Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Savings and Investments thread
Comments
-
Dont disagree there needs to be a review but I do once again want to challenge the way you have presented these numbers. When you just look at working aged and childrens social security - which is what we are talking about here it makes up 10.2% of all government spending. not a quarter.Rob7Lee said:I'm ok with removing the 2 child cap, however it should have been done in conjunction with a complete review of benefits/welfare as a whole. We cannot continue on a path where we use 1/4 or if you include State pension 1/3rd of all income tax and National Insurance collected on welfare/state pension, it's simply not sustainable.
Figure 3 here: https://ifs.org.uk/taxlab/taxlab-key-questions/what-does-government-spend-money0 -
One thing that hasnt really been talked about is the cash grab as part of the graduate tax (student loan). Thresholds frozen - YAY more fiscal drag - but the worst part being the interest rate which has always been s tracker at the ridiculous rate of CPI+3 is now frozen to 7.5% for the next 3 years rather than falling as it was due to.
Horrendous assault on young people trying to make a career.0 -
£1100 rentcantersaddick said:
What housing costs assumption did you use in this example? was it a single parent family or 2 parent, what ages are the children? I think some pretty unrealistic and extreme assumptions will have been needed to get these figures. E.g. I think all 5 of the kids will need to be below school age and housing costs would need to be extreme.Rob7Lee said:I saw it on Twitter and immediately called bull, I then put the info myself into a benefit checker (entitled.co.uk if anyone wants to have a go and depress themselves!)
Clearly someone had worked out what the absolute maximum you could get based on circumstance.
£4,287 in benefits (made up of UC and Child allowance and council tax help). £11k a year on minimum wage/16 hours each gives you £6,120 a month.
Someone also made the point that if you also suffer with 'anxiety' (probably from having 5 kids and so much money) you can also get a brand new car on Mobility although I'm not convinced it's that simple!!
I'll get my coat......... someone turn the lights out on the way out
Not saying its impossible but its gonna be extremely unlikely to get numbers like this.
And it was discussed on the general things that annoy you thread a couple of weeks ago but anxiety alone is not enough for motability. It Needs a few other conditions/criteria to be met alongside that to become eligible.
Dual parent (hence two x minimum wage salaries x 16 hours each per week)
All school age (5-15).
I don't know the full calculation and exactly what it is made up from as it's an online calculator as linked to above.
As I say, I'm sure this is based on an extreme, but even still there should be no circumstances really where a couple with 5 children are working 16 hours a week each on minimum wage and are getting the equivalent of north of a £100k salary.0 -
I dont know anything about the calculator used but it is recommended by citizens advice so lets take it as largely accurate. I havent worked on UC stuff since 2016 so I am a bit rusty but I am struggling to see how that scenario can come up with the numbers youre talking about. Because with 2 parents part time and all kids of school age there are no childcare costs to be taken into consideration. Unless someone in the family is disabled? Surely there is some other factor at play here?Rob7Lee said:
£1100 rentcantersaddick said:
What housing costs assumption did you use in this example? was it a single parent family or 2 parent, what ages are the children? I think some pretty unrealistic and extreme assumptions will have been needed to get these figures. E.g. I think all 5 of the kids will need to be below school age and housing costs would need to be extreme.Rob7Lee said:I saw it on Twitter and immediately called bull, I then put the info myself into a benefit checker (entitled.co.uk if anyone wants to have a go and depress themselves!)
Clearly someone had worked out what the absolute maximum you could get based on circumstance.
£4,287 in benefits (made up of UC and Child allowance and council tax help). £11k a year on minimum wage/16 hours each gives you £6,120 a month.
Someone also made the point that if you also suffer with 'anxiety' (probably from having 5 kids and so much money) you can also get a brand new car on Mobility although I'm not convinced it's that simple!!
I'll get my coat......... someone turn the lights out on the way out
Not saying its impossible but its gonna be extremely unlikely to get numbers like this.
And it was discussed on the general things that annoy you thread a couple of weeks ago but anxiety alone is not enough for motability. It Needs a few other conditions/criteria to be met alongside that to become eligible.
Dual parent (hence two x minimum wage salaries x 16 hours each per week)
All school age (5-15).
I don't know the full calculation and exactly what it is made up from as it's an online calculator as linked to above.
As I say, I'm sure this is based on an extreme, but even still there should be no circumstances really where a couple with 5 children are working 16 hours a week each on minimum wage and are getting the equivalent of north of a £100k salary.
If it is right with no other factors impacting on it then even I think that scenario is mad. Luckily its a hypothetical not the norm and the actual amounts for the majority of people are nothing like that.0 -
Rob7Lee said:
£1100 rentcantersaddick said:
What housing costs assumption did you use in this example? was it a single parent family or 2 parent, what ages are the children? I think some pretty unrealistic and extreme assumptions will have been needed to get these figures. E.g. I think all 5 of the kids will need to be below school age and housing costs would need to be extreme.Rob7Lee said:I saw it on Twitter and immediately called bull, I then put the info myself into a benefit checker (entitled.co.uk if anyone wants to have a go and depress themselves!)
Clearly someone had worked out what the absolute maximum you could get based on circumstance.
£4,287 in benefits (made up of UC and Child allowance and council tax help). £11k a year on minimum wage/16 hours each gives you £6,120 a month.
Someone also made the point that if you also suffer with 'anxiety' (probably from having 5 kids and so much money) you can also get a brand new car on Mobility although I'm not convinced it's that simple!!
I'll get my coat......... someone turn the lights out on the way out
Not saying its impossible but its gonna be extremely unlikely to get numbers like this.
And it was discussed on the general things that annoy you thread a couple of weeks ago but anxiety alone is not enough for motability. It Needs a few other conditions/criteria to be met alongside that to become eligible.
Dual parent (hence two x minimum wage salaries x 16 hours each per week)
All school age (5-15).
I don't know the full calculation and exactly what it is made up from as it's an online calculator as linked to above.
As I say, I'm sure this is based on an extreme, but even still there should be no circumstances really where a couple with 5 children are working 16 hours a week each on minimum wage and are getting the equivalent of north of a £100k salary.
!00% agree. The benefits system is/was designed as a safety net - and those in genuine need should be supported. What it should never be is an alternative lifestyle choice, which it is for some. That's the fault of the system, not the individuals.0 -
Its a fair chunk of both in my eyesbobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
£1100 rentcantersaddick said:
What housing costs assumption did you use in this example? was it a single parent family or 2 parent, what ages are the children? I think some pretty unrealistic and extreme assumptions will have been needed to get these figures. E.g. I think all 5 of the kids will need to be below school age and housing costs would need to be extreme.Rob7Lee said:I saw it on Twitter and immediately called bull, I then put the info myself into a benefit checker (entitled.co.uk if anyone wants to have a go and depress themselves!)
Clearly someone had worked out what the absolute maximum you could get based on circumstance.
£4,287 in benefits (made up of UC and Child allowance and council tax help). £11k a year on minimum wage/16 hours each gives you £6,120 a month.
Someone also made the point that if you also suffer with 'anxiety' (probably from having 5 kids and so much money) you can also get a brand new car on Mobility although I'm not convinced it's that simple!!
I'll get my coat......... someone turn the lights out on the way out
Not saying its impossible but its gonna be extremely unlikely to get numbers like this.
And it was discussed on the general things that annoy you thread a couple of weeks ago but anxiety alone is not enough for motability. It Needs a few other conditions/criteria to be met alongside that to become eligible.
Dual parent (hence two x minimum wage salaries x 16 hours each per week)
All school age (5-15).
I don't know the full calculation and exactly what it is made up from as it's an online calculator as linked to above.
As I say, I'm sure this is based on an extreme, but even still there should be no circumstances really where a couple with 5 children are working 16 hours a week each on minimum wage and are getting the equivalent of north of a £100k salary.
!00% agree. The benefits system is/was designed as a safety net - and those in genuine need should be supported. What it should never be is an alternative lifestyle choice, which it is for some. That's the fault of the system, not the individuals.
Just because you can do something definitely doesn't always mean you should
Being out of work is more about lack of purpose, structure and drive. I'm not talking about high performers or over achievers. Not doing that will absolutely wallop your mental health
For my part, its the societal contract, I don't mind paying tax what I can't abide is how that money is wasted and given to people who have chosen not to take part in their end of the societal contract
0 -
Carter said:
Hang on, I'm pretty sure I didn’t say that children were dossersDiebythesword said:Children are dossers? Personally I’m happy something that’s proven to drive children into poverty has been removed.
I know who is, and this budget does more for helping them and taking more from pretty much everyone elseWho exactly are dossers then? Genuinely because DWP data shows 59% of families affected by the two-child limit are working.https://cpag.org.uk/news/1-million-children-working-families-now-hit-two-child-limit
I think we need to change the way we think about this. We shouldn't be punishing children for their parents circumstances, particularly when in a majority of cases its due to a change in circumstances not a plan. I think there is also an untrue perception that it is laziness or people out of work when that's not the case.0 -
I'm seeing a widespread assumption that people out of work can't be trying to get back into work. Have any of you seen the jobs market recently?1
-
I completely agree that the social contract has broken down. The other side to that social contract is low pay. the minimum wage was effectively brought in as part of that social contract to say that if you worked 40 hours a week you would be able to provide for yourself and your family and not be in poverty. Unfortunately that side of the social contract has also broken down. We now have massive and growing in work poverty. Thats a real issue and for me is the main factor in why welfare has exploded. Its not that the safety net is too high its that we have had a whole generation of wage suppression which means those in work also need the safety net. Yes there will be a minority who choose not to work but thats not because the safety net is too high but because the pay is too low (otherwise they wouldn't be in poverty).Carter said:
Its a fair chunk of both in my eyesbobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
£1100 rentcantersaddick said:
What housing costs assumption did you use in this example? was it a single parent family or 2 parent, what ages are the children? I think some pretty unrealistic and extreme assumptions will have been needed to get these figures. E.g. I think all 5 of the kids will need to be below school age and housing costs would need to be extreme.Rob7Lee said:I saw it on Twitter and immediately called bull, I then put the info myself into a benefit checker (entitled.co.uk if anyone wants to have a go and depress themselves!)
Clearly someone had worked out what the absolute maximum you could get based on circumstance.
£4,287 in benefits (made up of UC and Child allowance and council tax help). £11k a year on minimum wage/16 hours each gives you £6,120 a month.
Someone also made the point that if you also suffer with 'anxiety' (probably from having 5 kids and so much money) you can also get a brand new car on Mobility although I'm not convinced it's that simple!!
I'll get my coat......... someone turn the lights out on the way out
Not saying its impossible but its gonna be extremely unlikely to get numbers like this.
And it was discussed on the general things that annoy you thread a couple of weeks ago but anxiety alone is not enough for motability. It Needs a few other conditions/criteria to be met alongside that to become eligible.
Dual parent (hence two x minimum wage salaries x 16 hours each per week)
All school age (5-15).
I don't know the full calculation and exactly what it is made up from as it's an online calculator as linked to above.
As I say, I'm sure this is based on an extreme, but even still there should be no circumstances really where a couple with 5 children are working 16 hours a week each on minimum wage and are getting the equivalent of north of a £100k salary.
!00% agree. The benefits system is/was designed as a safety net - and those in genuine need should be supported. What it should never be is an alternative lifestyle choice, which it is for some. That's the fault of the system, not the individuals.
Just because you can do something definitely doesn't always mean you should
Being out of work is more about lack of purpose, structure and drive. I'm not talking about high performers or over achievers. Not doing that will absolutely wallop your mental health
For my part, its the societal contract, I don't mind paying tax what I can't abide is how that money is wasted and given to people who have chosen not to take part in their end of the societal contract
https://www.health.org.uk/evidence-hub/money-and-resources/poverty/in-work-poverty-trends- 65% of children and working-age adults in poverty in 2023/24 lived in families where at least one adult was working part-time or more, up from 56% in 2012/13 and 44% in 1996/97.
- 18% of children and working-age adults in poverty in 2023/24 lived in families where all adults were working and at least one adult was working full-time (referred to here as high work intensity families), which is up from 13% in 2012/13 and 9% in 1996/97.
0 -
Have to agree to disagree then
I can promise you, give most the households who are having kids they can't afford 10k and it would not improve anything for the children involved. Incentivising going to work might help but the government seem intent on making that as unappealing to both employers and employees as they can
This whole lone about lifting kids out of poverty is absolute bollocks. Poverty is not erased by the sums of money they are using.
To answer your question. The dossers are anyone who can go to work choosing not to, anyone who is living beyond their means and being babied by the state in this case people having children they cannot afford to raise.
That could be not feeding their kids because they see that as something the state should do, not reading to or educating their children at home, not setting an example to their children.
Sudden changes of situation, ill health are what a welfare state is there for, the numbers show and the information behind the data is a lot of people are choosing to be looked after, like infants as opposed to being accountable.
0
