Benefit cuts timetable

rogerblack

topaztiger1983 wrote: »

I agree with the cuts in the fact that it is not right that someone on benefits can earn nearly twice as much as someone working for NMW, but saying that I do believe that help should be given to the most needy in the community & not people who cant be bothered to work

Essentially noone on benefits is given 'twice the minimum wage'.
For people who have high benefit incomes, and are out of work, their level of benefit due to being out of work is small. They would get more-or-less the same benefit - housing/child - if they moved into work.
Most of the money in the extreme cases is not 'given to the claimant' - it's given either directly, or to be paid to the landlord.
Who is almost certainly considerably richer than the tenant.

People qualified for higher level DLA or ESA are pretty much 'the most needy'. (exceptions of course exist).

bloolagoon

KxMx wrote: »

Did £12bn have to come off the welfare bill at the last budget?

Anyone who doesn't think mass cuts which are going to affect a vast number of people are coming are deluding themselves. Nothing to do with politics, more to do with the FACT that so much has to be saved, and that can't be achieved without mass, widespread cuts.

I could save it very easily. Eg prescriptions. We give over 60 free prescriptions. Average drug price per item is £11.46 (though a few years out of date so maybe slightly different now). Plus £1 admin per script. Why does an over 60 on a good wage need free prescriptions. Why do we prescribe paracetamol? By changing prescription pricing alone the £12b is less to save. Add the £10 bonus at Christmas, the cap lowering and UC hours for WTC and it's saved.

zagfles

KxMx wrote: »

Did £12bn have to come off the welfare bill at the last budget?

Err, the £12bn is going to over the next 3 years. It won't all come into effect on Wednesday.

Over the last 5 years, about 16.7bn of cuts were made to welfare.

Carry on trying to scare people if you want. The cuts were in the Tory manifesto. The usual rags tried to scare people before the election. It didn't work then, and hopefully won't now. We'll soon find out the truth. In the meantime, panic if you want. Scare others if you want. I won't.

topaztiger1983

So rogerblack you are saying as claimants don't directly receive the HB payments that it should not be counted I work and have to pay my rent so why is in not valid argument I am discussed with the way some people swindle the system

KxMx

zagfles wrote: »

Err, the £12bn is going to over the next 3 years. It won't all come into effect on Wednesday.

Over the last 5 years, about 16.7bn of cuts were made to welfare.

If I take your stats as correct 16.7bn over 5 years and 12bn over 3 years... basic maths dictates a higher level of cuts than at the last budget per year.

Pensioners and child benefits have been stated by the Gov as safe so that leaves the poorest and most vulnerable to target. Disabled/sick, jobseekers, housing benefit, low paid etc.

Nothing to do with scare mongering again dealing in the facts...

bloolagoon

KxMx wrote: »

If I take your stats as correct 16.7bn over 5 years and 12bn over 3 years... basic maths dictates a higher level of cuts than at the last budget per year.

Pensioners and child benefits have been stated by the Gov as safe so that leaves the poorest and most vulnerable to target. Disabled/sick, jobseekers, housing benefit, low paid etc.

Nothing to do with scare mongering again dealing in the facts...

How is charging those with 30k or 40k incomes market rent in social housing targeting the vulnerable?

rogerblack

topaztiger1983 wrote: »

So rogerblack you are saying as claimants don't directly receive the HB payments that it should not be counted I work and have to pay my rent so why is in not valid argument I am discussed with the way some people swindle the system

Because those moving into low-paid work will also be paid HB at a similar rate.

zagfles

KxMx wrote: »

If I take your stats as correct 16.7bn over 5 years and 12bn over 3 years... basic maths dictates a higher level of cuts than at the last budget per year.

Pensioners and child benefits have been stated by the Gov as safe so that leaves the poorest and most vulnerable to target. Disabled/sick, jobseekers, housing benefit, low paid etc.

Nothing to do with scare mongering again dealing in the facts...

Pensioners were safe last time. Child benefits have not been stated as safe, CTC is a very likely target. Your facts are bulls**t just like your speculation and I CBA reading any more. I bet if a relative got cancer you'd be telling them they're going to die.

Carry on scaremongering if you want, but go over to the cesspit of DT, they're probably predicting workhouses and concentration camps over there.

topaztiger1983

rogerblack wrote: »

Because those moving into low-paid work will also be paid HB at a similar rate.

I work for NMW full-time and I get no HB so obviously your argument is not all that valid

bloolagoon

zagfles wrote: »

Pensioners were safe last time. Child benefits have not been stated as safe, CTC is a very likely target. Your facts are bulls**t just like your speculation and I CBA reading any more. I bet if a relative got cancer you'd be telling them they're going to die.

Carry on scaremongering if you want, but go over to the cesspit of DT, they're probably predicting workhouses and concentration camps over there.

They are :mad:

I know of at least 1 person pushed into crisis as the Internet has informed them they will be destitute and homeless.

There's a prepare yourself and it will be brutal expect the worst. One approach is sensible and one is damaging.

CTC will be hit via the cap. I don't know how low the cap will go outside London but high number of children families will be hit. Which people scream out for!