Benefit cuts

Can any of you Tories defend this?

Heartbreaking.

I sometimes really, really, really hate what this country has become. Anyone who tries to defend this isn’t worth any form of response and should be ignored as a troll.

Can’t decide whether to say that she’s worse than Thatcher, Hitler or both. She really is a vile specimen.

this line is really quite chilling:

These cuts will do something Thatcher never managed: they break once and for all the link between the needs of benefits claimants and their entitlements.

🙁

THM will be along in a moment to tell you that there’s no such thing as austerity.

Poor people are less likely to vote Tory. And if they’ve starved or frozen to death before the next general election, they can’t vote Labour either.

I have a solution, we need to halve all rents and property values nationwide.

I have a solution, we need to stop vilifying the poor and understand they are human beings

Aerosmith have a solution….

Seriously though if we don’t prioritise protecting the wealth creators who will exploit the proles so they can have a hovel to cower in

not a Tory, however I’ll dispute the maths in the example given.

A quick search on rightmove shows 4 bed houses (should be big enough for the family), in the area he lives in, at around £600/month. The benefit cap is £1668/month, leaving a grand a month for ‘other expenses’.

I’m not going to claim the benefit cap isn’t going to leave some people in a pinch, but in Liverpool (given the cheapness of housing), I don’t think it does

THM will be along in a moment to tell you that there’s no such thing as austerity.

There isn’t. Hence NW comes along to mix up different ideas.

Ahh ‘Meine Führerin hath spoken.

All hail ‘Meine Führerin

Like NOW!

Not designed to be inflammatory, but I suspect it’s only designed to provide the bare minimum…. And the allowance is sufficient for most of the UK I suspect.

Sure, it might not be exactly what they want, in the area they want… But that’s the consequences of choices isn’t it?

I like a challenge.

but not too many employers will be able to fit around his school runs and meal preps

Meal preps? Good show! And yet

But they don’t get fresh fruit or veg, subsisting on frozen meals from Iceland.

Pissing his money away at ready meals rather than cooking? Odd.

Or he can ask Wirral council to top up his rent, by filling out a complicated form

It’s complicated? Oh well, in that case we should use his kids to feed the animals at Chester Zoo.

There’s a good deal of handwringing in that article, yet no sense that he’s had months to do something, but didn’t quite get round to it. Probably a queue at Icleand.

How’s that? Did I fulfill the OP’s brief?

5lab – it think you don’t understand how the benefit cap works. “cash” benefits (jobseekers/PIP’s, whatever else) will make up a small and fixed proportion of that £1668, the rest is for housing and will be what that housing costs in the area, it CAN go upto the full amount but is only likely to down south.

e.g. cash benefits £400 (made up number)
housing benefit £600 – liverpool
total £1000

cash benefits £400
housing benefit £1200 – that london
total £1600

I started to lose sympathy at “try to land 16 hours’ work a week”, then when we got to “complicated form” I was out.

Remember a few years back when we had a coalition government – lib dems were stopping stuff like this happening. Idiot electorate decided they were doing a terrible job and abandoned the lib dems giving a conservative majority = this is not a particularly unlikely outcome.

On the other hand:

Those outside the capital will be cut to £385 a week.

Many people work hard to earn £385/wk, and there are certainly places in the UK where you can live very comfortably on that amount.

And the story grabbing the headlines is about people wanting to spend millions to find out who were the bigger bunch of a-holes in a strike 30+ years ago.

“I’m not going to claim the benefit cap isn’t going to leave some people in a pinch, but in Liverpool (given the cheapness of housing), I don’t think it does”

You’re more than welcome to give it a go. You’ll need four kids with you as well. Don’t forget things like transport costs, food outside, ‘phone etc. And all the other costs which aren’t mentioned but are part of life. such as clothes (kids grow out of them pretty quick), stuff for school etc. My fag packet calculations give £35.60 per day after your £600 pm rent, for an adult and four kids. I’m sure you could ‘survive’, but it’d be shit. And your figures are based on a maximum anyone can get, not what they actually get, which could be a lot less, depending on circumstances.

No good asking if any tories ‘defend’ this; nobody with any experience of real poverty would ever vote tory, and nobody who votes tory has a **** clue about the reality of life in poverty for so many people. They’d just ‘organise a fun run’ for charity or something, to assuage any guilt they might feel. Job done. Crack open another bottle of Semillon….

I’ll get shot down for this but hey-ho 😉

For the record I’m not a Tory. Not Labour either as they bribe the electorate with benefits etc that the country cannot afford. Don’t really fit any political group really!

The figures at the bottom of the article relate to a family of 4 with 2 adults. Why aren’t they in work? One could get a job while the other one looks after the kids, saving on childcare costs etc. If the breadwinner has been made redundant then this situation is temporary, surely they have a small amount of savings from when they were in work?

Benefits are designed to be a safety net to cushion you when times turn bad, not a way of fully supporting you and your family for life. Yes, living on that amount of money is tough but it is only meant to be for a short time.

I should add that my experience of people on benefits has been coloured by one couple in one part of my family (that I have nothing to do with) being on benefits for life, popping out another sprog when money got low and being all the cliches that Jeremy Kyle envisages so I have very little time for ‘career claimants’. I have never had to claim any out-of-work benefits as I’ve made sure I had a safety net, be that parents or savings. I see this sorry mess as part of the whole culture of everything now, easy credit, misplaced entitlement that pervades society these days. I would love to live in the middle of nowhere just being on my own, riding my bike etc but I can’t afford to. So I live in a city and work hard to pay my way with a bit left over every month to spend on bikes and a bit of savings.

Let the shooting commence 😆

new headline “time rich dad feeds kids ready-meals”

to earn the £1668 total monthly benefit cap you’d need a job paying £25K.

Which I’ll wager is more than most working people in Birkenhead earn on average.

**** hell, no wonder the tories keep getting elected if their supporters maths and comprehension skills are on a par with the sample represented here.

statistically they voted brexit and with it accepted a few difficult years in the belief things would be better.

Hmmmmm STW does benefits, and already its going a bit…. you know…. Toby Young

Benefits should be for those in need not a lifestyle choice, tbh I dont think any ‘benefits’ should be cash, it should all be via voucher for necessities,I susprct there would be far fewer benefit ‘claimants’ this way.

Remember when everyone was getting outraged at the media reporting about families proudly claiming £50k a year and whipping everyone into an outraged frenzy?

Well now it’s harder to do that as a result of the BenCap, so they just flip the story on it’s head and whip everyone into an outraged frenzy.

Will we never learn? It’s the bloody media doing what it does so well and we’re biting, again.

Why aren’t they in work?

Is that a real question or a rhetorical one? Very important distinction.

In the article, the guy is a single parent. Getting a job in his situation is pretty damn difficult I’d imagine. If that’s not victim blaming, I don’t know what is.

Rubber_Buccaneer – Member
I have a solution, we need to halve all rents and property values nationwide

Reckon labour would vote for that?

“Let the shooting commence”

Well, you kind of did it to yourself, in your opening line:

“For the record I’m not a Tory. Not Labour either as they bribe the electorate with benefits etc that the country cannot afford.”

😕

“Hmmmmm STW does benefits, and already its going a bit…. you know….”

I’m reminded of recent threads about ‘how much do you spend a week’, that kind of thing. Obviously not posted by people the Guardian article highlights…

I have a solution, we need to halve all rents and property values nationwide

That would benefit poor people but disadvantage those well off enough to be landlords. Who do you think needs our help? The poor, to survive – or the well off, to get a bit more well off?

fifeandy – Member
Remember a few years back when we had a coalition government – lib dems were stopping stuff like this happening. Idiot electorate decided they were doing a terrible job and abandoned the lib dems giving a conservative majority = this is not a particularly unlikely outcome.

Had the Lib Dems made the impact they were having clear, the “idiot electorate” may have viewed their apparent capitulating to the will of the Tories in a different light.

5lab – it think you don’t understand how the benefit cap works. “cash” benefits (jobseekers/PIP’s, whatever else) will make up a small and fixed proportion of that £1668, the rest is for housing and will be what that housing costs in the area, it CAN go upto the full amount but is only likely to down south.

True – but if this guy is affected by the ‘new cap’ – it is the overall figure which is being reduced – a quick google suggests the cut hits primarily housing benefit – so unless I’ve missed something the impact of the cap is that it will bring the overall figure down till it hits £1668 – so anyone impacted is getting more than that?

You’re more than welcome to give it a go. You’ll need four kids with you as well. Don’t forget things like transport costs, food outside, ‘phone etc. And all the other costs which aren’t mentioned but are part of life. such as clothes (kids grow out of them pretty quick), stuff for school etc. My fag packet calculations give £35.60 per day after your £600 pm rent, for an adult and four kids. I’m sure you could ‘survive’, but it’d be shit. And your figures are based on a maximum anyone can get, not what they actually get, which could be a lot less, depending on circumstances.

No thanks. I have a good salary, and yet I wouldn’t want to support 4 kids on it, as it would make money tight. So, you know, I’ve decided not to have 4 kids..

the hustler
Benefits should be for those in need not a lifestyle choice, tbh I dont think any ‘benefits’ should be cash, it should all be via voucher for necessities,I susprct there would be far fewer benefit ‘claimants’ this way.

It’s popular suggestion – if I was geniunely hard up I wouldn’t give a monkey’s if I was given cash in the bank, or a voucher to be spent only on food / necessities (ie. no fags / booze / scratchcards) but the government would probably manage to **** that up by putting the voucher scheme out to tender so that they were only redeemable in certain shops – let’s face it – probably ones that the government top brass have a shit load of shares in.

So, we’d probably end up with the situation where people struggling with addictions etc. would flog them at below face value for cash to spend on booze / fags / scratchcards / drugs anyway & their kids would be worse off than before.

Except he isn’t cos that the **** LONDON CAP!!!!!

molgrips – Member
That would benefit poor people but disadvantage those well off enough to be landlords. Who do you think needs our help? The poor, to survive – or the well off, to get a bit more well off?

It wouldn’t benefit the poor, housing benefit only passes via them to the landlord. They’d be in the same situation they are now but the benefit bill would have reduced as required. I’m not sure my proposal is going to be popular

No thanks. I have a good salary, and yet I wouldn’t want to support 4 kids on it, as it would make money tight. So, you know, I’ve decided not to have 4 kids..

Not even a braaaaahn one?

So, you know, I’ve decided not to have 4 kids..

As if every kid is the result of a conscious decision to have them.

As if innocent kids should pay the price for their parents’ mistakes. You sound like a lovely chap.

I have a good salary, and yet I wouldn’t want to support 4 kids on it, as it would make money tight. So, you know, I’ve decided not to have 4 kids..

You know, there’s probably a percentage of folk struggling on benefits that may once have enjoyed a much better salary than you and easily afforded a big house, 4 kids & 5 holidays per year until some terrible chain of events, illness / death in the family / redundancy / mental health issues / all of the above turned everything on it’s head – benefits don’t just apply to those folk you see on the TV documentaries… although, yes there are some that sadly see a large family as a source of income, they probably should keep it in their pants.

I think I might be another struggling to feel for the guy.

I think too many people have lost their way, and lost the link between work and lifestyle. We cannot, and shouldn’t allow able bodied, able minded to live indefinitely off benefits because they can. If you are unable to work because of sickness or disability you should be provided with a ‘nice’ lifestyle, that’s what a decent society does – but we can’t because we spend too much supporting people who are lazy. If you lose your job you should be supported until you can find another one, we shouldn’t live in a society when people get made redundant and face losing their homes but we can’t afford to do it properly because too many people are lazy and ‘play the system’.

A total cap of £1540 outside of London, I’m sorry, but that’s a decent income these days. It’s not going to afford you a great lifestyle, but lots of people work very hard to earn that. It’s what someone earning £22500 a year would take home or £8500 more than someone on minimum wage would earn full-time.

If I am right (and I hope I am not) about the scale and impact of the eurozone collapse triggered by the Greek debt crises these cuts will pale into insignificance versus what will be required. The Labour Party created an unsustainable welfare burden which has and will take many years to resolve.