone the systematic murder of disabled adults and children during the Holocaust.

rogerblack

clemmatis wrote: »

But if he receives DLA then if he applied for JSA instead of ESA he would receive £1100 a month minus the difference between JSA and ESA (if any), so, would receive, what? £1000?

Perhaps similar.
Though the base rate of ESA is the same as JSA, and there is a extra 'support/work-related' group payment made - there are also disability premiums under JSA that have more lax criteria than under ESA.

This may mean that a premium comes in to replace the lost money almost entirely.

SandraScarlett

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

It's not. It's also the under 25s, under 35s, social housing tenants on Housing Benefit who have a spare room, and various others. Most people on benefits in fact, unless they have hoards of children or, (dare I say it) are Pensioners.

How else is the Welfare bill going to come down unless the way we dish it out is curtailed?

Wondered how long it would take for Pensioners to get a mention! That's right, those who are not only getting a SRP, but are often disabled as well!

If I want to go mad at the weekend, and go out :eek: I'm charged £19.48 per hour for a sitter for my DH. So a few hours respite, at nearly 60 quid isn't going to be an option very often.

xx

Dunroamin

Anny wrote: »

Personal care costs approx £10 - £15 per hour and help with housework is £7 - £10 per hour, so for 10 hours personal care and 4 hours help with housework it would cost £128 per weeks high rate care is £77.45 - med is £51.85 and low rate is £20.55, so even on high rate care there is a deficit of £50.55 on the lowest cost of care and help with housework, the benefit rates are national but the care costs are not, so if you live in London, for instance, the care cost will be greater.

Severe disability premium is £58.20 per week (eligible if med or high rate care) and enhanced disability is £14.80 (high rate care only) again national rate.

Single person aged 48 -

101.35 (inc disability prem/IS)
58.20 severe disability premium
14.80 enhanced disability

---

174.35 Total

DLA
77.45 HR care
54.05 HR mobility

---

121 .40

£174.35 + £121.40 = £295.75

Those with no disability have no disability costs and their benefits are therefore lower, so a single person on JSA will get less. I am using the lowest costs here and assuming the highest DLA awards and also that the person can drive (so no taxi costs), :-

295.75
128.00 - costs for personal care/h/work help
54.05 - mobility car

---

113.70


So £113.70 per week for food, cleaning products, toiletries, utility bills (heating/gas and electricity for washing machine costs possibly higher depending on disability ), water rates, insurances, petrol, any disability aids, replacement of household items,clothes, birthday/Christmas/anniversary cards / presents, stamps, postage. I am not adding social events here or even a cup of tea in a cafe. Granted, there are no prescription charges, but if you have 4,5,6 + items on prescription on a regular basis as opposed to one or two every few months, if that, for a non-disabled person, then surely it is obvious why they are free on certain benefits and this is also assuming there is no 'top up' rent to pay.

The fictitious person in the above example NEEDS - not wants or desires personal care/ help with h/work and NEEDS - not wants or desires a mobility or NEEDS not wants transport at high cost (eg taxis) and certainly did not NEED or WANT a disability!

The fictitious person is also assumed to be genuine and the low quotes of the numbers who are fraudulently claiming disability benefits would seem to support that many disabled people are genuine and are being 'scapegoated'. Half of disabled people are living below the poverty level threshold, after making adjustments for their disability related costs and even without the adjustments two in five are found to be in poverty.

We now have a system more obsessed with someone getting what they shouldn't, than looking after those who need and deserve help. Some of the posters on this thread would appear to be obsessed in the exactly that way.

Disturbingly, whilst nothing new, the scapegoating of disabled people for society's ills has intensified and become more brazen in recent years, especially on the internet. Cries of "burdens to society", "drain on taxpayers" and "scroungers", eerily echo Nazi slogans used to condone the systematic murder of disabled adults and children during the Holocaust.

It interests me to see that you think it possible for someone to be able to drive (even in London!) but not be able to operate a vacuum cleaner or washing machine.

While there may be a tiny minority of people in this a situation, I'm surprised that you've singled them out as a typical example.

krisskross

Dunroamin wrote: »

It interests me to see that you think it possible for someone to be able to drive (even in London!) but not be able to operate a vacuum cleaner or washing machine.

While there may be a tiny minority of people in this a situation, I'm surprised that you've singled them out as a typical example.

when people have their claimed for needs met then i have no problem at all with them receiving the payments to help pay for them.

However we see many posters who have apparently claimed for needs, including 24/7 care and supervision, who have absolutely nothing in place to meet or alleviate those needs. What is the point of giving the money then?

The answer is always that it would not be possible to pay for this round the clock help from DLA payments but if someone is managing without the help for years on end then surely they can manage without the payments?

Another answer is that is enough for the need to exist to justify the payment but does it really exist if if doesn't need addressing?

Anny_2

Dunroamin wrote: »

It interests me to see that you think it possible for someone to be able to drive (even in London!) but not be able to operate a vacuum cleaner or washing machine.

While there may be a tiny minority of people in this a situation, I'm surprised that you've singled them out as a typical example.

You just will not accept facts will you? and I wonder just what point you are trying to prove - you have proved many to me already but perhaps not ones you would wish to own.

If you read before you 'jumped' you will see I have acknowledge the need for taxis in the scenario and so while I do indeed *acknowledge that someone may be able to drive, but not operate a vacuum or washing machine, I tried to give the 'cheaper option' rather than the very high price of taxi fares, that would use DLA mobility up in perhaps one/two journeys! If the disabled person lived in London and did not drive and could not afford more than one/two taxis journeys with the £50, then would it suit you if they were housebound and not able to participate in society? would that
be acceptable to you? No doubt there are many in just that situation and I find it disgusting that some people think it is OK and further OK to add to that by targeting disabled benefits.

*I feel you would benefit by doing some research on the differing disabilities and the impact on the individual, instead of constantly
judging everyone the same, perhaps then you would also see that limitations with regard to one activity are not always transferred to another - far too complicated for me to try to explain on here - but even if I did you would still not accept the truth - you have your own version of the truth and it would appear you are sticking to it!

Regarding - your 'tiny minority' - where do you get your facts from?
I find it is always a good idea to debate from a strong knowledge base of fact, a base from which the proof can be given if asked for.

I am pleased to say there remains many intelligent and empathetic individuals who are thankfully unwilling to be manipulated by politicians and right wing tabloids and will not collude by remaining silent with the scapegoating of disabled people.

I am proud to pay taxes that support disabled people.

seven-day-weekend

SandraScarlett wrote: »

Wondered how long it would take for Pensioners to get a mention! That's right, those who are not only getting a SRP, but are often disabled as well!

If I want to go mad at the weekend, and go out :eek: I'm charged £19.48 per hour for a sitter for my DH. So a few hours respite, at nearly 60 quid isn't going to be an option very often.

xx

I am a pensioner myself.

And I didn't say that you shouldn't get anything you are entitled to. I just said that, on the whole, pensioners are not included in the benefit cuts.

Dunroamin

Anny wrote: »

You just will not accept facts will you? and I wonder just what point you are trying to prove - you have proved many to me already but perhaps not ones you would wish to own.

If you read before you 'jumped' you will see I have acknowledge the need for taxis in the scenario and so while I do indeed *acknowledge that someone may be able to drive, but not operate a vacuum or washing machine, I tried to give the 'cheaper option' rather than the very high price of taxi fares, that would use DLA mobility up in perhaps one/two journeys! If the disabled person lived in London and did not drive and could not afford more than one/two taxis journeys with the £50, then would it suit you if they were housebound and not able to participate in society? would that
be acceptable to you? No doubt there are many in just that situation and I find it disgusting that some people think it is OK and further OK to add to that by targeting disabled benefits.

*I feel you would benefit by doing some research on the differing disabilities and the impact on the individual, instead of constantly
judging everyone the same, perhaps then you would also see that limitations with regard to one activity are not always transferred to another - far too complicated for me to try to explain on here - but even if I did you would still not accept the truth - you have your own version of the truth and it would appear you are sticking to it!

Regarding - your 'tiny minority' - where do you get your facts from?
I find it is always a good idea to debate from a strong knowledge base of fact, a base from which the proof can be given if asked for.

I am pleased to say there remains many intelligent and empathetic individuals who are thankfully unwilling to be manipulated by politicians and right wing tabloids and will not collude by remaining silent with the scapegoating of disabled people.

I am proud to pay taxes that support disabled people.

I am happy to pay taxes to support people who need help and believe strongly in paying more tax to do it better. I've never read a tabloid paper in my life and my political views are far to the left of any current mainstream party.

If you use figures for a Motability car (which is what I assume you meant) in your costs then it isn't surprising that anyone reading would take this to be the relevant situation. As for one or two taxi journeys taking up all of the DLA HRM, that's really not worthy of a comment!

JohnRo

Dunroamin wrote: »

I am happy to pay taxes to support people who need help and believe strongly in paying more tax to do it better. I've never read a tabloid paper in my life and my political views are far to the left of any current mainstream party.

If you use figures for a Motability car (which is what I assume you meant) in your costs then it isn't surprising that anyone reading would take this to be the relevant situation. As for one or two taxi journeys taking up all of the DLA HRM, that's really not worthy of a comment!

It's not as ridiculous as you seem to imply.

Higher Rate Mobility is £54.05 p.w.

http://yourtaximeter.com/main#/main

a 3 mile round journey would typically cost me around £12, if caught in heavy traffic it could get quite pricey.