Benefits Cap

[vetran]

£26,000 after tax is a good wage for a single earner


UK Average Salary Graphs | Career Advice | Monster.co.uk


feeding £26000 into the IFS calculator with 2 kids:

IFS - Where do you fit in?

Taking into account household size and composition (click here to see how), we have calculated your position in the income distribution. With a household after tax income of £499 per week, you have a higher income than around 38% of the population - equivalent to about 23.1 million individuals.

If you give them 5 kids
you have a higher income than around 17% of the population - equivalent to about 10.3 million individuals.

And if you give them 10 kids
You have a higher income than around 6% of the population - equivalent to about 3.6 million individuals.


so even with 10 kids they are better off than 6% of the population. With 5 kids they are just in the bottom 20% and with 2 kids they just fall into the bottom 40% hardly grinding poverty if they have no outgoings related to work.

[The Spartan]

You are showing a certain level of ignorance there - "family allowance" hasn't existed for years, everyone gets it (benefits or not) and it's called Child Benefit. This is simple basic stuff - if you don't know that, your contribution doesn't count for much.

It might be basic stuff if you receive it where as I do not, therefore why would I actually know what it has changed to regardless of name it's still the same.

[d000hg]

They don't need to do that, thay just need to cut your landlord benefit by 50%. Problem solved.

Since housing benefit is based on the rent charged, not a fixed amount like JSA, your suggestion doesn't even make sense. The only way to achieve what you seem to be wanting is to set a cap on housing benefits based on family size, but that's already happening.

[d000hg]

It might be basic stuff if you receive it where as I do not, therefore why would I actually know what it has changed to regardless of name it's still the same.

How can you make assertions the system is wrong if you don't know what the system is? How benefits are awarded and become eligible are constantly changing so saying it's "just another name for the same thing" is inaccurate. It'd be like saying "the UK tax system is no good" without knowing what VAT is.

[d000hg]

£26,000 after tax is a good wage for a single earner


UK Average Salary Graphs | Career Advice | Monster.co.uk


feeding £26000 into the IFS calculator with 2 kids:

IFS - Where do you fit in?

What exact figures did you put in IFS for total annual salary and council tax? And are you assuming a single adult or 2 parents? Just want to repeat your test...

[vetran]

The government can fix that any time, make social housing available and offer it to claimants.

make housing provision national, long term unemployed have to relocate. sorry Mr Claimant you have been out of work for 5 years we have a nice flat in Cardiff / Birmingham you will have to move out of your central London pad funded by taxpayers.

They tried it a few years ago moving all the Asylum seekers out of London, they all reappeared down south. Despite the fact they had no family here and 'fled' for their lives (not a problem popping back home for weddings etc). So it may well be harder than it first appeared.

There are only so many houses available down south why fill them up with people who have no intention of working here? Or are already working but claiming as well.

No its not nice, but it is fair that working people have a better standard of life than people which have no intention of contributing.

Don't agree with a lifetime limit it, people may genuinely need more and we should give it to them, the difficulty is deciding how much more they might need.

Not sure where you have seen this grinding poverty? My experience is that despite a badly managed and disorganised welfare system provision seems to be satisfactory overall.

Now if there truly was poverty caused by benefits it would make sense that the poorest gave up alcohol to feed their poor wee wains but the facts suggest they don't.

Reported drinking above guidelines is slightly
higher in the least deprived areas at 39%
compared to the others, although this may
not be statistically significant. (I would suggest this was due to the fact many of the other groups were under reporting but it may be all rich people are drunkards not something I have noticed)


The alcohol-related mortality rate in the most deprived
communities of Wales was 22.0 per 100,000
in 2002-2006, more than three times higher
than 6.2 in the least deprived areas.

(this may be a cause and effect - I'm dying of drink therefore I'm poor and unemployed, not suggesting all alcoholics are unemployed but that most terminal ones are) But this suggests either they are getting poorer quality alcohol or they are drinking more of it.

Its pretty much a flat line for consumption regardless of economic membership. I would suggest the higher the economic status the more likely you are to purchase alcohol at bargain rates (booze cruises in my experience are a very middle class pastime) my experience with benefit claimants is the alcohol is purchased at full price normally at the local corner shop.

Similarly the lower the economic group the more likely (in my experience) you are to smoke regularly. I know plenty of professionals that smoke < 5 cigarettes a month (one or two in a pub or at parties) but very few that smoke > 5 a day.

Now obviously this is only indicative more investigation is needed to confirm but the smoking drinking benefit claimant isn't that unusual in my limited experience. If they were truly living hand to mouth they would cut out the fags & booze.

[d000hg]

If they push the claimants to cheaper/less popular areas like the north-east, prices here will increase and bingobob will be even more incensed at how much 'benefits' I receive

[The Spartan]

Another thing you've got to love is the fact that any new housing developments have to have a certain number of houses for social housing. So you could be paying £200,000+ for a nice newly built house only to find out that the house next door or opposite you is full of scroungers

[vetran]

What exact figures did you put in IFS for total annual salary and council tax? And are you assuming a single adult or 2 parents? Just want to repeat your test...

Its net = £26000, £0 council tax (you don't have to pay it)

2 adults (they don't both have to be the parents) , 2 Kids,5 Kids, 10 kids

[KimberleyChris]

I'm all in favour of a benefits cap.

The cap should be bright orange, must be worn at all times, and it should say in big letters "I am a no good scrounging git".

Just when I thought we could sink no lower.

We have a Government who is supposed to run the country for us...that's what we pay them for.

1. Create a vibrant economy where there is work for all, or as near as possible.
2. If you cannot do that, then leave office and we will find somebody who can.
3. If there are more people than jobs, then shut the door until this has been rectified.
4. If you succeed in full employment, and find any work-shy people, then allocate them a job.
5. If necessary, rescue people who want to work from unemployment blackspots to where they are needed.
6. Re-locate the persistant workshy into their homes.

I'm just 'joe bloggs' with no high-faluting university degree in economics, but even a numptie like me can see what needs to be done.