MSE News: MPs vote to limit benefit rises to 1%

emweaver

DeeDee74 wrote: »

Like who??? Joke people believe people like you even if you had 4 kids you'd have 2 be getting like 300 a week wtc to get anywhere near that amount!!!! Simple people who dont work couldnt claim 26grand taxcredits....

I assume his partner takes care of buying for his child and receiving the tax credits so I doubt he has clue what hes writing about.

bloomingflower

Gentile wrote: »

Sadly, when kids are in school they are never made aware of how important education is and why they should get a degree in medical,dental, IT or law etc. Parents do not spend enough time educating their kids about their future.

clemmatis wrote: »

Though I do agree many children are let down, badly, it may not make that much sense for many more of them to do degrees in medicine or law unless they are prepared to accept that they may have to work in another field afterwards.

Your absolutely right clemmatis;

Sorry a bit off topic...

My 17 year old daughter is currently in college and studying Psychology,Health and Social care and English Literature.

She wants to go to Uni to further her education. I know she will do very well as she is very much focused on her studies. She really wants to be a Psychologist. And she is hoping she will get everything she needs to qualify as one.

She has just had some good news with regards to applying for a job as a waitress. She will do this while she is at college/uni just so she can earn a little bit of extra money for her studies (books,stationary etc) She doesn't really have a social life while studying so hard. But she hopes this will pay off and that all her education and studying doesn't go to waste!

But however,who knows what will happen after her studies. She may just have to keep the job she's got as a waitress but she will not want to do that for the rest of her life and will fight to get the career she wants in her field.

emweaver

shedboy94 wrote: »

There are lots of families out there with multiple children. Many of them also claim for disabilities as well.

As an example, which you will no doubt call extreme, but trust me they exist, would be a couple with 6 children, 1 of them disabled. 1 of the parents works 30hrs pw s/e, earning £6k pa. They also receive DLA.
The total amount of Tax Credits alone that they would receive would be £27101

Add on all other benefits to this and the amount becomes ridiculous.

There are claimants out there who receive more than that as they have multiple disabled children.

Tax Credits is a system designed to reward people for having multiple children.

When the benefit cap comes in soon they will be badly affected the as they will not be able to claim more than £500 a week from all their benefits combined.

ILW

dori2o wrote: »

Unfortunately the uneducated in this country have fallen for the Governments propaganda and are too stupid to see the truth, that the richest in this country and worldwide caused the economic crisis, not the poorest, the sick, the disabled or the unemployed. They are merely easy targets.

There are many people in this country who, because of the inequalities and pressure put on Governments from those with the ability to influence, are working 40/50/60 hours a week and yet still require their salaries to be subsidised by the Government, allowing the big corporations to generate larger and larger profits at the taxpayers expense.

The benefit cap affects more hardworking people than it does non-working.

The cap on public sector salaries is supposed to be 1% across the board. Therefore what should happen is those on the lowest incomes get a larger %age increase than those on higher incomes. It won't happen though, it will be implemented as a flat 1% increase. The end result is that our salaries, in real terms have reduced by some 12% in the past 3 years.

The uneducated will argue that the public sector get annual cost of living increases, but the FACT is the majority do not get such payments. Less than 30% of all public sector workers have these provisions as contractual rights.

There's a simple and effective way to reduce the amounts of money spent on public sector and welfare.

1, Reduce the number of MP's, MP's salaries and restrict the maximum amount they can claim in expenses.

2, Increase the NMW, The more a person earns the less they need subsidising by the state.

3, The Government should stop focussing all of its energies on how it can best destroy the lives of those who need the most help and focus on generating growth to the rest of the economy. Something they promised would happen before the next election, but which they have so far failed to achieve anything.

Generate growth, growth means more jobs, more jobs means less unemployment, less unemployment means a lower welfare bill.

Finally, close the borders. Close them to EU and Non-EU individuals and tell Brussels to stick it where the sun don't shine.

Just as we should not be paying benefits to people who do not live permenently in the UK, neither should we be providing them with jobs whilst there are upto 8M people inactive in this country.

Whilst I would agree with a few of your points, you let yourself down with the reference to MPs pay and expenses. Cutting them to zero would have no direct financial effect on the economy whatsoever.

FBaby

dori2o wrote: »

It shouldn't be a problem, but with ATOS doing the assessments and the goalposts having been significantly changed, there will be amny people who are genuinely disabled, who struggle to live day to day, who will not be eligible for the benefit.

But how do you define 'genuine'? Who knows better? The actual person who has a clear interest in considering themselves disabled (for the same symptoms suffered), the GP who can only speak from a medical perspective, or the assessor who is trained to decide whether someone is able to carry out some level of care themselves or is mobile enough not to be considered disabled? All three have a reason to believe they are more qualified to decide who is genuine and who isn't.

Using your example of parking space, one could argue (from the information you provided evidently) that all it means is you having to park a bit further away and take more time and effort to get to your office. Not nice, not ideal, but not impossible, therefore not essential to have the space.

The reason why people on low income struggle is because expectation of what is essential in life has significantly increased. I have been amazed at the number of my kids' friends who got the precious i-pad or latest i-phone for Christmas, the majority of these family (as a matter all but for one) who are dependent on some benefits from the state. I am not, and yet I felt that an i-pad was a luxury for a 13 year old and not appropriate.

A large number of family on benefits are able to afford luxuries that similar families would only have aspired for in previous generation. There seem to be an expectations that a level of luxuries should be available to anyone regardless of their working income.

Higher incomes do for most come with higher responsibilities, therefore higher risks, higher expectations, and therefore higher stress.

DeeDee74

emweaver wrote: »

I assume his partner takes care of buying for his child and receiving the tax credits so I doubt he has clue what hes writing about.

Think you right or thay read dt allday and think posters on there are right , ive been on benefit but work now deffo better off working , i still get ct and wt which is still a benefit some posters on here are quick to !!!!! people who dont work but forget thay claim tc there selves.. so all the get a better job and support your family posts bug me 1000's claim tax credits wt because thay need it.

DeeDee74

shedboy94 wrote: »

What is a "proper family"?

A normal one who doesnt have 6 kids and claim disability for them all .....
Bit unfair picking high number of children plus disabilitys of course there get more .

dori2o

FBaby wrote: »

But how do you define 'genuine'? Who knows better? The actual person who has a clear interest in considering themselves disabled (for the same symptoms suffered), the GP who can only speak from a medical perspective, or the assessor who is trained to decide whether someone is able to carry out some level of care themselves or is mobile enough not to be considered disabled? All three have a reason to believe they are more qualified to decide who is genuine and who isn't.

Using your example of parking space, one could argue (from the information you provided evidently) that all it means is you having to park a bit further away and take more time and effort to get to your office. Not nice, not ideal, but not impossible, therefore not essential to have the space.

The reason why people on low income struggle is because expectation of what is essential in life has significantly increased. I have been amazed at the number of my kids' friends who got the precious i-pad or latest i-phone for Christmas, the majority of these family (as a matter all but for one) who are dependent on some benefits from the state. I am not, and yet I felt that an i-pad was a luxury for a 13 year old and not appropriate.
Are you really that ignorant that you cannot see that the reason people on low incomes struggle is because the price of everything has increased way above the inceases in salaries and even benefits?

Some people will go without in an attempt to make sure they/their kids ahve the latest gadgets. How many of those who got I-pods bought them outright? How many have them on the never-never via brighthouse or doorstep loans?

Apple offer finance themselves on the i-pad or any of their computers/laptops.

A large number of family on benefits are able to afford luxuries that similar families would only have aspired for in previous generation. There seem to be an expectations that a level of luxuries should be available to anyone regardless of their working income.

Higher incomes do for most come with higher responsibilities, therefore higher risks, higher expectations, and therefore higher stress.

It must be so hard coping with an income which means state benefits are out of reach. I feel really sorry for you.

Thats easy for someone who doesn't have the condition I have to say.

It's not only that though, the money I get in DLA pays for many things that mean I can currently get to work, medications not available on the NHS, treatments not available on the NHS, and the running of my car to and from work.

Without PIP/DLA those things are unaffordable. The treatment I have to keep me going will have to stop, so will the counselling.

I will have to return to full time hours which will be against what was advised to me by the OHA.

I won't be able to afford to run the car to work everyday, or pay for the parking.

I can't sit on public transport for very long, certainly with travel to and from work taking approx an hour on the tram at the best times and about an hour and 20 on the bus I would be in considerable pain even before getting to work. The car allows me the freedom to stop and stretch move around should I need to.

The pain once set in doesn't just clear after a few minutes. It stays for days/weeks and especially most recently it doesn't go away, it ramains at the increased levels.

The other problem is that whilst I can self propel short distances, I certainly cannot do that over the distance required from the local car park or from the bus/tram stops, and neither allows the use of Mobility Scooters on them.

So it makes a massive difference to someone who can only walk a very short distance, and cannot walk at all without being in severe pain, compared to someone with relatively normal mobility.

shedboy94

emweaver wrote: »

I assume his partner takes care of buying for his child and receiving the tax credits so I doubt he has clue what hes writing about.

Who are you referring to?

shedboy94

emweaver wrote: »

When the benefit cap comes in soon they will be badly affected the as they will not be able to claim more than £500 a week from all their benefits combined.

I just wish the benefit cap was lower - why should anyone get that kind of free handout? £500 a week is ridiculous.