limiting housing benefits, did i hear that wrong?
limiting housing benefits, did i hear that wrong?
Author
Discussion

Y282

Original Poster:

20,566 posts

202 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
article on NAT now where a woman with one child being interviewed is complaining she can't get by on the proposed cap of FIVE HUNDRED QUID A WEEK for housing benefits alone.

someone tell me i've heard that wrong, please?

davepoth

29,395 posts

229 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
I think it's £500 a week benefits, total. The Government is to cap benefits at the average wage, currently somewhere around £26k. But still, WTF. You don't need to live in Kensington.

Y282

Original Poster:

20,566 posts

202 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
FIVE HUNDRED fkING QUID A WEEK?!?!?!?!?! fk MY TALL fkING HAT IT'S NO WONDER WE'RE ALL fkING BROKE!!!!!!

RemainAllHoof

80,140 posts

312 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
davepoth said:
You don't need to live in Kensington.
Yeah, there are halfwits out there crying that it will mean poor people have to move out of London. Well, if they want to live in Kensington, they should get a better job then!! I'd love to live in a house overlooking Hyde Park but I can't afford it so have to make do with living in a cheaper location ffs. Cretins.

Y282

Original Poster:

20,566 posts

202 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
so i heard it right then. people are moaning at a 500 quid cap.

my fking god what the hell's wrong with people?

RemainAllHoof

80,140 posts

312 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
Y282 said:
so i heard it right then. people are moaning at a 500 quid cap.

my fking god what the hell's wrong with people?
Something like it's their human rights if they so wish to have 18 kids.

powerstroke

10,283 posts

190 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
RemainAllHoof said:
Y282 said:
so i heard it right then. people are moaning at a 500 quid cap.

my fking god what the hell's wrong with people?
Something like it's their human rights if they so wish to have 18 kids.
yes my piss was boiling one or more of the labour mongs was moaning on the news about how unfair it was to cap benifits at £500... and how it would make vunrable people homeless ....utter tossers shoot

Thom987

3,185 posts

196 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
And they dont even pay tax on that £26k

Shuvi Tupya

24,460 posts

277 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
Thom987 said:
And they dont even pay tax on that £26k
And free dentists/doctors etc etc etc

Tsippy

15,078 posts

199 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
irked

anonymous-user

84 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
RemainAllHoof said:
davepoth said:
You don't need to live in Kensington.
Yeah, there are halfwits out there crying that it will mean poor people have to move out of London. Well, if they want to live in Kensington, they should get a better job then!! I'd love to live in a house overlooking Hyde Park but I can't afford it so have to make do with living in a cheaper location ffs. Cretins.
I reckon they ought to scrap the London weighting allowance for all civil servants etc, not anyone's fault they want to live/work in an expensive area.
Hopefully scrap that and when there are no decent services left because no one can provide them on the wages paid people may consider moving to other parts of the country.

Ilikebeaver

3,227 posts

211 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
Thom987 said:
And they dont even pay tax on that £26k
They get more than the national average wage.

Dont have to work for it

Do t have to pay tax on it

And get other freebies

If that's what they are thinking of limiting it to then what on earth are they paying out to some people?

If that's the way it is, then no wonder there is such a huge benefits problem. It must be very tempting getting all that free cash without having to put any graft in.


Bing o

15,184 posts

249 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
It's not free cash. Not by a long road. I don't know why the govt didn't go after benefit scroungers before students and teachers. They'd have got a lot more support from everyone, apart from the bleeding hearts liberals, but who gives a toss what they think?

Ilikebeaver

3,227 posts

211 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
Bing o said:
It's not free cash. Not by a long road. I don't know why the govt didn't go after benefit scroungers before students and teachers. They'd have got a lot more support from everyone, apart from the bleeding hearts liberals, but who gives a toss what they think?
It's free in the sense that they don't have to work for it.

I'm not on benefits and don't know anyone who is so have no idea the things people have to pull to get these sorts of benefits. At a guess its something like have a bit of unprotected sex and be single in need of a house.

I think people wouldn't be so angry abou benefits if it was just enough money to get by and not above the national average wage and not to people who do my actually need it in the first place


Edited by Ilikebeaver on Monday 4th July 00:11

jazzybee

3,056 posts

279 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
The departmental memo said that this cap will likely cause 40k people to become homeless.

Now, if you take it that ALL the people who are capped will become homeless, you can safely say that more than 40k households recieve in excess of £500 per week net (working person would need to earn at least £32k or so to be in a similar position - still do not benefit from free dental, Council Tax benefits etc).

Over £1Bn per year spent on those receiving over £500 per week seems a HUGE amount of people. I can understand a few instances of where this may be required in the short-term for large families, but over 40k households staggers belief.

poo at Paul's

14,620 posts

205 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
I think it is £500 a week for housing benefit only.

and even if it is total benfits, it is tax free, (so more than the National Average) and since when did sitting on one's arse watching Trisha and Facebooking on an Iphone make you deserve to be "average"?

Country is full of scum with more disposable income than most of us who work!

thinfourth2

32,414 posts

234 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
jazzybee said:
The departmental memo said that this cap will likely cause 40k people to become homeless.
When I earned £20k a year I don't remeber living in a cardboard box.

Shuvi Tupya

24,460 posts

277 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
thinfourth2 said:
jazzybee said:
The departmental memo said that this cap will likely cause 40k people to become homeless.
When I earned £20k a year I don't remeber living in a cardboard box.
Yes, but you didn't need all the latest iphones and flat screen TV's. You can't send your children to school without an iphone in this day and age, it is against their ooman rites..


Pints

18,451 posts

224 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
thinfourth2 said:
jazzybee said:
The departmental memo said that this cap will likely cause 40k people to become homeless.
When I earned £20k a year I don't remeber living in a cardboard box.
Shock, horror. I agree with ThinFourth. wink

I survived on less than that living in London, which included paying tax and NI, and forking out for travel.
The difference is that I wasn't paying for Sky, cigarettes, and cheap White Lightning cider.

elster

17,517 posts

240 months

Monday 4th July 2011
quotequote all
jazzybee said:
The departmental memo said that this cap will likely cause 40k people to become homeless.

Now, if you take it that ALL the people who are capped will become homeless, you can safely say that more than 40k households recieve in excess of £500 per week net (working person would need to earn at least £32k or so to be in a similar position - still do not benefit from free dental, Council Tax benefits etc).

Over £1Bn per year spent on those receiving over £500 per week seems a HUGE amount of people. I can understand a few instances of where this may be required in the short-term for large families, but over 40k households staggers belief.
What it means is 40k people will have to move house, not be homeless.