MSE News: Benefits to rise by less than inflation: full breakdown

seven-day-weekend

BurnleyBob wrote: »

No, I can't point you to a .gov website that says the percentage.

Of the last ten households I visited the ratio was 100%. Four pensioners. Two families on lousy wages, both with kids under 16. An accountant and his teacher wife with two kids under 16. A single mother of one working part-time living in social housing. An unemployed single male in his mortgaged house. And another working household with an adult child still at home who's also unemployed.

I'm presuming that all of them entitled to collect Tax Credits, State Pension, Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, SMI, JSA, Child Benefit and Income support did so.

Of the last 10 households you visited, have a guess which were in receipt of at least one benefit. Remember, there's a vast array of them. Perhaps then you won't be so surprised.

Last ten households I visited:

Household one - Two working people on good money with no children. No Benefits whatsoever.
HH 2 : Couple, one working, one unemployed, no dependent children, no Benefits.
Hh 3: Couple, both working (one 24 hours), no children, one person claims DLA.
Hh4. 2 Pensioners, Both still work part-time, State Pensions for both but no other Benefits.
Hh5. ditto except they do not work.
HH6 : Single mother of child under 16, working. I assume she gets at least Child Benefit (and probably Tax Credits).
HH7 .Pensioner couple on Pension Credit.
HH8. Two working people on good money with no children. No Benefits whatsoever
HH9: Two working people on good money with no children and Coutts Bank account. Obviously no Benefits whatsoever!
HH10, is us. Me on State Pension, Husband on small amount of IB,Teacher's Pension. I am also a professional pet-sitter. No other Benefits.

4/10 on no Benefits whatsoever. 2/10 State Pension and nothing else (and several of the Pensioners still working). 2/10 on non means-tested Benefits. And only 2/10 on means-tested Benefits.

Dunroamin

I know several people claiming their state pension and one person claiming benefits as an unemployed lone parent. Apart from that, I don't know anyone who claims any benefits at all.

BurnleyBob

Dunroamin wrote: »

I know several people claiming their state pension and one person claiming benefits as an unemployed lone parent. Apart from that, I don't know anyone who claims any benefits at all.

Maybe they don't advertise the fact, or you aren't aware of the benefits available to them, or you are but don't consider what they are in receipt of count as benefits?

It would appear that way because the state via the DWP and HMRC and the Office for National Statistics, who are staffed by civil servants and collate all the data and are the UK's official bean counters, certainly know of a staggering percentage of UK households in receipt of at least one benefit.

In case you missed my earlier posts, officialdom reckons 44.6% of non-retired and non-Child Benefit recipient households collect at least one benefit. There are 26.3 million households in the UK, of them 6.7M are retired ones which represent 26%. Add those to 44.6% equals 70.6%.

All's left to calculate is the number of households who are in receipt of just Child Benefit... it's fair to conclude that they comprise almost exclusively of high earners whose income only entitles them to that universal benefit.

Dunroamin

BurnleyBob wrote: »

Maybe they don't advertise the fact, or you aren't aware of the benefits available to them, or you are but don't consider what they are in receipt of count as benefits?

Whilst I appreciate that both CB and SP are part of the benefits budget, like most people outside MSE, I don't class people who get these as "benefit claimants".

It seems to be a peculiarity of this site for people who get one of these to be classed in the same category as those claiming means tested benefits, presumably because of the high number of people on here who do claim those and like to feel that claiming "benefits" is the norm.

schrodie

Dunroamin wrote: »

Why ask whether I know disabled people who work and then disparage the fact that I do?

The fact you know only a handful of disabled people who work then extrapolate your "experience" to include the whole sick/disabled cohort as shirkers who could work is worthy of a daily hate article!

As I say get rid of Atos which costs the taxpayer a fortune and just use your method!

Dunroamin

schrodie wrote: »

The fact you know only a handful of disabled people who work then extrapolate your "experience" to include the whole sick/disabled cohort as shirkers who could work is worthy of a daily hate article!

As I say get rid of Atos which costs the taxpayer a fortune and just use your method!

The only person who has mentioned the word "shirker" is you.;)

My point is simply that I have worked with many disabled people who have had decent careers and who haven't been forced into the mindset that disability = benefits. Why you should consider that people with a disability should be consigned to the scrapheap of a life on benefits says more about your perception of their abilities than it does about mine, I'm afraid.

Disability rights should be about helping people to fulfil their potential and play a role in society (as used to be the case) rather than about making it ever easier for them to claim benefits.

Your attitude does a great disservice to people with disabilities.

Sixer

Dunroamin wrote: »

Whilst I appreciate that both CB and SP are part of the benefits budget, like most people outside MSE, I don't class people who get these as "benefit claimants".

It seems to be a peculiarity of this site for people who get one of these to be classed in the same category as those claiming means tested benefits, presumably because of the high number of people on here who do claim those and like to feel that claiming "benefits" is the norm.

On that basis, how do you see people on CB JSA and CB (WRAG rather than time-unlimited SG) ESA?

Presumably, these people shouldn't be seen as benefits claimants also? These are people in receipt of insurance payouts?

Not offering an opinion; just wondering how far you take this logic?

I kinda think there is a very unfair conflation of the total welfare bill and what it costs the country, which, as we know, includes CB and SP, and the money spent on those who could be seen as lazy/f-eckess/scrounging. Because the two are so often conflated, people overestimate the number of lazy/f-eckess/scrounging people there actually are.

rogerblack

Commenting on the ESA tests -

schrodie wrote: »

And those who assume they have medical degrees don't realise that the test is based on whether it is reasonable to expect someone with disabilities to work.

As MTF said anyone can work disabled or not but whether it is reasonable to expect someone who is sick/disabled to work is what matters.

This is incorrect.
The test for ESA at no point asks about whether it is reasonable to expect someone to work.
It is a series of tests, which you pass or fail, based on your ability to do them.

For example, if you are unable to place any hand in a shirt pocket, due to a sports injury - due to being unable to tightly bend the elbow - you are entitled to the support group.

People with complex multi-faceted disabilities who are much, much less employable than the above may not be granted ESA, simply as they don't tick the right boxes.

There is an exceptional cause route into ESA, but it again does not deal with reasonable employability.

seven-day-weekend

Dunroamin wrote: »

The only person who has mentioned the word "shirker" is you.;)

My point is simply that I have worked with many disabled people who have had decent careers and who haven't been forced into the mindset that disability = benefits. Why you should consider that people with a disability should be consigned to the scrapheap of a life on benefits says more about your perception of their abilities than it does about mine, I'm afraid.

Disability rights should be about helping people to fulfil their potential and play a role in society (as used to be the case) rather than about making it ever easier for them to claim benefits.

Your attitude does a great disservice to people with disabilities.

TBH, most of the people I know with disabilities work too. Admittedly I only know about a dozen, but out of those dozen only two don't work (and one did, until she became bed-bound).

I do know that many people with disabilities can't work, but I think more could than actually do and that many disabilities are not necessarily a bar to working.

My dad worked all his life in a factory, until he was 64, in spite of being registered disabled, having a brace on his leg and being in constant pain. That was in the days before DLA.

JS477

Dunroamin wrote: »

The only person who has mentioned the word "shirker" is you.;)

Don't forget your mates Gideon & Cameron!