The Student Room Group

Ian Duncan Smith can live on £53 a week...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Avatar for Bobifier
Bobifier
13
I don't understand why he would say this. He knows it can't end well for him.
Reply 21
Avatar for StacFace
StacFace
18
Original post by dj1015
I live of less after rent.

£53 is lubriciously high.


I have more than that available per week to spend and do live off less after rent too, was just pointing out it's perfectly doable to live off that amount (for a single person at least).

I don't think it's massively high though, it's not like you could get nice holidays and cars etc on that budget. Unless you mean it's high considering they don't work for it, though even then I think it's a bit high but not massively so and I think that's better than going too low so they can't afford to live tbh.
Original post by RachaelBee
I couldn't as my mortgage works out at more than £53 a week, however I can do groceries for £15 a week, do I get points for that?!



The majority of these people are also claiming housing benefit, council tax benefits Eric. So it's simply £53 a week fir food and electricity. It's tough but do able.
Original post by Bobifier
I don't understand why he would say this. He knows it can't end well for him.



It would be good if he did it just to shut the nay Sayers up
Its not including rent since you get housing benefits. I can easily live off £50 per week. I probably come in at about £45 at the moment.
Reply 25
Avatar for 1on4
1on4
As others have said, if you're claiming JSA your rent, council tax, NHS prescriptions, dentistry etc will all be covered by various other benefits/exemptions. The £53 would be expected to cover your food, bills and travel.

I can understand why it might be a bit of a shock for some people who have been made redundant after having a higher wage but it's more than do-able for a single person who spends it sensibly. I believe the amount is higher for those over 25.
Original post by MatureStudent36
The majority of these people are also claiming housing benefit, council tax benefits Eric. So it's simply £53 a week fir food and electricity. It's tough but do able.


Oh in that case, easy.
The whole analogy is false in a number of respects.

Firstly the person who originally made the comment wasn't living on £53 a week. He "forgot" he was also receiving tax credits (and presumably also Housing and Council Tax Benefit). £53 a week was what he had left net after rent and bills.

Similar points have been made in the past about low headline rates for benefits but what they almost always ignore is that claimants usually receive a portfolio of benefits. Very few live on the headline rate of a single benefit.

Of course IDS can live for a week or a fortnight on £53 a week. His clothes won't wear out. His washing machine is unlikely to break down. He will not need to arrange an access visit to his children 100 miles a way.
Reply 28
Avatar for n00
n00
14
Original post by Aspiringlawstudent
he earns a salary


Well thats debatable. If failing to cut the welfare bill while pissing huge sums of money up the wall on failed IT projects, failed "social purpose companies", failed schemes, failed restructuring and legal fees in order to cover over his cock ups is deemed to be earning a salary then we truly are doomed.

Original post by Aspiringlawstudent
and pays his own way in the world.


:rofl:He's been living off the tax payer most his life, when he hasn't been living of the tax payer he's been living off his rich heiress wife. The mans not managed more than few months paying his own way in his entire life, firstly as a failed arms dealer and then as a failed magazine salesman.

Original post by Aspiringlawstudent
The people that rely on money taken by force from others do not have the right to set their own budget or to live in houses larger than necessary. In my eyes, they do not deserve anything at all;


Make your mind up.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 29
Avatar for Clip
Clip
19
These debates always end up in one place: How much? How much should you give someone who isn't working? How comfortable/uncomfortable do you want them to be? If you don't want to be like the "Evil Tories" then you increase benefits. People aren't stupid. Give them a comfortable life to not work, and where is the incentive to work? Some people might take a drop in income in order to get going with work - but many won't.

All this political idealism is grossly over-simplifying a very difficult question - exactly where do you want people on social security to be? Is it right that they can receive more than the minimum wage? More than the median wage, even?
Reply 30
Avatar for AJ_Moose
AJ_Moose
Original post by Kolasinac138
£212 a month

-200 for rent

-100 for food

-50 for bills

-200 for clubbing with friends

= £-338



NO, I CAN'T

You would get benefits to help with your rent too. A single person does not need £25 a week on food. You think you're entitled to spend £200 a month 'clubbing' with your mates if you're on benefits? Get real sunshine.

I'm not an ignorant rich boy talking out of his **** here. My family was very poor for a time when I was growing up. If you use your brain (something modern Britons increasingly have difficulty doing) - You can pay your bills and get around on £53 a week. The problem is British people today have no concept of poverty. None. Absolutely no idea what living in actual poverty is like so they think they're entitled to all these luxies that actual poor people would give their left arm for. This guy I just quoted sums it all up; he thinks he's entitled to £200 a month to go clubbing while he's on benefits.
I'm not on benefits man. I go to uni.
Original post by scrotgrot
You can cut child benefit or limit it to the first couple of kids, but it doesn't matter, the cost will seep back into the system somewhere. The only other solution is sterilisation, and I don't think that's going to go down well somehow.


China started doing that, they claimed people were being voluntarily sterilised in exchange for money but the people being sterilised claimed family members were kidnapped etc, it was very unsettling.

Original post by Clip
These debates always end up in one place: How much? How much should you give someone who isn't working? How comfortable/uncomfortable do you want them to be? If you don't want to be like the "Evil Tories" then you increase benefits. People aren't stupid. Give them a comfortable life to not work, and where is the incentive to work? Some people might take a drop in income in order to get going with work - but many won't.

All this political idealism is grossly over-simplifying a very difficult question - exactly where do you want people on social security to be? Is it right that they can receive more than the minimum wage? More than the median wage, even?


You've hit the nail on the head there. Some people will be using it as a safety net and could have been made redundant whilst they have a family to feed and a mortgage to pay, others will just be spongers and it will be almost impossible to be fair to everyone. I've long being in favour of giving out food or clothing tokens instead of money to people but in arguments I've always being shot down because that would 'embarrass those who were made redundant'.
Reply 33
Avatar for Kibalchich
Kibalchich
Original post by MatureStudent36
The majority of these people are also claiming housing benefit, council tax benefits Eric. So it's simply £53 a week fir food and electricity. It's tough but do able.


And gas and water and phone and (from yesterday in a lot of places) council tax and shoes and clothes and travel...
Original post by Kibalchich
And gas and water and phone and (from yesterday in a lot of places) council tax and shoes and clothes and travel...



In some cases yes. In some cases no
Reply 35
Avatar for Kibalchich
Kibalchich
Original post by MatureStudent36
In some cases yes. In some cases no


Whut? lol
Thing is, it's alright living on £53 for one week, but that's providing this isn't the week your car fails its MOT and you can't get to a job interview, your washing machine breaks, your kids need new school uniform.

Iain Duncan Smith lives in Zone 4. A weekly travel card is £43.60. He would have less than £10 a week to pay for all of his utilities, food, consumables, and emergencies if he was made to live off £53/wk. It's not even viable to do volunteering work to develop the skills and fill the CV gaps to get back into work because the Jobcentre Plus Travelcards are over £20.
Original post by RachaelBee
China started doing that, they claimed people were being voluntarily sterilised in exchange for money but the people being sterilised claimed family members were kidnapped etc, it was very unsettling.


That's by no means all - Sweden, yes, progressive, civilised Sweden, ran a clandestine sterilisation programme until the 1970s, mainly targeting the disabled and the sick.
Original post by DarkWhite
Thing is, it's alright living on £53 for one week, but that's providing this isn't the week your car fails its MOT and you can't get to a job interview, your washing machine breaks, your kids need new school uniform.

Iain Duncan Smith lives in Zone 4. A weekly travel card is £43.60. He would have less than £10 a week to pay for all of his utilities, food, consumables, and emergencies if he was made to live off £53/wk. It's not even viable to do volunteering work to develop the skills and fill the CV gaps to get back into work because the Jobcentre Plus Travelcards are over £20.


No need for a car when you can get free bus travel.http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/travel/2012/12/unemployed-to-get-free-bus-travel
Original post by CreedofMaurus
Mr Smith earns 135,000 as a cabinet minister and probably a lot more with other on the side ventures, I would love for him to try :smile:

Anyway what about you guys could you live with £53 a week, is it reasonable and what do you think of Mr Smiths comment?


IDS is a politician, you should show him respect because he is better than you. He worked hard to get where he is today, and he deserves ALL of his wage.

The type of lowlife skanky people he has to deal with on a daily basis are the ones who hang around outside buildings with placards saying "I'd rather have AIDS than IDS!". :rolleyes:

It's no surprise IDS doesn't take them seriously; I wouldn't, either.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you