MSE News: Benefits cap comes into force

FBaby

A single mum with 4 kids is never going to be able to work because she cant afford the childcare

Why NEVER? Once her youngest child is 3, she can contemplate working a few hours a week. Then it all depends on a number of factors, how far apart are the children, if there is a 16 year old say, they should be able to help with childcare, depends on their education etc... but to assume that because a single mum has 4 children she can never work is very short sighted even if it is what THEY like to believe.

zagfles

Morlock wrote: »

It is easy to pick and choose policies from other EU members to justify policy changes,

Erm...I'm not. I'm not even in favour of the benefit cap, as I've said several times. Besides the argument about contributory vs income based benefits has nothing whatsoever to do with the cap. It's easy to build strawmen when proved wrong

but ignore factors such as EU rent controls. With which the benefit cap would probably be unnecessary as most of the controversy surrounding the cap stems directly from high levels of housing benefit, hence why it is housing benefit that will be cut to maintain a level of payment under the cap.

Rent controls are another good idea from the EU, would keep the housing market under control. But we needed them 15 years ago...

zagfles

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

That's pretty daft - even in London, £280 is quite a chunk for a 1 bed flat per week. True, it won't get you much in Chelsea or Mayfair, but you could be in Bloomsbury, Clerkenwell or Angel for that sort of money.

Yes, you can rent a 3-bed house in some parts of London for under £280, as per my PP. And of course it's not compulsory to live alone - there are plenty of house shares advertised in London at a fraction of that cost.

mazza111

Love this cap, it makes it look like everyone on benefits is receiving these amounts. Then, quite rightly, those working are up in arms about the amounts given. I wish I was receiving the maximum amount

I know I was certainly better off working than I was on benefits, maybe I just didn't have enough children to make benefits pay

Dunroamin

mazza111 wrote: »

Love this cap, it makes it look like everyone on benefits is receiving these amounts. Then, quite rightly, those working are up in arms about the amounts given. I wish I was receiving the maximum amount

I know I was certainly better off working than I was on benefits, maybe I just didn't have enough children to make benefits pay

It doesn't - all the reports and articles I've read are very specific about the number of households who'll be affected. 40,000, I believe.

pinkypoopydoo

Ben_Reeve-Lewis wrote: »

A single mum with 4 kids is never going to be able to work because she cant afford the childcare. You could take the view that she shouldn’t have had the kids, you could also say “where is their dad in all this”? both valid questions but what happens then?

I'm going to have to take exception this quote. I'm a single mother of 4 children (through divorce, not choice), with an ex who is too busy having a motorbike filled mid-life crisis to worry about food in the mouth of his children.

I got stuck on Income support when my youngest was still little, but was able to get retrained, and am now self employed. The opportunities ARE there for people, single mums of 4 included, if they get off their backsides to look for it. It;s not easy, it's not handed to anyone on a plate, but it's possible. IF you have the drive to get off benefits.

If the cap helps to fire the drive of a few families, to get out of the spiral of benefits (it's horrible - once you become tarred by the "benefit" brush, even long term friends start to look at you differently) then it can only be a good thing.

Morlock

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

That's pretty daft - even in London, £280 is quite a chunk for a 1 bed flat per week. True, it won't get you much in Chelsea or Mayfair, but you could be in Bloomsbury, Clerkenwell or Angel for that sort of money.

And that is part of the point, virtually no single person will be affected by a cap of £350 per week, particularly a JSA claimant, who would need to claim more than £280 in rent to be affected, which is highly implausible as no LHA rate is that high.

The only purpose the cap on single claimants serves is to mislead the public into thinking that those claimants can receive over £350 per week in benefits, which is very, very, very, rarely the case.

Morlock

Dunroamin wrote: »

It doesn't - all the reports and articles I've read are very specific about the number of households who'll be affected. 40,000, I believe.

I expect the average person would not even bother to read any articles. It is well publicised that the general public have distorted and misinformed views about benefit recipients.

princessdon

Morlock wrote: »

And that is part of the point, virtually no single person will be affected by a cap of £350 per week, particularly a JSA claimant, who would need to claim more than £280 in rent to be affected, which is highly implausible as no LHA rate is that high.

The only purpose the cap on single claimants serves is to mislead the public into thinking that those claimants can receive over £350 per week in benefits, which is very, very, very, rarely the case.

Their definition of single is no child dependants.

Would carers allowance take them over the cap? Not sure, but I guess by pennies if so and such small numbers its not a big deal. They should realistically have set that one far lower and then it made sense.

I think the cap will be reduced over time.

Dunroamin

Morlock wrote: »

I expect the average person would not even bother to read any articles. It is well publicised that the general public have distorted and misinformed views about benefit recipients.

If they don't read any articles or hear an item about it on the news - how will they know about it anyway?