The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Make benefits cap = minimum annual wage + possible child credits?

Poll

Should benefits be capped at the annual minimum wage?

I cannot believe there are people out there complaining benefits are being capped to £500 a week- yes, pretty much the average salary in the UK........

I have a better idea, I think the benefits cap should be equal to the annual minimum wage for childless people and if you have children, increase this by child credits (or whatever nonsense they have nowadays).

There are people out there earning less than £25k (quite a bloody large number actually!). Why should they work hard 9 to 5 when some people get paid £25k a year for doing nothing?

The annual minimum wage is £12,070.....

Who agrees benefits should not exceed the minimum amount a full-time worker takes home?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for Psyk
Psyk
16
Can someone on minimum wage with no children qualify for any benefits at all?

If not, then it stands to reason that someone on benefits should not get any more than that. But would they even under the current system?

Assuming someone with no dependants, no disabilities.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 2
Avatar for billydisco
billydisco
OP
3
Original post by Psyk
Can someone on minimum wage with no children qualify for any benefits at all?

If not, then it stands to reason that someone on benefits should not get any more than that. But would they even under the current system?

Assuming someone with no dependants, no disabilities.

I'm pretty certain if somebody with 2 kids works full time and earns £12k a year, they do not get given another £13k a year in benefits.

I would believe that somebody with 3 kids and doesn't work receives at least £25k a year in benefits...
Reply 3
Avatar for The_Duck
The_Duck
7
No, if there are more than one person living in a household they will need more than one full time worker.
Reply 4
Avatar for kmcgowan13
kmcgowan13
My partner is on £25,000 I've been signed off work for the last 4 months and now on ssp, I get no benefits for my daughter at all! Anything on or over £25,000 you get £0 support for a child.

As a single mum when I was living alone I got a top up of £700 a month towards housing etc, I was working too so income was around £1500 a month, now moving in with my new partner I only get my salary which is £800 but as I said now on ssp at £87 per week :-( don't quite know how I sort my bills out!

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 5
Avatar for kmcgowan13
kmcgowan13
I understand why they top up your money but it does seem to penalise working families on low ish incomes around
£25,000 so take home of about £1600 a month..,. After debt council tax etc it doesn't leave a lot!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Quite frankly I don't really agree with child related benefits, I don't having kids is a right, and I don't think its the state's responsibility to ensure you can provide for your children. Perhaps if people knew that they weren't getting government money and housing they might decide to plan ahead.
Reply 7
Avatar for Martyn*
Martyn*
13
People on benefits don't get more than a FT worker.
Original post by billydisco
I cannot believe there are people out there complaining benefits are being capped to £500 a week- yes, pretty much the average salary in the UK........


The £500 cap isn't for a single unemployed individual, it is for couples or single parents. For a single person it's £350.

A person on minimum wage working 9 to 15 would earn around £12,000 off of their own work but they would also be entitled to government benefits. It isn't a case that as you start working you suddenly lose all of your benefits, of course you are not entitled to unemployment benefit, but you still receive housing etc.
Original post by doggyfizzel
Quite frankly I don't really agree with child related benefits, I don't having kids is a right, and I don't think its the state's responsibility to ensure you can provide for your children. Perhaps if people knew that they weren't getting government money and housing they might decide to plan ahead.


Exactly, we have free, safe abortion in this country and children have the right to not be born into poverty.

There are also plenty of charities to help those people who fall between the gaps.
Original post by Martyn*
People on benefits don't get more than a FT worker.


yes, they do, unemployed single parents get a huge amount in total, for doing absolutely nothing
Original post by Elissabeth
yes, they do, unemployed single parents get a huge amount in total, for doing absolutely nothing


No, as I explained, they do receive a lot of money from benefits, but generally not have an income that is larger than someone who works full time.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by doggyfizzel
Quite frankly I don't really agree with child related benefits, I don't having kids is a right, and I don't think its the state's responsibility to ensure you can provide for your children. Perhaps if people knew that they weren't getting government money and housing they might decide to plan ahead.


I won't be able to afford to send my children to a private school so I'll need state support in terms of an education, partly paid for by your taxes.

Would you object to that?
Reply 13
Avatar for kmcgowan13
kmcgowan13
Please remember that not all children are born into poverty.., I owned madhouse worked fulltime on a good wage £18,000, husband worked fulltime on a good wage £20,000 then bam... I wad struck ill, my husband left me so I was jobless, homeless and had a child. Is this unfair for me to have help after all I've paid my taxes etc since I was 17! I now have a partner and got myself back into work but struck ill again, not currently entitled to any support due to partners wage of £25,000 do you think my child should suffer because I'm ill. Not all people on benefits are scroungers....

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 14
Avatar for kmcgowan13
kmcgowan13
* A HOUSE not a madhouse!

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 15
Avatar for qwerty52
qwerty52
Original post by Elissabeth
we have free, safe abortion in this country

I'm not sure how terminating a foetus is safe for the it.
Original post by Heliosphan
I won't be able to afford to send my children to a private school so I'll need state support in terms of an education, partly paid for by your taxes.

Would you object to that?
Its a slightly different provision since we are all entitled and all benefit from it, much like the NHS its a collective service we can all use. Even private schools can if they choose get government funding, even private healthcare users are entitled to use a service such as A&E should they choose. Child benefits are not a service they are hand out, a charity for a select group of society, I get no use from such a system, not everyone is a stakeholder in the system.
who the hell can't get by on 500 quid a week?
Reply 18
Avatar for billydisco
billydisco
OP
3
Original post by Martyn*
People on benefits don't get more than a FT worker.

Yes they do.

A year ago I went on the benefits calculator website and a single mum with two kids received £19k a year in benefits.
Original post by doggyfizzel
Quite frankly I don't really agree with child related benefits, I don't having kids is a right, and I don't think its the state's responsibility to ensure you can provide for your children. Perhaps if people knew that they weren't getting government money and housing they might decide to plan ahead.


I think the problem is that once people do have kids, the kids exist whether the parents should have had them or not - and if the parents can't provide for them, and the government won't help, then what's gonna become of these kids? A kid that has a ****ty upbringing is gonna be everyone's problem 20 years down the line.
(edited 10 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you