Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Benefits - Only for lazy, stupid people....

Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    I thought that was what incapacity benefit was for? Statutory sick pay if you have to take time off work... I'm not really clued up about incapacity benefit, but I remember being told it was for people with short-to-mid term problems.
    Incapacity benefit was paid to those with long term illnesses / disabilities if they paid enough national insurance and couldn't work at all. You get SSP for the first 28 weeks / first 28 weeks after company sick pay ends.

    It is possible to get incapacity benefits if you do have a short-term illness too.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    Incapacity benefit was paid to those with long term illnesses / disabilities if they paid enough national insurance and couldn't work at all. You get SSP for the first 28 weeks / first 28 weeks after company sick pay ends.

    It is possible to get incapacity benefits if you do have a short-term illness too.
    Thank you for this information. I only really know about DLA because that's what my mum got.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Exaclty what OU Student said. My mobility was given straight to motability for my car when I was entitled to it, and my care needs were used for things like my glasses, I have to have special shoes made (the only shoes I can get to fit me on the high street are UGG boots as they can stretch) and my physio. I got £140/150 care a month and seeing as my physio was £40 a week, it didn't even cover that alone.

    I don't go out and spend it on a designer handbag every month you know. Likewise I wouldn't spend £150 on a pair of boots every 3/4 months unless I had to.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilovehobnobs)
    I don't go out and spend it on a designer handbag every month you know. Likewise I wouldn't spend £150 on a pair of boots every 3/4 months unless I had to.
    Exactly. I don't know anyone who spends their DLA on things like that. A friends son receives DLA due to a rare chromosome disorder. I remember her saying that his benefits pay for things like his buggy. (he's at the age now where most children would be walking and most standard buggies won't take his weight)

    Mine goes on things like medication that NHS won't prescribe, replacement of shoes (because I don't walk properly - therefore, wear out shoes quicker) and aids NHS won't prescribe. (ie, the expensive ones)

    A lot of people have to save their DLA to buy things they need.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilovehobnobs)
    Exaclty what OU Student said. My mobility was given straight to motability for my car when I was entitled to it, and my care needs were used for things like my glasses, I have to have special shoes made (the only shoes I can get to fit me on the high street are UGG boots as they can stretch) and my physio. I got £140/150 care a month and seeing as my physio was £40 a week, it didn't even cover that alone.

    I don't go out and spend it on a designer handbag every month you know. Likewise I wouldn't spend £150 on a pair of boots every 3/4 months unless I had to.

    (Original post by OU Student)
    Exactly. I don't know anyone who spends their DLA on things like that. A friends son receives DLA due to a rare chromosome disorder. I remember her saying that his benefits pay for things like his buggy. (he's at the age now where most children would be walking and most standard buggies won't take his weight)

    Mine goes on things like medication that NHS won't prescribe, replacement of shoes (because I don't walk properly - therefore, wear out shoes quicker) and aids NHS won't prescribe. (ie, the expensive ones)

    A lot of people have to save their DLA to buy things they need.
    My parents would spend it to make up the difference of the income my dad would be earning if he could work full time.
    She also has to buy more/better shoes as they keep getting worn out, and sometimes spends it going swimming when she isn't too bad because it is non-impact exercise so she can do it without making her joints worse. Petrol for fortnightly trips to the hospital for her medication related blood tests adds up to quite a lot as well.
    There was also the money for the microwave with the big buttons, and just before I came to uni she bought a wheelchair as well (second hand so it was cheaper, but still bought one).
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    Who on earth are you to say that they are uncivilised because they have a lot of children? They're all well fed, intelligent and wonderful people - it isn't up to you to say that they shouldn't exist.
    Neither of us have said they shouldn't exist; just that nine children is a ridiculous number as raising a family is very demanding and expensive. Most families recognise that, hence why the average is around 3 children.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Lady)
    Neither of us have said they shouldn't exist; just that nine children is a ridiculous number as raising a family is very demanding and expensive. Most families recognise that, hence why the average is around 3 children.
    But as long as the parents are in work and aren't claiming a load of benefits without good reason, what's the problem with someone having several children?
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    They're currently reforming DLA and one of the criteria is about being able to use a microwave. As someone who is wheat intolerant, this would leave me with 2 choices - live on tinned curry and rice or eat a load of processed crap I'm not allowed.

    Someone I know was told recently that the council won't give her hours for helping with cooking a meal.

    Why should we be forced to live on processed crap because our disabilities mean we can't cook a meal? Where's the equality here?



    Depending on where you live in London, it's not that expensive.
    That's pretty disgraceful.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nonotrly)
    The same ****ing people arguing pointlessly with each other for up to ONE THOUSAND POSTS, and they're judging what OTHER people have the right to have, or do with what they have?

    ****ing laugh that is.
    Why do you keep coming on the thread and posting in it then?

    Go, live, enjoy yourself.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If benefits are only for stupid lazy people, why can politicians with children claim benefits for their children?
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    Well, both parents worked - the dad full-time except paternity leave and the mum part-time from when her eldest hit school so they were taxpayers as well.



    I thought that was what incapacity benefit was for? Statutory sick pay if you have to take time off work... I'm not really clued up about incapacity benefit, but I remember being told it was for people with short-to-mid term problems.
    I had a serious sprain to my ankle a few years ago after a rugby player from college stumbled and stood on it trying to regain his balance (fantastically unlikely, wish we'd videoed it for You've Been Framed). I was on crutches for two weeks, my friends and family had to help me out - dad drove me to college instead of me getting the bus, friends in college would carry my food to the table in the canteen etc. they didn't mind because it only lasted a few weeks and then it was over, and I did the same for a friend when she broke her leg later that same year. However, my mum needs constant care, my dad can't work full-time because she needs someone during the day. Friends cannot be looking after her constantly in the same way that you can do a little bit for someone for a short time. She won't get better in 2 weeks time and then be able to help someone else out to repay them for their help. She won't get better AT ALL. She will continue to get worse for the rest of her life.
    Short-to-mid term problems are a pain, I'll give you that. I've experienced them myself. But then they're over and you go back to normality. You may have had to lend money off someone or dip into an overdraft (like a friend of mine did when she had swine flu) but then you get better and go back to work and a few pound a week will pay the money back and it's all fine again. That will never happen for my mum. She will never be able to go back to work and repay any money she had to borrow to pay for essentials because she isn't working.

    So yeah, I have thought about people with short-term problems, and concluded that you can't compare the situations.
    Well, when I was at uni, I broke my ankle, was relying on my part-time job to support myself, couldn't work, couldn't do a lot of things for myself- yet I got nothing from my employer (I worked on a casual contract at the time), nothing from the state and nothing from the uni.

    So why on earth would I want to pay for other people to get benefits. Is it my problem, I was expected just to cope, with nothing, so why can't they?

    Anyway, it wasn't two weeks, it was 3 MONTHS before I could work again and even then I was limping a lot.

    How do you think the elderly manage? Both of my grandparents had their mobility quite restricted in their last 10 years due to arthritis, but they weren't given a free car! or blue badge! or any DLA payments.

    They were given their pensions and that was that. That isn't being 'disabled', its just an inevitable part of ageing.

    Whereas, one of my parents' friends has very bad arthritis but it is at least partly her own fault for being super-obese as this exacerbates the condition, and of course its going to affect the joints if they've got so much to support.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    But as long as the parents are in work and aren't claiming a load of benefits without good reason, what's the problem with someone having several children?
    Because there are already too many people in the world and not enough jobs/resources?
    • 0 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    How do you define 'too many people'?
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Lady)
    In the current climate everyone needs to do their bit. The government needs to reduce foreign aid significantly if there are national issues.



    .
    Im sorry, but this I completely disagree with.

    You can't compare benefit scroungers in this country with poor people in the third world who just haven't had the same opportunities.

    Hence, most immigrants have a totally different attitude and are shocked by the laziness here.

    I'm happy to pay tax if it is to be sent as foreign aid. I am not happy to pay it to fund some brats free school dinners, their plasma TV's and mobile phones.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stomm)
    Easier said that done. But I agree that only a fool would purposefully bring a child into this world without being able to support their family to whatever standard ofliving they think acceptable, but then likewise only a fool or the incredibly unlucky would do so unplanned...

    Accidents do happen of course...However the vast majority of single parents were not single when the child was concieved, nor usually when it is born... So using the excuse of 'immoral selfish scrounging baby-factory single mothers' as an excuse for driving yet more children and families into very real poverty is akin to only allowing people to drive when they reach the age of thirty as the vast majority of accidents involve the under twenty fives...
    Well, in these cases the Mother could be given an interest-free loan of the bare minimum amount needed to raise a child which she has to pay back when the child is 18 and she earns over £15K.

    And this should only be given on condition that she gets a contraceptive implant to stop her having any more children.

    Also, the first 3 years they should have to live in a mother-and-baby home with strict rules and curfews etc. It would put people off doing it to get their own flat.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elissabeth)
    How do you think the elderly manage? Both of my grandparents had their mobility quite restricted in their last 10 years due to arthritis, but they weren't given a free car! or blue badge! or any DLA payments.
    The car isn't free. Unless giving away £8k over 3 years, paying for adaptions to the car and an advanced payment out of their own money means the car is free? Do your research. The car isn't and have never been free.

    They were given their pensions and that was that. That isn't being 'disabled', its just an inevitable part of ageing.
    And probably pension credit, council tax benefit and housing benefit. That's much more than what most disabled people get. I have friends who are in a couple. From April 30th, the disabled friend will lose their sickness benefit if their partner earns £7.5k a year. Yes, that £7.5k a year is tax free; but they have to pay everything out of that.

    You sound bitter to me. Your broken ankle isn't a disability, unless it lasts for 12 months.

    You can't compare benefit scroungers in this country with poor people in the third world who just haven't had the same opportunities.
    Not everyone here has the same opportunities either.

    Well, when I was at uni, I broke my ankle, was relying on my part-time job to support myself, couldn't work, couldn't do a lot of things for myself- yet I got nothing from my employer (I worked on a casual contract at the time), nothing from the state and nothing from the uni.
    Given that you got a maintenance loan, which is for living costs, why should you have got more money from the government?
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elissabeth)
    Well, when I was at uni, I broke my ankle, was relying on my part-time job to support myself, couldn't work, couldn't do a lot of things for myself- yet I got nothing from my employer (I worked on a casual contract at the time), nothing from the state and nothing from the uni.

    So why on earth would I want to pay for other people to get benefits. Is it my problem, I was expected just to cope, with nothing, so why can't they?

    Anyway, it wasn't two weeks, it was 3 MONTHS before I could work again and even then I was limping a lot.
    That is a flaw with your employer and university, not the disability system. It is also short term and you presumably are now back to normality following that period. My mum has been struggling for 25/30 years and will never get better and be able to go back to work.

    How do you think the elderly manage? Both of my grandparents had their mobility quite restricted in their last 10 years due to arthritis, but they weren't given a free car! or blue badge! or any DLA payments.

    They were given their pensions and that was that. That isn't being 'disabled', its just an inevitable part of ageing.
    Elderly people with arthritis are entitled to blue badges if they have conditions affecting their mobility such as osteoarthritis. If they didn't apply for one then that's their fault and shouldn't form part of your argument.
    They don't work because they're elderly, they have pensions instead of a wage. Same way my mum got DLA instead of a wage because she doesn't work due to disability.
    Motability scooters in supermarkets etc. are also available to elderly people with conditions such as osteoarthritis as well.

    Whereas, one of my parents' friends has very bad arthritis but it is at least partly her own fault for being super-obese as this exacerbates the condition, and of course its going to affect the joints if they've got so much to support.
    Rheumatoid arthritis can be made more painful by obesity, but can also make someone more likely to be obese because it is painful to do a lot of forms of exercise. The joints would have been painful before the person was obese if it is rheumatoid, because it is an auto-immune condition that attacks the joints, and is not caused by obesity.
    Osteoarthritis is caused by wear and repair. If someone had an injury to a joint and then tried to use it too soon afterwards, they would be more likely to develop osteoarthritis in that joint in later life. While someone may be more likely to develop osteoarthritis in later life if they're overweight, in a young person it will not be caused by obesity unless it is extreme morbid obesity, like a BMI of over 40, it will usually be caused an injury or some sort of surgery for an injury. It can also make it painful to exercise and so a person would be more likely to be obese which in turn would put more strain on and make the condition worse, but if the person is under the age of about 60 then it will not have been caused by the obesity.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OU Student)
    And probably pension credit, council tax benefit and housing benefit. That's much more than what most disabled people get. I have friends who are in a couple. From April 30th, the disabled friend will lose their sickness benefit if their partner earns £7.5k a year. Yes, that £7.5k a year is tax free; but they have to pay everything out of that.

    You sound bitter to me. Your broken ankle isn't a disability, unless it lasts for 12 months.



    Not everyone here has the same opportunities either.



    Given that you got a maintenance loan, which is for living costs, why should you have got more money from the government?
    No, they didn't get housing benefit, they'd paid for their house by that time.

    Or pension credit, I don't think.

    I'm not claiming a broken bone is the same, but it causes the exact same problems as a disability, yet I was just left to rot?

    I know not everyone has the same opportunities, but at least everyone here can have basics like free school, NHS and use libraries etc. Can't compare that to the poor of the third world.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    ...and the disabled.

    I love our society it's so compassionate.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elissabeth)
    I'm not claiming a broken bone is the same, but it causes the exact same problems as a disability, yet I was just left to rot?
    Your broken ankle is temporary. My friends son is unlikely to ever walk and will be reliant on his parents for care until he dies. Hardly the same.
Updated: March 19, 2012
New on TSR

A-level results day

Is it about making your parents proud?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.