Dla/ca

benniebert

NYM wrote: »

I don't disagree with that in any way, but, please forgive me because I really don't know the different 'benefits', is DLA/PIP the same £amount I]regardless[/I] of condition ?

DLA/PIP is very similar in amounts. Yes you can get DLA/PIP regardless of whether you are trying to live on £75 a week or £7500 a week. Same goes for the State Pension. Even if you have a income in excess of £1m a year you will still be given £113+ a week when you reach State Retirement age.

50Twuncle

benniebert wrote: »

Your NI contributions pay for a lot of other things other than a 'pot' so that you are able to draw on it at a later date.
Get rid of all contribution based benefits and just think how much more money could be sent in the direction of the NHS?

In some cases - yes I agree
But if Carers stop receiving CA - Think of the huge amount of extra resources that the government will have to find to replace them ....
And anyway - most Carers have spent a lifetime in work, paying taxes and NI - so deserve some compensation for the work that they do...
Similarly - some disabled people (inc myself) have paid into the system (taxes and NI) so deserve some back now - whist we are still able to appreciate it.

benniebert

50Twuncle wrote: »

In some cases - yes I agree
But if Carers stop receiving CA - Think of the huge amount of extra resources that the government will have to find to replace them ....
And anyway - most Carers have spent a lifetime in work, paying taxes and NI - so deserve some compensation for the work that they do...
Similarly - some disabled people (inc myself) have paid into the system (taxes and NI) so deserve some back now - whist we are still able to appreciate it.

Unfortunately the Welfare system was originally set up and still is, a safety net. It is not a system that compensates people for the taxes and NIC paid in over time. It has seen to become that, but if we get back to the origins, a payment should only be made if there are no other resources to draw on such as capital or income of the household.

melbury

benniebert wrote: »

Your NI contributions pay for a lot of other things other than a 'pot' so that you are able to draw on it at a later date.
Get rid of all contribution based benefits and just think how much more money could be sent in the direction of the NHS?

I know that NI contributions pay for a lot of other things, which again everybody reaps the benefit of regardless of whether they have paid anything in or not.

Whilst I agree people who are earning a fortune (e.g. Lewis Hamilton and his new £27 million a year contract) shouldn't be entitled to some benefits, the point at which you are regarded as too rich to claim is extremely low at £16,000. So again being prudent counts against you.

Surely means testing should be based entirely on your actual weekly income.

Indie_Kid

melbury wrote: »

I know that NI contributions pay for a lot of other things, which again everybody reaps the benefit of regardless of whether they have paid anything in or not.

Whilst I agree people who are earning a fortune (e.g. Lewis Hamilton and his new £27 million a year contract) shouldn't be entitled to some benefits, the point at which you are regarded as too rich to claim is extremely low at £16,000. So again being prudent counts against you.

Surely means testing should be based entirely on your actual weekly income.

Where does the £16000 come from?

merlin68

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32084722
This article explains what they are planning.

benniebert

melbury wrote: »

I know that NI contributions pay for a lot of other things, which again everybody reaps the benefit of regardless of whether they have paid anything in or not.

Whilst I agree people who are earning a fortune (e.g. Lewis Hamilton and his new £27 million a year contract) shouldn't be entitled to some benefits, the point at which you are regarded as too rich to claim is extremely low at £16,000. So again being prudent counts against you.

Surely means testing should be based entirely on your actual weekly income.

I would say that if you have savings/investments with a value of over £16,000 that would preclude you from all benefits.


For a couple who are over 65 I would set a figure of £588 a week and for a couple under 65 a figure of £516 a week.


If there is an excess of income over those two figures, then the benefits are reduced £1 for £1 that is the excess. Once you have your own independent income as a couple above those figures, then no benefits are payable.

benniebert

merlin68 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32084722
This article explains what they are planning.

It is going in the right direction. But a bit hypocritical of Labour to make those demands on the Tories, when they themselves will not give out any information on the cuts that they intend to make.

melbury

Hopefully whoever gets in will see sense and not penalise those who have paid their NI contributions.

The best thing being suggested is restricting child related benefits to a maximum of two children, which should have been brought in years ago.

melbury

Indie_Kid wrote: »

Where does the £16000 come from?

http://www.express.co.uk/finance/crusader/426794/Savings-can-affect-your-benefit-entitlement

Not a lot really is it?