We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

"the amount the law says you need to live on.."

135

Comments

  • Nada666
    Nada666 Posts: 5,004 Forumite
    On the other hand, minimum wage is supposed to be a minimum.

    But you still get less than the minimum after tax and NI. ;)
    Minimum wage is not the minimum you need to live on. It is a minimum you ought to paid for an hour's work. Nothing to do with the other.

    And housing benefit plus council tax plus jsa is not significantly less for most over the age of 25.
  • bloolagoon
    bloolagoon Posts: 7,973 Forumite
    There are 365 days in a year.

    Good grief when did they change that! :o
    Tomorrow is the most important thing in life
  • Nada666 wrote: »
    Minimum wage is not the minimum you need to live on. It is a minimum you ought to paid for an hour's work. Nothing to do with the other.

    I never said it was.

    I simply gave it as an example of something else that was supposed to be a minimum but by the time you got it, it was less. :)


    It was simply an example to show that not everything is to be taken literally.
  • LittleMax
    LittleMax Posts: 1,408 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ILW wrote: »
    Levels of benefits etc are set every year by government. At no point is this based on any law that requires them to be enough to live on.

    When the Social Security and Benefits Act 1992 was passed the rates in it became 'what the law said you need to live off'. Whether those figures were enough to live off in reality would always be open to debate. However our elected representatives voted it through and so those were the figures used.

    These are increased each year, in accordance with section 150 of the Social security Administration Act 1992

    "The Secretary of State shall in each tax year review the sums—
    (a)specified in the following provisions of the Contributions and Benefits Act— ...
    ...in order to determine whether they have retained their value in relation to the general level of prices obtaining in Great Britain estimated in such manner as the Secretary of State thinks fit."

    Again whether you agree or not with the figures used is irrelevant, they were what politicians decided was enough to live off back then, and what each Secretary of State has decided has kept this abreast of general prices ever since.

    When they say in letter 'what the law says you need to live off' they are simplifying the legal position, but it is a true statement.

    In my personal opinion the phrase should be changed to 'what the law says you need in order to survive' but DM readers, would I'm sure take the view that the amount is enough to live off and buy luxury items ;)
    ILW wrote: »
    At no point is this based on any law that requires them to be enough to live on.

    Well no one says it was - it was an amount decided by civil servants at the DSS based on the lowest they thought they would get away with at the time. This in turn was accepted by the politicians and the bill passed through both parliaments and received royal assent, at this point the law was changed and the figures in the Social Security and Benefits Act 1992 became law.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    LittleMax wrote: »
    When the Social Security and Benefits Act 1992 was passed the rates in it became 'what the law said you need to live off'. Whether those figures were enough to live off in reality would always be open to debate. However our elected representatives voted it through and so those were the figures used.

    These are increased each year, in accordance with section 150 of the Social security Administration Act 1992

    "The Secretary of State shall in each tax year review the sums—
    (a)specified in the following provisions of the Contributions and Benefits Act— ...
    ...in order to determine whether they have retained their value in relation to the general level of prices obtaining in Great Britain estimated in such manner as the Secretary of State thinks fit."

    Again whether you agree or not with the figures used is irrelevant, they were what politicians decided was enough to live off back then, and what each Secretary of State has decided has kept this abreast of general prices ever since.

    When they say in letter 'what the law says you need to live off' they are simplifying the legal position, but it is a true statement.

    In my personal opinion the phrase should be changed to 'what the law says you need in order to survive' but DM readers, would I'm sure take the view that the amount is enough to live off and buy luxury items ;)



    Well no one says it was - it was an amount decided by civil servants at the DSS based on the lowest they thought they would get away with at the time. This in turn was accepted by the politicians and the bill passed through both parliaments and received royal assent, at this point the law was changed and the figures in the Social Security and Benefits Act 1992 became law.

    Where does it state that the amount is what one needs to live off?
    That is just your interpretation and is not a part of any law or statute.
  • LittleMax
    LittleMax Posts: 1,408 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Obviously the fact that people may receive less (or more) than laid down rates means there is no strict law about what one absolutely must have to live on.

    It doesn't change the fact that the government, via its agency, does issue forms which repeatedly use an expression that describes what the law says one needs to live on.

    That people believe it means what it says is not unreasonable.

    The phrase is 'what the law says you need to live off' this is true and the 'you' in this phrase refers to one individual not you in a general sense. So yes, every individual has an allowance which is set by law.
  • LittleMax
    LittleMax Posts: 1,408 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ILW wrote: »
    Where does it state that the amount is what one needs to live off?
    That is just your interpretation and is not a part of any law or statute.

    Suggest you actually read my post.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    LittleMax wrote: »
    Suggest you actually read my post.
    Your post seems to contradict itself, are you saying there is or is not a law that states the minimum a person requires to live on?
  • LittleMax
    LittleMax Posts: 1,408 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Yes, it's the Social Security and Benefits Act 1992

    Do I personally agree that the amounts set are enough to live off? No I don't.
  • LittleMax
    LittleMax Posts: 1,408 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    This is still relevant and interesting, and covers many of the points in this discussion. It's a transcript of an old Radio 4 Inside Money programme...
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.