Do you think present non-means tested benefits could become means tested?

barbedhook

Before I started getting tax credits approx £80 a month I had to pay for prescriptions glasses and dentist. Now I get more money and get them free.seems crazy to me think it should be the other way round

billywilly

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

State Pension, because a) most people have paid into it for decades and b) if you are over 65, you're over 65, whether you are a pauper or a professor.

Disability Benefits, because you are just as disabled whether you are a pauper or a Prime Minister's son.

I don't think it right or fair for pensioners, no matter what level of state pension they get, should be handed money that they don't need. I quote a comment made about a pensioner recently. 'He had more than enough income coming in via investments and private pensions, that he couldn't or had no need to spend ANY of his State Pension. He amassed a small fortune of that alone having saved it for over 24 years'

I agree, a disability can affect anybody, rich or poor. But if there is enough money coming in without having more be paid out in benefits, why do they need the extra?

nannytone_2

barbedhook wrote: »

Before I started getting tax credits approx £80 a month I had to pay for prescriptions glasses and dentist. Now I get more money and get them free.seems crazy to me think it should be the other way round

you probably would have got free prescriptions/dental/glasses before though.
all you had to do was complete an HC1 form for help with NHS costs due to low income/B]

TELLIT01

tomtontom wrote: »

This needs to go in Discussion Time.

It's entirely possible I've missed something but where does it say that this forum is for questions only and not Benefit related discussion?

missbiggles1

TELLIT01 wrote: »

It's entirely possible I've missed something but where does it say that this forum is for questions only and not Benefit related discussion?

You're right - you've missed something. (Even after it was spelled out in an earlier post.)

rogerblack

I would expect serious consideration in this parliament of extending PIP - sans mobility component - up into those who have a longstanding award of DLA and are over 65, and those under 16.

I expect a continued freeze at 1% of the base rate of disability benefits resulting in a 5-10 percent real-term reduction over the life of this parliament.
(ESA, plus the WRAG premium. People in the support group get very, very slightly more, but are largely affected by this as only the comparatively small premium is uprated).
It would not surprise me to see this 1% reduced to zero.

The 20 pound lower limit on permitted work will not be raised.

I expect an amendment to PIP to prevent gaining points for 'mental' descriptors for physical diseases, and vice-versa, given that this has been done for ESA. (So, if your painkillers for a physical condition confuse you mentally, you get no points for that)

I expect the whole amount of ESA to become sanctionable, not just the 'base' amount leaving the premiums untouched.

Policies will continue to be made on the premise that everyone in the work-related group of ESA will work at some point in the future, and defended on the 'we want to help people into work' basis, neglecting the reality that many have incurable conditions that severely limit their life and make them unemployable.

The continuing introduction of universal credit will be pushed recklessly ahead with the aim of getting it mainly done before the next parliament, without regard to rolling out and testing that it works.

The first of the 'pension freedom' mis-selling scandals will be hitting, largely involving vulnerable people made desperate by the lack of benefits taking out money to cope.

Buy shares in the Trussel Trust.

[Deleted User]

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

It should be in DT

mse on a regular basis post "official threads"in here that should be in dt
however back to the OP,i suspect the first moves will be to scrap cont based jsa and esa,we will see

cbrown372

billywilly wrote: »

I don't think it right or fair for pensioners, no matter what level of state pension they get, should be handed money that they don't need. I quote a comment made about a pensioner recently. 'He had more than enough income coming in via investments and private pensions, that he couldn't or had no need to spend ANY of his State Pension. He amassed a small fortune of that alone having saved it for over 24 years'

I agree, a disability can affect anybody, rich or poor. But if there is enough money coming in without having more be paid out in benefits, why do they need the extra?

Yes Andy, you have told this story many times about your father :beer:

Hedgehog99

It's only worth the considerable cost of means testing if the savings more than pay for it.
Taxing benefits is stupid - either the person needs the money or they don't. Paying a higher amount just to tax it doesn't make sense - pay the "post tax" value tax-free in the first place.

10pence

I'd be interested to see if they actually remove contribution based benefits, or limit them; especially ESA Support cont based. Reasoning behind this is in regards to the capital rules not applying.
Contribution based benefits both JSA and ESA should only be for that first year and no longer. I've met many people in my previous CAB employment that get ESA (SG/Cont) and have very large savings and with the new pension rules are able to amass even more, leaving them extremely comfortable.

I disagree with you, rogerblack about ESA (WRAG) regarding the employability of people with health conditions - according to the descriptors I would qualify for ESA as a sufferer of Manic Depression for nearly 20 years. Yet, I am still employed and have found jobs over that period. Furthermore, there are many people that are employed with health conditions far worse.
For me, allowing people to wallow on benefits for ill health is a national disgrace - in many cases it makes matters worse. I kind of feel that this government have noticed this and are doing something about it - whilst it might not be implemented in the best way it needs to be done.