Is this calculation right?

clemmatis

cbrown372 wrote: »

Tax inspector no less

Wonderful!

mikey_bach

Wilber
Its an open forum and I can and will comment on your made up scenarios. You have been sprouting on how much benefit you receive annually, but and there is a but
The benefits that you say you receive and the amount you receive, do not equate.
So you are clearly a Troll and for whatever reason you are on here, well who knows.
There are genuine people on benefits and you are clearly not one of them.
Good luck with this AE and I suppose when this one is banned you will be back
are you living on or in a dream world, who knows

or List your benefits then and prove me wrong
:rotfl: :rotfl::rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

evenasus

willber wrote: »

Personally I don't even think about 5/10 years hence, I'll worry about that if and when it causes me a problem.

I have always had choices in my life. I chose to take off as much time as possible and/or work the least number of hours/days/weeks/months/years.

I've never been short of a few bob, something has always come up. Probably in the whole of my available working life I have only worked about 30% of the time by choice. My family have never gone short and we own our own house.
I remember going to the jobcentre in 2004 asking if I would be any worse off by packing in work completely at age 55. My wife had just turned 60 so I thought that benefits would maych my salary of £21,000pa at the time. They looked at me as though I was crazy and said that I would be worse off. How wrong they were, benefits alone at the moment exceed my then salary by nearly £9,000 a year.
I have time on my hand and have enjoyed the past 9 years of retirement.

From reading your posts, you seem to fit the description of a benefit scrounger, that hard working people get very angry about.

Roll on benefit cuts!

princessdon

Whether Wibur/Andy/helentay's posts are made up, what you cannot usually deny is that they are possible.

There are huge problems with the benefit situation particularly around older/disabled/caring scenarios.

So whilst they are trip trapping - the could well exist for many.

However, in this situation I'd expect their high pension based on 100K salary to limit any means tested benefits.

SandraScarlett

willber wrote: »

That is a fantastic wish list.:eek:

What's wrong with wishing for good health for others, adequate benefits for those in need, and sufficient jobs for the work force?

xx

mikey_bach

SandraScarlett wrote: »

What's wrong with wishing for good health for others, adequate benefits for those in need, and sufficient jobs for the work force?

xx

well said

SandraScarlett

willber wrote: »

Both of my sons' in law are in full time employment. One is 25 and has a salary of £42,000pa and the other who is 27 has a salary of £68,000pa. Both are professionally qualified, one an architect and the other a solicitor.

Did the one who is a solicitor act for your brother?

xx

Angelicdevil

SandraScarlett wrote: »

No, I never said I wanted the taxpayer to pay less. I would like people who are genuinely sick and disabled to be able to afford things like a Day Centre - not because they know how to work the system, but because they have sufficient benefits in the first place. Or don't you agree?

I'd like parents of disabled children to be able to attend family centres free for a holiday, because without it, the family unit is in danger of collapse, through the endless daily grind.

I'd like more businesses to employ more people, and I'd like it to really be financially beneficial to work. I'd like cures for all the dreadful illnesses that blight the world. . . . .

I find it disgusting that there are greedy people who always manage to get the lion's share, whether they deserve it or not, whilst others get !!!!!! all. That is why I voluntarily complete forms and type letters, for those in need who are put off by the sheer volume and/or complexity of them.

But, selfishly, more than anything, I'd like my DH not to get worse, and I'd my pay my last penny to ensure that. That's not going to happen so in the meantime, I'll support those in genuine need, and criticise those that aren't, but brag about how much they manage to get. OK?

xx

Precisely. Couldn't have said it better myself! :T

Georgiegirl256

SandraScarlett wrote: »

What's wrong with wishing for good health for others, adequate benefits for those in need, and sufficient jobs for the work force?

xx

:T Totally agree. You should be a politician!

princessdon

willber wrote: »

OK, time to be a little more honest seeing that you are the first to accept that the level of benefit income is more than possible.

Wife - AA (HRC)
Self - DLA (MRC & HRM)

Wife - Carers Allowance for self (underlying entitlement only)
Self - Carers Allowance for wife (underlying entitlement only)

Wife - State Retirement Pension
Self - Contribution Based ESA (SG) (only for the purposes of having underlying entitlement to Carers Allowance instead of it actually being paid)

Claimed Pension Credit.

Given those facts I am sure that you will be able to work out the rest.

The end result gives a minimum income of £407.65pw (exclusive of DLA & AA)
Plus 100% CTS - worth £31.84pw
Plus AA £79.15pw
DLA £108.25 pw

Which brings the total to £626.89pw

Our home is fully paid for.

I have no doubt what you say is hypothetically correct. It's a pure shambles at best. If nothing else your posts (whatever AE) highlight the issues that need tackling.

Add to this HB and CTB it's far greater for some!

However, under this AE you'd need to factor in private pension for CC claimed at 60 or are you under this age?