Capping benefits to £26,000 a year - I think its wrong, do you?

[Cyclone]

You are aware that this cap will only affect about 67 000 claimants, aren't you. The money that it will save is minute in the scheme of things. As a piece of political messaging, I think that it is an ok thing to do.

 

However, I'm most amused at the amount of salivation that it has inspired amongst the usual mouth frothing suspects. Do you share my amusement? Or do you need a hanky?

 

I wasn't expecting it to save us all from the recession, it does stop visible unfair abuse of the system though, the kind of unfairness that makes people question why they pay their tax or bother working, so it's well worth a rule change to stop it happening.

[Cyclone]

I think many people immediately assume this is £26,000 disposable income, but actually they include many other things which the recipient never actually sees in cash like, for example, council tax.

It's irrelevant, the rest of us have to pay council tax out of our income, that's not disposable income for us even though we do see it briefly in our bank accounts. We don't talk about our income after deducting these things do we, for comparison purposes we just look at the gross rate.

 

A large part will be housing benefit, and from what I've seen, seems to apply more to London than anywhere else, where rents are high. For example, there was a divorced woman on TV who lives in a 4 bedroom house in Surrey, the rent on that must be astronomical.

 

Also there may be lots of children, child benefit is part of the total and there are benefits added for things such as disability.

 

I would be surprised if many people in Sheffield are over the top amount.

So would I.

[Guest sibon]

I wasn't expecting it to save us all from the recession, it does stop visible unfair abuse of the system though, the kind of unfairness that makes people question why they pay their tax or bother working, so it's well worth a rule change to stop it happening.

 

I agree entirely. It is a sensible policy and it sends a good message out. I was simply commenting upon the hysteria that it has generated, which is out of proportion to the potential savings.

[I1L2T3]

I agree entirely. It is a sensible policy and it sends a good message out.

 

I agree. The message is spot on. One thing for sure is that the benefits system is in such chaos it will need a concerted cross-party effort over many parliaments to sort it out. Anything sensible like this cap has to be welcomed across the board.

 

The key thing as I mentioned earlier is addressing why benefits payments are so high. It's a bit chicken and egg but underlying causes like sky high housing and fuel costs need to be addressed.

[Mecky]

I wasn't expecting it to save us all from the recession, it does stop visible unfair abuse of the system though, the kind of unfairness that makes people question why they pay their tax or bother working, so it's well worth a rule change to stop it happening.

 

No it won't stamp out abuse, whatever abuse is. It will just means the goalposts are shifted slightly until the new system begins to be abused. No matter what system is put in place people will always look to exploit it, no system can be ever foolproof.

[gnvqsos]

:clap:as a tax payer why should i subsidise the workshy and the people who have kids and expect the tax payer to pay the bills. Best thing this goverments done.

 

One day you may be out of work,pride before a fall.And you are wrong to exhibit such resentment towards the royals.

[blades89]

Any benefits changes have to be done within the next 5 years, otherwise we will ever be able to change the policy at the ballot box, it will be impossible.

 

If each of the kids of these large familys, each has another 5 kids who also expect the taxpayer to pay, then sooner or later it will be impossible for the workforce to change things via the ballot box, because there will be more benefit claimants than workers casting their vote.

 

Perhaps thats why Labour are keeping quiet? they are biding their time waiting for the children to grow up, have another mini football team who then will be key voters at the ballot box?

 

Perhaps labour are for the workshy scroungers, instead of the working class?

[blades89]

One day you may be out of work,pride before a fall.And you are wrong to exhibit such resentment towards the royals.

 

 

 

If you are a worker, in particular if you are self employed there is almost no support if you fall on hard times.

[Cyclone]

No it won't stamp out abuse, whatever abuse is. It will just means the goalposts are shifted slightly until the new system begins to be abused. No matter what system is put in place people will always look to exploit it, no system can be ever foolproof.

 

I agree, you can probably never stop abuse entirely, but you can reduce it by making it more difficult to do, less profitable and/or easier to detect.

[Glamrocker]

Now you wont believe this but its true there are some people in London claiming £100,000 per year in rent its these people they are after

Ah the days of Rachman and loan sharks have now returned legally in the guise of "decent" landlords and Wonga.com..all that Police work for nothing