So Mr Cameron wants to cap the benefit package for anyone to £500 a week ...
| Related: | Personal Finance•Benefits•Other Benefits |
Or £26,000 a year which would equate to a PAYE wage of around £35,000 a year. And the church leaders consider this 'un-Christian'.
Obviously this is a very emotive issue and one that will please some but upset others. On one hand, is it right that society can give people out of work ( or those that will not work ) a 'free' £35000 pa equivalent salary or is it a just and right thing to do?
Personally I am very much on the fence here and there is so much more to take into account ... induced poverty, family stability, children's needs, being able to eat properly, keeping warm and of course the continually decaying job market. I suppose it all depends if you have always been a worker, have a specific problem finding work or being able to work or indeed never having had that 'work ethos'.
Of course, the incentive to work and be a useful member of society should always be a priority for the good of the nation. But I suspect that it's a fine balance to survive when that very equation just doesn't balance.
The UK has to be applauded in some ways for its social benefits but have we simply become too soft now? And remember, all EU residents can come here and take advantage of the major state benefits as well.
WE have all heard how Cameron's public sector cuts have had a dramatic effect on our economy, so is it right or wrong to trim the benefit package in this way? Can the country afford it? And if the employment market continues to shrink, should we understandably provide reasonable benefit levels for those that cannot find work or indeed those that may never even work again?
It's a big question.
Responses (17)
Tax payers should not be paying for the unemployed to have a better standard of living than they can afford. Especially the workshy. It is simply immoral.
I heard on Radio 4 yesterday that a vicar had challenged the Archbishops on the grounds that vicars get a salary of £22k.
I have to say I think he had a point!
It beggars belief doesn't it Snoopy that someone can obtain more on benefits than the average earner in this country.
I feel the old BP rising when I hear such stories.
Still I suppose I have to try and understand that every case should be considered independently and 'suck it up' with the rest of us who think this is unfair.
Yes it is a big question and how this is going to be answered without causing major dissent amongst some I just don't know.
Sad to say, Lillie, very little is 'fair' in life anymore. And if you have are creative enough and play the system, the benefit system can do wonders for you! We are forced to pay taxes but have very little say in how they are spent .. is that fair? I know of one family with eight children whose child tax credit alone pays their £1200/month mortgage. Perhaps as a nation, we are indeed the author of our own misfortune ....
It's time for some courageous radical thinking by those in power, on the subject of the whole welfare state. It was founded on flawed calculations (which is why I'll never trust anything said by an actuary - they can crunch numbers all they like, but they still get it wrong) and human beings have been ingenious enough to exploit it in every way.
How about - you only have entitlement if you have contributed beforehand (so no benefits for nothing - let the feckless teenagers be the burden of their own families - they'd soon get a kick up the behind) and financial support to be time-limited (but allied to vocational support). I know there are the emotive issues of children and disabilities, but (as said by many others) people shouldn't have kids they can't afford to raise and too many people are on disability benefits because their doctors know it's an easy system to leech off.
Heaven knows there are jobs available - we have hundreds of thousands of foreigners coming here to do them, simply because a lot of workshy Brits know they're better off on the scrounge than if they make an effort.
This topic was discussed a few weeks ago on this site it seems we are becoming parrots and such repeats in a short period discredits the site.
Actually Noddy, the media was full of it yesterday and I think it's a very apt and hot topic, with no discredit to the site. I, for one, work actively within the benefits system and care passionately that the system is made fair for all although being realistic, I think that is unlikely to happen overnight, if at all.
Dead right, Snoops. Perhaps Noddy should have posted this in the 'Parrots' thread.
No offence intended, Noddy. ;-)
Well that speaks for itself, Feline .... lol
Wot U mean, Snoops?
You don't think I intended offence to our Noddy, do you? Or are you referring to the parrot speaking for itself?
Of course, it it happened to be a Mormon parrot it would be Poly gamous.
OK, I've finished my gin, now I'll get my coat....
Right with you, just get my coat Sis. Is that us Polygon then?
Well, Poly going in a minute I think, Lillie!
No Feline, no offence to Noddy at all ... it's just that a parrot speaks for itself!
Anyway, you can always tell when a parrot is intelligent, it speaks in Polly-syllables!
I hear they put on an opera show at the local zoo ... "The parrots of Penzance" !
Haa better get your coat too Snoopy before you get tarred and feathered with feline and myself.
Tarred and feathered, hmmm, I quite like that idea, Lillie!
Lol..I can't work out whether we're bored or desperate housewives today girls, what do you think?
As for you Snoopy I don't know what your excuse is??
The fact that this topic has resurfaced only illustrates the depth of feeling on the issue. If only somebody in power would pay attention.
Not really nods this is the discussion forum the real money forum where serious money issues are solved (usually by fruiters gman and snoops) is on the Q&A forum.
Is there any other country in the world who will pay someone the equivalent of a £35000 wage for not working. The rest of the world thinks we are mad, that's why economic migrants want to come here rather than other Western countries.
Hi Decka and welcome to the forum.
Simply but effectively put, I think.
I agree.
Quite right Decka, we are the world's soft touch and becoming so overcrowded because of it.
You have hit it on the nail Decka with very few words you have said what the majority of people think, thank you.
Spot on Decka, we are the world's laughing stock.
I work in a company which is (at least) 90% immigrant-staffed and so many of them openly state that the UK is seen as the end of the rainbow where the pot of gold lies. One chap even proudly told me his 8-year history of migration from Iraq via Turkey, Greece, Italy, Germany and France, always aiming for the UK. At least the foreigners I work with ARE working, but I've spoken with some from sub-Saharan Africa who admitted that they came with no papers knowing that our system would most likely let them stay and put a nice roof over their head straight away.
I completely agree!
Right on, brother Decka!
Welcome and good post!
Couldnt agree more Dexsta!
It's completely insane.
If they want the cap to be so high, why isn't the minimum wage set at over £35,000 to provide an incentive to work?
no benefits untill you have 5 years stamps on your cards
Excellent choice!
I agree.
At least five years -
i wish the government would take notice of this site and look at the coments you good people are giving
Of course there has to be a benefits cap. There is no incentive to work if you are getting £500 per week. Un-Christian, why is it un-Christian? It is more un-Christian not to work and not to contribute to the system. Most people I know are hard working and reliable, but I've also come across the other type who screw the system for as much as they can get.
I couldn't agree more ingol ... the problem in differentiating between 'good' and 'bad' people on the benefits system is in the burden of proof ... without this, people cannot be called liars and if you factor in human rights, you have a society where playing the system can be regarded as 'fair game' by these people. And I have lost count of the number of people that complain to me about specific acts of benefit fraud and then refuse to provide details for investigation purposes.
yes ingol they should be weeded out
They should be named and shamed by putting their names and face in a regular newspaper page and on the internet and made sure either they and their entire family are deported or are never able to claim benefits again that would soon make the fiddlers think twice but like everything in this country we are too afraid to take Draconian measures even though they are really now what is required if we are ever to right the toppled cruiseliner that was the UK.
I'd love that much a week! Unfortunately pride gets in the way and won't let me play the system. Much rather be working, sets a much better role model for my children
Of course this should be capped. What is the point of going to work for less when you can stay at home at that amount. If a family want to have that many kids then they should find work to be able to look after them and not let the govt provide for them. For too long this govt has been taking a softy softy approach. Look at the public sector which has to take a second pay freeze and a large amount of them are getting paid less than £26,000.00.
Go ahead and cap it, the working public will put their support behind the govt.
I felt sure Church leaders were against stopping child allowance, as it will directly affect children. Am I correct?
Greydo, I think that the debate examined if Child Benefit should be included in the cap as it remained a state benefit and was therefore equally funded by the taxpayer. It was argued that the effect of excluding child benefit in the calculation that families on child benefit would have an income higher than average earnings and therefore no upper limit except that set by the number of children.
There was evidence in the proposals that people with a higher number of children would face benefit penalties as a result.
Appreciate comment Snoopy48. However, if Child Benefit stops AND benefits capped, larger families are penalised. Now, I think the Church leaders in their wisdom (and they are trained to really think and listen) felt that single action would/could disadvantage children from large families. In a caring society, this is unacceptable. Your thoughts,and those within the Forum will be welcomed!
I agree with you on that one greydo .... I think the government want to achieve a balance between fairness and not funding individual families who decide to have several children as it could be said that the reason for this is simply to 'enjoy' the financial state benefits the children bring. From what I have read, these benefit reforms encourage much smaller families and it has to be said that people should not create large families purely for uncapped taxpayers' money. I think that is the message that the government is trying to get across.
The benefit reforms are only 'radical' as they are an attempt to qualify and curtail the unsustainable and generous levels of benefits that this country has enjoyed for too long. As people have said, where else can you go in the world and enjoy such 'handouts'? And while I fully agree that redistribution of wealth by certain benefits is an excellent thing, there has to be limits and it must never allow people to play the system with public money.
The main problem is ( as I see it ) that society does not function on the back of an 'equation' and there will never be full employment again, there will always be people who cannot function normally in society and there will always be people that suffer as well as those that use the system to advantage .... it's a big balancing act to get it right and I don't think you ever will. And we really need to look at the situation where every EU resident can in theory enter the country and qualify for the main state benefits here ( child benefit, working and child tax credits, housing benefit, council tax benefits etc )...
I have to say that I believe Cameron is going in the right direction but I say he has to do more to let the indigenous British people value their place in this country.
A brilliant answer Snoops - I don't mind how many children they have as long as the "man" of the house or if he is disabled "woman" goes out to work and works their backsides off to pay for their own children to be clothed, fed and looked after properly and not expect us the tax payers to support them. A great many of them are living in luxury compared to some of our poorer families who cannot find work and have to go on benefits until they do. As long as they are going all out to find work I don't mind they are on benefits but give them a time limit as there are jobs out there many are just too idle to look for one. You have to be prepared to take whatever you can get and swallow your pride if you want to produce so many children that you cannot afford. p.s. I think a huge packet of condoms wouldn't go amiss with their first benefit payments and a note saying "use these or else".
Snoopy48 and Sabre put up strong views that I lean to on this difficult issue. Keep the writing going! Does this make 'forumites' think?
It certainly makes me think, greydo!
Well look at it this way the only ones complaining are the ones with huge families sytematically ripping the system off - Bakri the one eyed pirate radical twat, choudri , etc etc etc - basically the muslims who are outbreeding us - capping them in my opinion couldnt be better.
They say if the current birthrate continues by 2070 there will be more muslims in this country than anyone else and that can only be a bad thing.
Name me one muslim country that doesnt repress women , homosexuals , anyone that stands up for peace and goodness and decency!
Go cogitate on that with yer morning tea and digestive!
>;-+
if they have children yes welldone but make sure they can look after them and not relying on the state to feed cloth and educate them
Hate to be controversial again....But
I think it should be like America - good few months (12 months would be ok) and if you havent found a job you get nowt!
And if you think thats harsh pop over to Poland or Slovakia or Romania and see how they deal with things!
Too many lazy fat-arses in this country and it makes me sick to see the pandering and molly codling we get in this country - there are plenty of jobs - might be street sweeping or cleaning the jobbies from a toilet but the Eastern Europeans are just glad for a job whilst our youngsters want everything on a gold plate.
Get real this country is living in fantasy land and if it continues we will be morally , socially and economically bankrupt by 2050 and delegated as a no-hoper third worls country.
Sheez..............
if omendata ever wants to be a M P he would get my vote
I think quite a few of us would vote for him, blueJ!
Aww shucks you are so nice!
Gosh, have we embarrassed OD...........?
I rather doubt it, Jazzj! But wouldn't it be nice....
I don't think we could embarrass Omen with anything we said or did sisters.
Not for lack of trying Sabre :)
Thank you very much for your controversial views Omen I endorse them entirely and could go further along the lines you espouse.
We are fast approaching the so called third world countries when we look at our financial situation. As such, the benefits provided by HMG should match those of the ones provided in the so called third world countries.
This was a really interesting comment HSP and I suspect that if the world is undergoing some kind of 'financial balancing' metamorphosis, there will come a time when true values may begin to emerge. Until then, I can only see the greed and inanity of mankind prevail!
i wish he would start the banks and RBS especially
He should cap bonus payments to bankers as well.
Posts within the money.co.uk community represent the views, experiences and opinions of members only. They should not be taken as financial advice and should not be followed without further research.
More Discussions for Other Benefits
Get fast answers to your money questions, Expert insight, top tips & much more...
Hi linda31 and welcome to the forum.
There will be many that agree totally with you and some that won't. Personally, I have worked continuously for some forty years now and often with long, unremitting hours. I work in a benefit linked role and am so aware just how well people can fare without working for it. Having said that, I did receive benefits for my late wife that supported our needs well but then she was seriously ill at the time.
Sad to say, there are people out there who are 'workshy' but doing anything about that is easier said than done. I agree, taxpayers should not be paying taxes to fund a better stadard of living than they personally have ... and perhaps Cameron has a point. But anyone of us could have to claim benefits at some time and we may well feel different about it ....
Thank you for your response. I agree that genuine cases should receive benefits. The problem I have is that many people who have no intention of working have large families and then expect the taxpayer to fund them. Responsible people limit the size of their families to what they can afford. When my husband was made redundant a couple of years ago we only received the basic jobseekers allowance even though he has worked all his life and paid his taxes and national insurance. We were put through the mill before we received a penny even though we had two young children and needed the money. My husband worked day and night searching for a job and sent off dozens of applications every week. Within a few months he had another job through his own efforts. It is hard to sympathise with people who have no intention of ever working, behave irresponsibly and are handed money on a plate!!!
We go over and over this subject constantly and never seem to agree on it. Why should anyone have £500 plus each week for sitting on their *rses and doing nothing but produce kids they expect other folks like us to pay for them. What about all the immigrants that are coming into our Country and somehow receiving benefits which are far more than our own people receive. Where is the justification in that. I have friends, family and others who are on the bare bones of their backsides and even though
they are filling in masses of application forms never seem to get a job. The paltry amount of money they receive is what they are entitled to having paid their taxes but at least they are desperately trying to get jobs. There is so much I want to say but as my BP is already up this week I shall remain silent
Many of us will echo what you say here Linda31 ... I have a friend who has married a Chinese lady ... he states that in China, if you don't work that day, you don't eat that evening. And their economy is not thwarted by a massive benefit bill as a result. In a way, it's all about the benefit system allowing the nation to share resources ... but as you say, when you need it yourself, it can be a trial and tribulation!
While we may feel that hot air and forum opnion doesn't get us anywhere, Sabre, our opinions do matter and you may well be surprised who reads this forum, after all it is in the public domain and I am sure that central government take an interest.
There will always be people who feel passionate about the mis-direction of benefits and of course those that simply think giving and receiving regardless is right. The argument will never be won I fear. But one thing I believe is for sure, the country must do something to rationalise our benefit bill ...
I have to agree with you, linda31.
Having worked and paid my taxes all my life, the only time I ever claimed any benefit was when I was made redundant and was out of work for six months in the 1980's. I eventually got a job on less than half the salary I had been earning and, with the expense of going to work, I was only very marginally better off than I would have been on unemployment benefit. But I chose work over unemployment, and that was in the days when you could claim just about indefinitely so long as you signed on every fortnight.
My husband receives disability living allowance, which is a great help to us. He could legitamately give up work and live on the State, but he too chooses to continue working. I understand benefits for those truly in need are to protected, for which I'm very grateful.
I don't envy the government the task of trying to sort this out. We can't carry on as we are, but it must be very difficult to strike the right balance between helping the needy and subsidising the workshy.
Then there are the ramifications such as the children of the workshy. You're quite right in saying that responsible people limit their families if they can't afford to support lots of children, but they didn't ask to be born and we surely have a responsibility to them as a civlilised society.
Thank you Snoopy you have helped my blood pressure to go down nicely. I just think at times that the Government must be deaf and daft and completely oblivious to how people are abusing the system and then my blood boils knowing I cannot do anything about these greedy, lazy and obnoxious people who are laughing like hell and living a royal life while others are so poor living below the poverty line. I know we have had a posting like this before Noddy but it's always so good to bring it to the fore again or else how are new members to know what's gone before unless they scroll through hundreds of postings.
Quite so, Sabre.
Absolutely linda!
This is the first time I have ever contributed to such a forum however I totally agree with Linda. I too was made redundant some 10 years ago and eventually had to take my private pension early, which means I will receive a lot less when I do retire.
I got another job and recently was made redundant again, BUT GUESS WHAT, because I looked after myself and provided my own solution, I am now not allowed to claim unemployment benefit ( I have paid in for over 40 years) because I have an income.
Incidentally I believe that to receive £26000, after tax and personal allowances you would need a salary of £46000 and how many of you earn that kind of money for sitting on your backside?
Hi, norman_w and a warm welcome to the Forum.
I think most of us agree totally with what you say.