Do you really think that people getting £71 a week are living better than you.
Thats £71 a week tax free which isn't means tested together with other benefits. I hate to say it but its money given because a person happens to have a disability almost compensation if you will. I get it totally if someone is severely disabled in the sense they are quadraplegic or have locked in syndrome for example in those cases extra support is definitely warranted.
But someone getting £71 quid a week is most certainly better off than me, I don't have an issue with people on benefits honestly I don't, I am happy to pay my way and help those in a much more difficult position than I am. But it is a two way street, this entitlement culture does need to end, when someone has an accident one of the first things that is mentioned is what compensation is applicable and what benefits.
Our parents and grand parents before that didn't have these benefits they worked very hard and yes paid the price with having very worn bodies by the time they retired but it was honest. Their attitudes weren't self indulgent it was almost altruistic when compared to todays modern society, .
Thats £71 a week tax free which isn't means tested together with other benefits. I hate to say it but its money given because a person happens to have a disability almost compensation if you will. I get it totally if someone is severely disabled in the sense they are quadraplegic or have locked in syndrome for example in those cases extra support is definitely warranted.
But someone getting £71 quid a week is most certainly better off than me, I don't have an issue with people on benefits honestly I don't, I am happy to pay my way and help those in a much more difficult position than I am. But it is a two way street, this entitlement culture does need to end, when someone has an accident one of the first things that is mentioned is what compensation is applicable and what benefits.
Our parents and grand parents before that didn't have these benefits they worked very hard and yes paid the price with having very worn bodies by the time they retired but it was honest. Their attitudes weren't self indulgent it was almost altruistic when compared to todays modern society, .
You only have to look at countries that don't have a benefits system to see that you would be worse off if we didn't have one.
Rich people are still rich in those countries and the poor still have to work just as hard to stay poor.
Thats £71 a week tax free which isn't means tested together with other benefits. I hate to say it but its money given because a person happens to have a disability almost compensation if you will. I get it totally if someone is severely disabled in the sense they are quadraplegic or have locked in syndrome for example in those cases extra support is definitely warranted.
But someone getting £71 quid a week is most certainly better off than me, I don't have an issue with people on benefits honestly I don't, I am happy to pay my way and help those in a much more difficult position than I am. But it is a two way street, this entitlement culture does need to end, when someone has an accident one of the first things that is mentioned is what compensation is applicable and what benefits.
Our parents and grand parents before that didn't have these benefits they worked very hard and yes paid the price with having very worn bodies by the time they retired but it was honest. Their attitudes weren't self indulgent it was almost altruistic when compared to todays modern society, .
Now I just think that you are Trolling and telling Porkies about your circumstances.
People on Benefits have to pay for their own Utilities, Water/Gas/Electric & TV Licence out of that £71, as well as usually something towards their rent as HB usually covers around 90% of Private Rents. This usually leaves them with around £15/week for food and everything else, apart from perhaps the less than 1% that break the law by doing other work.
When I was of working age I used to pay nearly £700 a month in deductions, and it did not bother me one jot to help those less fortunate than me, because I always felt that I was only one work accident away from their circumstances myself. How Britain has changed.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and are probably getting your facts from The Daily Mail or other disreputable Tory rag.
When I was of working age I used to pay nearly £700 a month in deductions, and it did not bother me one jot to help those less fortunate than me, because I always felt that I was only one work accident away from their circumstances myself. How Britain has changed.
.
Yes and most of the £700 would be used for things that you used, an even smaller percentage of it would go to help those on benefits.
But someone getting £71 quid a week is most certainly better off than me, I don't have an issue with people on benefits honestly I don't, I am happy to pay my way and help those in a much more difficult position than I am. But it is a two way street, this entitlement culture does need to end, when someone has an accident one of the first things that is mentioned is what compensation is applicable and what benefits.
That £71 has to pay for food, utilities, clothing and other essentials but if anything goes wrong like the fridge, cooker or whatever you are buggered - holidays, forget 'em.
With regards to accident then yes compensation is the first thing to seek and benefits go on the back shelf unless you receive no compensation.
TBH I don't think the state should pick up the tab when whoever caused the accident is liable, govt should go after them for any benefits paid out.
Our parents and grand parents before that didn't have these benefits they worked very hard and yes paid the price with having very worn bodies by the time they retired but it was honest. Their attitudes weren't self indulgent it was almost altruistic when compared to todays modern society, .
Not much of a life for them though was it and thankfully we moved on from those days - until now it seems.
Now I just think that you are Trolling and telling Porkies about your circumstances.
People on Benefits have to pay for their own Utilities, Water/Gas/Electric & TV Licence out of that £71, as well as usually something towards their rent as HB usually covers around 90% of Private Rents. This usually leaves them with around £15/week for food and everything else, apart from perhaps the less than 1% that break the law by doing other work.
When I was of working age I used to pay nearly £700 a month in deductions, and it did not bother me one jot to help those less fortunate than me, because I always felt that I was only one work accident away from their circumstances myself. How Britain has changed.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and are probably getting your facts from The Daily Mail or other disreputable Tory rag.
So what you are telling me that people who receive DLA get just that and nothing else (aside from HB)?
FYI I am not trolling and I have not been sourcing my facts from the daily fail.
I don't read Tory rags, so frankly your pompous accusations are damn insulting. Why is it when difficult discussions happen on here, people feel the need to resort to type and insult one another
If I was trolling my lovely I certainly would be a lot more discourteous than I have been.
So what you are telling me that people who receive DLA get just that and nothing else (aside from HB)?
FYI I am not trolling and I have not been sourcing my facts from the daily fail.
I don't read Tory rags, so frankly your pompous accusations are damn insulting. Why is it when difficult discussions happen on here, people feel the need to resort to type and insult one another
If I was trolling my lovely I certainly would be a lot more discourteous than I have been.
Oh really so why does you twitter account say, otherwise, and point to this blog, you are not married nor have you described your circumstances correctly, you are a student according to this who hasn't even started a workng life yet.
Typical Tory kid who thinks he can preach to others, before he has even contributed to Society in any way.
You have said council housing is subsidised, which is is not.
You have said people on DLA get cars, which they don't.
You have said people on benefits get houses. That is mostly because they are in need.
If workers hadn't brought up most of the council stock, then there would be plenty left for workers to claim for.
Council housing isn't subsidised ok sorry genuinely I apologise those obviously paying full rent and council tax don't get it subsidised, I have been two quick of the mark on that one and I should have been more specific.
As for people on DLA don't get cars, again I should have been more specific so I am sorry. Those that qualify for the mobility component have the option of leasing one....whether they choose to do so is upto them as I understand it. Or have I misunderstood that as well?
Re people on benefits in the most need.....I really don't know what to say to that.
Oh really so why does you twitter account say, otherwise, and point to this blog, you are not married nor have you described your circumstances correctly, you are a student according to this who hasn't even started a workng life yet.
Typical Tory kid who thinks he can preach to others, before he has even contributed to Society in any way.
I work full time, and study. jesus forgive me for not updating my info! As for married I haven't stated anywhere that I was.....everyone else took it upon them to think I have a wife and for the record if you need to know I won't be having a wife either! IF you must know I am gay, I haven't mislead anyone regarding my circumstances.
Don't paint me as a tory kid, I don't think I can preach to anyone, I come from nothing myself having come from a broken home and been brought up by a single parent who also didn't get sweet fa help from the state. So my apologies if I believe you should reap what you sow! You wan't to deflect to my blog fine, go for it. You want to rub it in and say I lied about being married when I have never stated anywhere I was, again go for it. You wanna take the piss for me being gay, again go for it.
Please just debate the issues and not my character, as that is a battle I won't entertain.
I work full time, and study. jesus forgive me for not updating my info! As for married I haven't stated anywhere that I was.....everyone else took it upon them to think I have a wife and for the record if you need to know I won't be having a wife either! IF you must know I am gay, I haven't mislead anyone regarding my circumstances.
Don't paint me as a tory kid, I don't think I can preach to anyone, I come from nothing myself having come from a broken home and been brought up by a single parent who also didn't get sweet fa help from the state. So my apologies if I believe you should reap what you sow! You wan't to deflect to my blog fine, go for it. You want to rub it in and say I lied about being married when I have never stated anywhere I was, again go for it. You wanna take the piss for me being gay, again go for it.
Please just debate the issues and not my character, as that is a battle I won't entertain.
I don't like the government at all very much if I am honest, its just when we struggle and we really do, it is so disheartening to see people not having to work and seemingly better off than we are.
As for what I earn well it doesn't meat the so called living wage if that indicates much to you. I am thankful for working and he job I have, and I rather be in the position I am now, at least I can hold my head high with what little luxuries I have.
The above post implies that you have a partner, I am sorry for assuming that this was female, however it does not change the facts that you are still at University according to your blog, and have just fabricated much of your argument.
Personally I would feel a lot safer if or when you do finish Uni, that you rule out a career in MI 5.
I think what I was trying to get across is that it isn't a means tested benefit, so it has no baring on any other benefits people will claim for. At least that is how I have understood from reading gov.uk
I think I need to clarify, I believe we as a society we have a responsibility to look after those who find themselves in difficult circumstances, be that being severely disabled or just recently made redundant. The welfare system should be a sustainable way of providing a safety net for those falling out of work and a more targeted and robust ongoing support system to those with severe disabilities. As it is now it does none of those things, and some of what is being proposed are fair measures in my eyes.
The above post implies that you have a partner, I am sorry for assuming that this was female, however it does not change the facts that you are still at University according to your blog, and have just fabricated much of your argument.
Personally I would feel a lot safer if or when you do finish Uni, that you rule out a career in MI 5.
I think what I was trying to get across is that it isn't a means tested benefit, so it has no baring on any other benefits people will claim for. At least that is how I have understood from reading gov.uk
I think I need to clarify, I believe we as a society we have a responsibility to look after those who find themselves in difficult circumstances, be that being severely disabled or just recently made redundant. The welfare system should be a sustainable way of providing a safety net for those falling out of work and a more targeted and robust ongoing support system to those with severe disabilities. As it is now it does none of those things, and some of what is being proposed are fair measures in my eyes.
But it does look after the disabled and those recently redundant.
It is only because of those complaining about it being too generous, that those who are unemployed now, are being made to go through tougher times.
But it does look after the disabled and those recently redundant.
It is only because of those complaining about it being too generous, that those who are unemployed now, are being made to go through tougher times.
This is where I am probably going in contradiction to what I have been saying, those recently made redundant I think need a bigger safety net to fall on at least initially so they can keep their head above water for about three months, then it could be tapered down to standard jobseekers rates and so on.
Disability benefits the myriad that exist aren't targeted more effectively, it just seems we throw money at the problem as opposed to dealing with the root causes. For example an elderly lady who can't climb the stairs has difficulty getting mobile, throwing money at the issue doesn't necessarily give the support. I know this support can be spent on chair lifts and mobility scooters and what not. When people are struggling in the home, physically and mentally support should be forthcoming of course., but it should be with a range of options from home help to a carer assisting them out for their shopping. The focus seems to be on throwing money at the situation.
What I want to know is what tipped us over into deficit?
Surely Labour didn't say, 'Right well we want to buy votes so we'll come up with DLA, but we don't have enough tax coming in, so we'll have to borrow to pay for it'?
Who does that?
Brown allowed too big a credit bubble and too much reliance on the financial sector - so we got hit harder by the recession. He also failed to build an adequate industrial base,enough smaller homes, and really sustainable growth - but then so did Major and Blair too. North Sea oil's decline coincided. There's also been a general failure by British capitalists to take risks,research, innovate, grow businesses, employ people and export. They have been more interested in making things cheaply overseas, selling out to overseas buyers, avoiding risk, transfering costs to their customers waiting on phones for an answer, counting their own salary packages, building property empires and floating around on their yachts.
We don't really have a spending problem. What we have is an economy thats now 20%, at least, smaller, then where it should now be with sustained moderate steady growth, and a tax system that leaves much of the tax take avoided and evaded. Cutting necessary services - from abolishing beat policing, to aircraft carriers with no aircraft, to closing hospitals, and potholes unfiilled - and slashing benefits to the sick and poorly paid, just makes the problem worse. The key thing lacking is not incentives for business or even cheaper labour - its demand, and better incentives and penalties for people to invest to meet it - and not to just take their profits out of the economy to the nearest tax haven
Brown allowed too big a credit bubble and too much reliance on the financial sector - so we got hit harder by the recession. He also failed to build an adequate industrial base,enough smaller homes, and really sustainable growth - but then so did Major and Blair too. North Sea oil's decline coincided. There's also been a general failure by British capitalists to take risks,research, innovate, grow businesses, employ people and export. They have been more interested in making things cheaply overseas, selling out to overseas buyers, avoiding risk, transfering costs to their customers waiting on phones for an answer, counting their own salary packages, building property empires and floating around on their yachts.
We don't really have a spending problem. What we have is an economy thats now 20%, at least, smaller, then where it should now be with sustained moderate steady growth, and a tax system that leaves much of the tax take avoided and evaded. Cutting necessary services - from abolishing beat policing, to aircraft carriers with no aircraft, to closing hospitals, and potholes unfiilled - and slashing benefits to the sick and poorly paid, just makes the problem worse. The key thing lacking is not incentives for business or even cheaper labour - its demand, and better incentives and penalties for people to invest to meet it - and not to just take their profits out of the economy to the nearest tax haven
This is where I am probably going in contradiction to what I have been saying, those recently made redundant I think need a bigger safety net to fall on at least initially so they can keep their head above water for about three months, then it could be tapered down to standard jobseekers rates and so on.
Disability benefits the myriad that exist aren't targeted more effectively, it just seems we throw money at the problem as opposed to dealing with the root causes. For example an elderly lady who can't climb the stairs has difficulty getting mobile, throwing money at the issue doesn't necessarily give the support. I know this support can be spent on chair lifts and mobility scooters and what not. When people are struggling in the home, physically and mentally support should be forthcoming of course., but it should be with a range of options from home help to a carer assisting them out for their shopping. The focus seems to be on throwing money at the situation.
Dla is in two parts, mobility and care. I am in receipt of dla, have been since I was a child, and until recently I worked too. I have a motability car, my mobility allowance covers that. I can only drive automatics and need a larger car to fit my wheelchair in. Most of these require an extra up front payment which I cover myself. The hospital that treats me is in north London, I see three consultants for my conditions, they don't work on the same days and also this hospital doesn't even want me having any other treatments like physio, xrays etc at the local hospital so I have to travel, I use my car for that. The care part helps with when my boyfriend has to take 'sick day's because I'm unable to get up that day, also helps in any extras I need or am willing to try to make my life easier. I am unable to put my shoes and socks on, I am unable to shower by myself, I am unable to wipe my own backside and unable to generally look after myself. I'm still under 30. This isn't getting better, more surgery due on my spine, and looking at having my ankle joint completely pinned and plated, that'll make getting shoes on even more fun. I'm sick to death of people moaning about working and paying for the likes of us....I've worked too!! My boyfriend works, hell my whole family work, apart from my parents who are old and disabled, but they worked too! Don't sit there and tar everyone with the same brush, you're no better just because you work, that tax you pay is also there for you too, if you lose your job or if you become ill! Try being thankful that at the moment you aren't having to justify your existence to people who have no idea about you, but feel you're the problem!
OP, Could you give the following info so your situation can be evaluated:
Do you have any children?
How many bedrooms do you have?
How much do you and your partner earn, individually?
How many hours do you each work, individually?
Edit: forget the above, just saw your a full time student, as with most students who aren't vulnerable you need to fund yourself - and rightly so.
Double edit: and your paying too much rent, you and you partner need to move into a room in a shared house like the vast majority of other students, you will save a bundle.
I'm sure many of those with disabilities or that are out of work and struggling to find employment that are having to pay the bedroom tax would love to swap places with you.
It is tough for a lot of people whether they are in work or not. The only people who are not having a hard time are the rich.
No one is paying any bedroom tax.
What they will be getting is a reduction in benefit because they live in a home far bigger than their needs.
Comments
Thats £71 a week tax free which isn't means tested together with other benefits. I hate to say it but its money given because a person happens to have a disability almost compensation if you will. I get it totally if someone is severely disabled in the sense they are quadraplegic or have locked in syndrome for example in those cases extra support is definitely warranted.
But someone getting £71 quid a week is most certainly better off than me, I don't have an issue with people on benefits honestly I don't, I am happy to pay my way and help those in a much more difficult position than I am. But it is a two way street, this entitlement culture does need to end, when someone has an accident one of the first things that is mentioned is what compensation is applicable and what benefits.
Our parents and grand parents before that didn't have these benefits they worked very hard and yes paid the price with having very worn bodies by the time they retired but it was honest. Their attitudes weren't self indulgent it was almost altruistic when compared to todays modern society, .
Two good suggestions,
Rich people are still rich in those countries and the poor still have to work just as hard to stay poor.
Now I just think that you are Trolling and telling Porkies about your circumstances.
People on Benefits have to pay for their own Utilities, Water/Gas/Electric & TV Licence out of that £71, as well as usually something towards their rent as HB usually covers around 90% of Private Rents. This usually leaves them with around £15/week for food and everything else, apart from perhaps the less than 1% that break the law by doing other work.
When I was of working age I used to pay nearly £700 a month in deductions, and it did not bother me one jot to help those less fortunate than me, because I always felt that I was only one work accident away from their circumstances myself. How Britain has changed.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and are probably getting your facts from The Daily Mail or other disreputable Tory rag.
Yes and most of the £700 would be used for things that you used, an even smaller percentage of it would go to help those on benefits.
How do you know what I use.
I assume you use things that are paid for with tax?
No need to get defensive.
That £71 has to pay for food, utilities, clothing and other essentials but if anything goes wrong like the fridge, cooker or whatever you are buggered - holidays, forget 'em.
With regards to accident then yes compensation is the first thing to seek and benefits go on the back shelf unless you receive no compensation.
TBH I don't think the state should pick up the tab when whoever caused the accident is liable, govt should go after them for any benefits paid out.
Not much of a life for them though was it and thankfully we moved on from those days - until now it seems.
So what you are telling me that people who receive DLA get just that and nothing else (aside from HB)?
FYI I am not trolling and I have not been sourcing my facts from the daily fail.
I don't read Tory rags, so frankly your pompous accusations are damn insulting. Why is it when difficult discussions happen on here, people feel the need to resort to type and insult one another
If I was trolling my lovely I certainly would be a lot more discourteous than I have been.
You don't really have any facts in your posts.
You have said council housing is subsidised, which is is not.
You have said people on DLA get cars, which they don't.
You have said people on benefits get houses. That is mostly because they are in need.
If workers hadn't brought up most of the council stock, then there would be plenty left for workers to claim for.
Oh really so why does you twitter account say, otherwise, and point to this blog, you are not married nor have you described your circumstances correctly, you are a student according to this who hasn't even started a workng life yet.
Typical Tory kid who thinks he can preach to others, before he has even contributed to Society in any way.
http://www.4kyx.eu/
Council housing isn't subsidised ok sorry genuinely I apologise those obviously paying full rent and council tax don't get it subsidised, I have been two quick of the mark on that one and I should have been more specific.
As for people on DLA don't get cars, again I should have been more specific so I am sorry. Those that qualify for the mobility component have the option of leasing one....whether they choose to do so is upto them as I understand it. Or have I misunderstood that as well?
Re people on benefits in the most need.....I really don't know what to say to that.
You spoke of someone getting £71 a week being better off than you, no mention of DLA.
£71 (or less) per week is what you get to live on excl HB so how much do you live on after you've paid mortgage and council tax?
You can get DLA even if you are working.
I work full time, and study. jesus forgive me for not updating my info! As for married I haven't stated anywhere that I was.....everyone else took it upon them to think I have a wife and for the record if you need to know I won't be having a wife either! IF you must know I am gay, I haven't mislead anyone regarding my circumstances.
Don't paint me as a tory kid, I don't think I can preach to anyone, I come from nothing myself having come from a broken home and been brought up by a single parent who also didn't get sweet fa help from the state. So my apologies if I believe you should reap what you sow! You wan't to deflect to my blog fine, go for it. You want to rub it in and say I lied about being married when I have never stated anywhere I was, again go for it. You wanna take the piss for me being gay, again go for it.
Please just debate the issues and not my character, as that is a battle I won't entertain.
The above post implies that you have a partner, I am sorry for assuming that this was female, however it does not change the facts that you are still at University according to your blog, and have just fabricated much of your argument.
Personally I would feel a lot safer if or when you do finish Uni, that you rule out a career in MI 5.
Yeah I understood that
I think what I was trying to get across is that it isn't a means tested benefit, so it has no baring on any other benefits people will claim for. At least that is how I have understood from reading gov.uk
I think I need to clarify, I believe we as a society we have a responsibility to look after those who find themselves in difficult circumstances, be that being severely disabled or just recently made redundant. The welfare system should be a sustainable way of providing a safety net for those falling out of work and a more targeted and robust ongoing support system to those with severe disabilities. As it is now it does none of those things, and some of what is being proposed are fair measures in my eyes.
What????????? oh I give in.....
But it does look after the disabled and those recently redundant.
It is only because of those complaining about it being too generous, that those who are unemployed now, are being made to go through tougher times.
This is where I am probably going in contradiction to what I have been saying, those recently made redundant I think need a bigger safety net to fall on at least initially so they can keep their head above water for about three months, then it could be tapered down to standard jobseekers rates and so on.
Disability benefits the myriad that exist aren't targeted more effectively, it just seems we throw money at the problem as opposed to dealing with the root causes. For example an elderly lady who can't climb the stairs has difficulty getting mobile, throwing money at the issue doesn't necessarily give the support. I know this support can be spent on chair lifts and mobility scooters and what not. When people are struggling in the home, physically and mentally support should be forthcoming of course., but it should be with a range of options from home help to a carer assisting them out for their shopping. The focus seems to be on throwing money at the situation.
Brown allowed too big a credit bubble and too much reliance on the financial sector - so we got hit harder by the recession. He also failed to build an adequate industrial base,enough smaller homes, and really sustainable growth - but then so did Major and Blair too. North Sea oil's decline coincided. There's also been a general failure by British capitalists to take risks,research, innovate, grow businesses, employ people and export. They have been more interested in making things cheaply overseas, selling out to overseas buyers, avoiding risk, transfering costs to their customers waiting on phones for an answer, counting their own salary packages, building property empires and floating around on their yachts.
We don't really have a spending problem. What we have is an economy thats now 20%, at least, smaller, then where it should now be with sustained moderate steady growth, and a tax system that leaves much of the tax take avoided and evaded. Cutting necessary services - from abolishing beat policing, to aircraft carriers with no aircraft, to closing hospitals, and potholes unfiilled - and slashing benefits to the sick and poorly paid, just makes the problem worse. The key thing lacking is not incentives for business or even cheaper labour - its demand, and better incentives and penalties for people to invest to meet it - and not to just take their profits out of the economy to the nearest tax haven
Thanks for that explanation, it all makes sense.
Dla is in two parts, mobility and care. I am in receipt of dla, have been since I was a child, and until recently I worked too. I have a motability car, my mobility allowance covers that. I can only drive automatics and need a larger car to fit my wheelchair in. Most of these require an extra up front payment which I cover myself. The hospital that treats me is in north London, I see three consultants for my conditions, they don't work on the same days and also this hospital doesn't even want me having any other treatments like physio, xrays etc at the local hospital so I have to travel, I use my car for that. The care part helps with when my boyfriend has to take 'sick day's because I'm unable to get up that day, also helps in any extras I need or am willing to try to make my life easier. I am unable to put my shoes and socks on, I am unable to shower by myself, I am unable to wipe my own backside and unable to generally look after myself. I'm still under 30. This isn't getting better, more surgery due on my spine, and looking at having my ankle joint completely pinned and plated, that'll make getting shoes on even more fun. I'm sick to death of people moaning about working and paying for the likes of us....I've worked too!! My boyfriend works, hell my whole family work, apart from my parents who are old and disabled, but they worked too! Don't sit there and tar everyone with the same brush, you're no better just because you work, that tax you pay is also there for you too, if you lose your job or if you become ill! Try being thankful that at the moment you aren't having to justify your existence to people who have no idea about you, but feel you're the problem!
Do you have any children?
How many bedrooms do you have?
How much do you and your partner earn, individually?
How many hours do you each work, individually?
Edit: forget the above, just saw your a full time student, as with most students who aren't vulnerable you need to fund yourself - and rightly so.
Double edit: and your paying too much rent, you and you partner need to move into a room in a shared house like the vast majority of other students, you will save a bundle.
No one is paying any bedroom tax.
What they will be getting is a reduction in benefit because they live in a home far bigger than their needs.