Jump to content

£26,000 Benefit Cap


Guest Barry Fish
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 422
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

£35,000 in Oldham is a LOT of money... I can ensure you of that...

Still not seeing who it will be an issue for...

Whether £35,000 is a lot of money is fully dependent on how many people that £35k is supporting.

As that article makes clear, the benefit cap will mostly hit normally-working genuine benefit claimants and hit to far less extent the rarely-working perhaps-not-genuine claimants that this cap is designed to hit.

The idea behind the cap is sound in theory but the application of the cap won't have the desired effect on adults and will simply cause more poverty for already heavily-disadvantaged kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the current situation which has gone on for the last decade where huge amounts of public money is funneled into the pockets of private landlords to create huge btl empires can't continue and just feeds the higher rents.. equally I can't see things getting better when the population is increasing at 4 times the rate houses are being built..

saying all that though the cap seems affordable in most parts of the country, the issue seems to be with the families that want to stay in the expensive parts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know REAL people in Oldham EARNiNG less with that amount of children who survive... But you stick to the fictional made up example in the rag...

... and who survive with the addition of child benefit and who knows what other benefits/tax credits. The chances are that you know only of their earnings, not their total income from all directions.

This whole idea of moving somewhere cheaper is nuts, unless ther govt is going to help finance families to move home. Moving house costs a lot of money, and while the unthinking might say "well, they're unemployed so they can do it themselves" that only works if the moving-from property or moving-to property is prepared to give them that house rent-free for a day or two for the transition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a £35,000 income the poverty argument is bollocks...

and you just throwing in £35k at every opportunity is bollocks too. :rolleyes:

Whether an income of that amount improverishes someone is 100% dependent on what irrevocable expenses have to come out of that money.

And it's funny how only last week you were banging on about how you deserved child benefit despite having an income over twice that amount.

So in your world the already-rich deserve benefits to help them live but the desperate do not. Nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know for a fact you can raise a family of four on £35K income.... The guardian article is bullshit...

It 100% depends on what the irrevocable expenses are. :rolleyes:

That £35k is really only £26k.

The rent in the real-world example that article gave is £1738pm, which leaves just £428 for electric, gas & water, a telephone (get a job without a telephone nowadays? Hugely unlikely!), and food for 6 people.

Without deducting money for the utilities, there's £2.34 per-person per day - EVERY DAY - with which to buy all living requirements (food, clothing, hygene products, etc) for each of those 6 people ... it might be possible, but given how much you moan currently in your privileged financial position then you'd deafen us if it was you having to get by on just that. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just done tyhe calculation of the benefits that the family in Oldham would be receiving at the moment and it is as follows per annum.

JSA: 5509.40 per annum

Child Tax Credits: 11306.60 per annum

Housing Benefit: 7800 per annum

That comes to a total of £24,616 per annum thay would receive on what would be classed as benefits. At the moment Child Benefit is not used as income in the calculation of any other benefit such as Housing Benefit etc. Labour took it out of the equation in their bid to end child poverty. However the if this bill is passed it will be used as income for the Universal Credit. In addition they add Council Tax Benefit on top as well, so the benefits figure would become

Total Benefits: 24,616 per annum

Child Benefit for 4: 60.50 per week = 3146

Council Tax (Band A) 1028.55

Total: 28790.55

So the family of 4 in Oldham is going to lose £2790.55 a year once the cap come in. Thats nearly £54 a quid a week. Now that figure does not include education payments such as free school meals or the replacement grants for EMA, but for 4 kids I would guesstimate at least another £60?

What is planned here is diabolical in the least. Labour made a good move taking Child Benefit out of the loop, and with most of the famliles I know (and myself) the money goes directly to the kids. Now we have a situation of "Fuck You, we want it back".

Also lets not forget that the £150 per week rent figure that is stated is the maximum that can be paid for a 4 bedroomed house in Oldham. The rent for the family may well be above that (70% of rents in the area are higher than the LHA payable), and they have to make the shortfall anyway, so probably far worse off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not put that cap on for say, 2 adults + 2/3 children? Anymore more kids and you get an extra supplement? Would still work out far less than is currently being handed out.

something like that would be far more sensible - but the govt is totally against any sort of supplement for extra kids, which is why they're insistant that even the 'universal benefit' that is child benefit is included within the cap.

IDS is giving a personal guarantee that not one single family will be made homeless as a result of this cap. I've always thought him a dick but now he's just proving himself stupid beyond belief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So no one can really justify why it shouldn't happen... Other than Vodafone are c**ts...

If you choose to have six children then that's your choice... But you should only expect so much state help... There should be a cut off point...

Edited by Ed209
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never understood why people can't work for benefits? I was unemployed for about 6 months and would have happily worked for the council cutting grass or something for my £50 a week! Big holes in CVs does not look good and doesn't help in attaining future employment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of interest, I'm not totally clued up on the fine details. Does this include *all* benefit?

What if a single mother has 4 children, two of which suffer from disabilities. Is the disability payments included in this cap or are they seperate? Because if it is, then that could start causing all kind of problems.

Why does it include all benefits? Because that's what the govt has deemed to be the correct way of doing it, from the basis that "right minded taxpayers" don't think they should get more.

What that pans out as is yet another tory application of divide and rule, of turning the poor against the poor as a diversion from the fact that small number of the rich are running off with all the money to cause those poor in the first place.

I believe it's the case that it'll affect the sort of example family you mention no differently to one with all-heathy kids. It's the indiscriminate impact of this bebefit change that pays no regard to real life circumstances which has had even the torey party at prayer - the Church of England - kicking off about it.

IDS is a moron. Even that well-known communist (:lol:) Eric Pickles has told him that this change will cost the country more and not less, because it costs far more to pick up the pieces of a broken family than it does to pay a living rate of benefit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never understood why people can't work for benefits? I was unemployed for about 6 months and would have happily worked for the council cutting grass or something for my £50 a week!

if something is a task that is deemed as a necessity then it's only right that that task is fulfilled by someone in an employed role - otherwise all forcing people to do necessary tasks would achieve is a greater-still level of unemployment.

Which is funnily enough exactly what Dave Moron's 'Big Society' is designed to achieve.

The right wants to pretend that class warfare is dead, something from a previous time - while ensuring that class-civil-war kicks off as a method of control of the 'lower orders'. Sadly the irony of that gets lost by the dimmer members of society that implement the tories class warfare for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...