Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
fru-gal

Reduced benefit cap begins in November (reduced to £20k per annum outside London and £23k in London)

Recommended Posts

The reduced benefit cap starts in November (reduced to £23k in London and £20k outside London). Will this have any effect on housing? The current cap doesn't seem to have had much effect at all so far in either bringing down rents or house prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, One-percent said:

So, no matter how many kids, the cost of rent, these are the caps?

nope:

* disabilities no cap

* pension age - no cap

* been working for the last year  but now unemployed - no cap for nine months

* working 16+ hours per week as a sinlge person, or 24 as a couple - no cap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bambam said:

nope:

* disabilities no cap

* pension age - no cap

* been working for the last year  but now unemployed - no cap for nine months

* working 16+ hours per week as a sinlge person, or 24 as a couple - no cap

Ah thought it was too good to be true.  So, given your list, who exactly will the cap apply to?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, One-percent said:

Ah thought it was too good to be true.  So, given your list, who exactly will the cap apply to?  

Hardly anyone. All the hardcore benefits claimants know that you need to be 'working' in some shape or form (selling MLM shite on Facebook will qualify) to get the good cash these days (tax credits).

The 'benefits cap' is and was just a dog whistle for those outraged at benefits spendig, not a serious attempt to cut spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bambam said:

Hardly anyone. All the hardcore benefits claimants know that you need to be 'working' in some shape or form (selling MLM shite on Facebook will qualify) to get the good cash these days (tax credits).

The 'benefits cap' is and was just a dog whistle for those outraged at benefits spendig, not a serious attempt to cut spending.

Ah, so the main gravy train of in work credits keeps trundling on. Seems like a smokescreen so they can convince those being shafted through paying for this carp that it is being dealt with. 

 

May they burn burn in hell for this subterfuge 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Lovely Rum said:

its amazes me that people can "earn" £23k on benefits. is that taxed in the same way as income?

In a word no

 

for the real analysis of this, search for Durham born's posts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doubt this will effect the migrants from outside the EU with 4-7 kids who can't/won't work because they are uneducated/lazy yet get given large council houses while I work my **** off only to see near enough half my salary disappear in rent + council tax for a poxy studio flat. F*** this country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The benefit cap is a decent idea,ruined by not counting anyone who works 16 hours or if anyone in the house gets DLA/PIP.Many tax credit claims include getting a child on DLA/PIP for behaviour etc because it boosts benefits by another £100 a week.

Going forward though the big change is the two child limit in tax credits that comes in April next year (so for anyone getting pregnant now).The removal of the "family element" is done at the same time,so new claims from then lose £10 a week,plus £56 a week for each child over two children.The two child limit might also affect housing  benefit,so the most anyone will be able to claim is for a 3 bedroom house but im not sure on that yet.

A single mother on tax credits with two children working 16 hours would get £17.5k a year including wages +£2k housing benefit,under the benefit cap anyway,the two child limit means the benefit cap wouldnt affect anyone working in the future anyway even if they were included. 

I would say the two child limit goes halfway to solving the tax credit problem.The next steps are to increase the hours needed to claim it once a child is at school and then at secondary school (5 and 13),and also lowering the level where the means test kicks in (this has been done in Universal Credit),though its likely they will simply use freezing them and let inflation do the work (if we ever get any).

Edited by durhamborn
add info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that assumes that therell be no more more changes.

I doubt thats the case. Yes, i know May said not looking to save money from welfare budget but everyone on TCs reckons they are working.

The cap is v.popular. I reckon itll  change to count all payments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Lovely Rum said:

its amazes me that people can "earn" £23k on benefits. is that taxed in the same way as income?

 

It's the biggest anomoly that you are taxed on the income that provided a roof over your head but if you are socially housed this falls outside the scope of income if you don't work. Also I get charged a couple of grand council tax to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has UC been rolled out for families with children yet? I have seen a few posts recently on other forums of people with children saying they have been moved to UC.

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, fru-gal said:

Has UC been rolled out for families with children yet? I have seen a few posts recently on other forums of people with children saying they have been moved to UC.

I dont know of any though its possible a few token cases have been moved though its more probably people living with a partner and fiddling so the partner is put on UC as single unemployed..They cant move more than a few because they have no interface to HMRCs real time data still.Its all still dont by hand from data emailed over once a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, spyguy said:

Well, that assumes that therell be no more more changes.

I doubt thats the case. Yes, i know May said not looking to save money from welfare budget but everyone on TCs reckons they are working.

The cap is v.popular. I reckon itll  change to count all payments.

Im not sure.The best way to reform tax credits was the taper,two child limit and the allowable earnings cuts,the Lords kicked out all of those and the two child limit only got through by being put into another bill.Like you say though the hours rules are an easy target and increasing them as a child hits 5 and 12/13 is an obvious one.Universal Credit has no hours rules though at all so that defeats any changes.

Tax credits are hugely generous with every extra child so the two child limit is a very big cut.We will have to see if there is anything in the autumn statement,but i think they will leave things as they are for now and let the two child limit and benefits freeze come in.They might tweak housing benefit some more though.

Edited by durhamborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7 October 2016 at 6:48 PM, fru-gal said:

The reduced benefit cap starts in November (reduced to £23k in London and £20k outside London). Will this have any effect on housing? The current cap doesn't seem to have had much effect at all so far in either bringing down rents or house prices.

In short, it will have no effect on house prices or rents.  The reason house prices and rent are so high is that there is a shortage in proper family housing in the uk, and taking from the poorest in society will not change this.  

Likely causalities of the new policy include increases in poverty both extreme and relative, slum areas around the country (most likely outside of central London as that is too expensive now), underfed children and adults, more social problems, diseases both physical and mental associated with over crowding and sanitation, rental properties in disrepair for the poorest (why invest when there is no profit) and an increase between the haves and have nots financially.

So so ignore the excitable nasties on here who think this policy reflects a jolly good wheeze.  

Edited by Royw6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roy. Stop listening to so much James O'Brian. It does matter to those of us that support ourselves.  Housing benefit for a 3 bed round my way is £1200 pm.  That is what I have to compete against. The first £20k gross I earn is irrelevant because that just gets a very basic roof over my head that others get for free.  It is not jealousy of the benefits recipients. The amount they receive sets a floor under what we have to earn to provide the basics. Cut benefits and the living standards of those that don't receive will improve. As it should be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How on god's earth can taking money from those on the minimum acceptable standard of income per head for this country possibly improve people's lives?

the argument you put forward that you are competing with these people for merger rations is bizarre beyond my comprehension.  In a society, provision must be made for all.  Instead of arguing for people to be poorer and live worse than you, you should be arguing for new council houses.  We are not wild animals scrabbling for merger rations and houses.  Are you arguing that there are the undeserving poor ofthis country, should we bring back work houses?

to take your argument even further, should we simply not educate those of limited intelligence, then we could focus on people with higher IQs rather than waste money on educating those who it might be wasted upon?  What about the disabled, on your scrap heap of the undeserving poor, where would they fit?

Edited by Royw6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Royw6 said:

How on god's earth can taking money from those on the minimum acceptable standard of income per head for this country possibly improve people's lives?

the argument you put forward that you are competing with these people for merger rations is bizarre beyond my comprehension.  In a society, provision must be made for all.  Instead of arguing for people to be poorer and live worse than you, you should be arguing for new council houses.  We are not wild animals scrabbling for merger rations and houses.  Are you arguing that there are the undeserving poor ofthis country, should we bring back work houses?

to take your argument even further, should we simply not educate those of limited intelligence, then we could focus on people with higher IQs rather than waste money on educating those who it might be wasted upon?  What about the disabled, on your scrap heap of the undeserving poor, where would they fit?

Think of it from another angle.  Giving tax credits to those on low pay (but only if you have kids. Feck off if you are single or a childless couple) enables employers to pay lower wages. If these props were removed, employers would be forced to pay a decent living wage . Essentially it is not benefits for the individual but for employers and corporations. Why do you think that Sainsbury's, Tesco et al offer 16 hour contracts?  It's because this is where the benefits kick in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Royw6 said:

How on god's earth can taking money from those on the minimum acceptable standard of income per head for this country possibly improve people's lives?

the argument you put forward that you are competing with these people for merger rations is bizarre beyond my comprehension.  In a society, provision must be made for all.  Instead of arguing for people to be poorer and live worse than you, you should be arguing for new council houses.  We are not wild animals scrabbling for merger rations and houses.  Are you arguing that there are the undeserving poor ofthis country, should we bring back work houses?

to take your argument even further, should we simply not educate those of limited intelligence, then we could focus on people with higher IQs rather than waste money on educating those who it might be wasted upon?  What about the disabled, on your scrap heap of the undeserving poor, where would they fit?

CP is not suggesting taking any money away from the poor at the end of the day. HB goes towards rent, it's not like the poor are pocketing the money. And the number of families stays the same, so If you lower HB then rent will be lowered as well (otherwise landlords end up with voids and they get 0 rent). The number of homes and people remains the same, so the real-world benefits going around would be the same as now. The only difference is that productive people would pay less to maintain this system.

Regarding your comparison to education, that is free for everyone which makes it fair. If everyone got HB too, that would level the playing field (while highlighting problems with the PRS, of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, One-percent said:

Think of it from another angle.  Giving tax credits to those on low pay (but only if you have kids. Feck off if you are single or a childless couple) enables employers to pay lower wages. If these props were removed, employers would be forced to pay a decent living wage . Essentially it is not benefits for the individual but for employers and corporations. Why do you think that Sainsbury's, Tesco et al offer 16 hour contracts?  It's because this is where the benefits kick in

That might work in a closed economy, but in reality could not work in a globalised one.  If we pay a shop worker £20 an hour, sausages will cost four or five times what they do now, as would everything else - unless you have loads of spare cash, this will be bad for you.  If you pay a painter decorator £30 an hour, people will paint for themselves.

So the "subsidy" that tax credits provide, actually helps keep down the costs of goods for the middle and working class, who benefit from cheap sausages and a shoes.  Therefore, tax credits, or the equivalent, actually helps people like you.

another benefit of tax credits, or similar, is that it prevents shoeless undernourished children from appearing  on our streets. Morally I object to anyone being placed in this position, but particualrly children who have no control over the behaviour of their parents.

you might have noted the comments at the Tory party conference, and calls for the complete removal of paid maternity leave post brexit.  Rather than congratulating the government of the forced impoverishment of a section of society, you should argue against it.  Once tax credits are done and dusted, expect further reductions in state intervention, and quite likely things you and or your families currently benefit from, and possibly hold dear.

I pay huge amounts of tax - I have no problem with that, and I support the redistribution of my wealth to those who earn less.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Royw6 said:

How on god's earth can taking money from those on the minimum acceptable standard of income per head for this country possibly improve people's lives?

It's OK Roy, we've more or less solved this on the Universal Basic Income thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Royw6 said:

That might work in a closed economy, but in reality could not work in a globalised one.  If we pay a shop worker £20 an hour, sausages will cost four or five times what they do now, as would everything else - unless you have loads of spare cash, this will be bad for you.  If you pay a painter decorator £30 an hour, people will paint for themselves.

So the "subsidy" that tax credits provide, actually helps keep down the costs of goods for the middle and working class, who benefit from cheap sausages and a shoes.  Therefore, tax credits, or the equivalent, actually helps people like you.

another benefit of tax credits, or similar, is that it prevents shoeless undernourished children from appearing  on our streets. Morally I object to anyone being placed in this position, but particualrly children who have no control over the behaviour of their parents.

you might have noted the comments at the Tory party conference, and calls for the complete removal of paid maternity leave post brexit.  Rather than congratulating the government of the forced impoverishment of a section of society, you should argue against it.  Once tax credits are done and dusted, expect further reductions in state intervention, and quite likely things you and or your families currently benefit from, and possibly hold dear.

I pay huge amounts of tax - I have no problem with that, and I support the redistribution of my wealth to those who earn less.  

I'm not sure what you mean about a closed economy. 

 

Look ok at it another way then.

 

my grand parents and my parents both brought up families on one wage. Bought houses on not very skilled work, fed and clothed everyone. Did not have much spare cash.  Did not own cars, phones or any other  accoutrements or trappings that people take for granted now

 

me, it took two wages, with both parents working to bring up a family.

 

now, no hope for my kids unless they themselves have children and then rely on the largess of the state. 

 

It is slavery under the guise of globalisation and tee markets, or whatever other sh!te is used to explain and justify it . Cut all credits so that employers have to pay a decent wage. And yes, food prices will rise.  It is cheaper now than it ever has been, which is why there is so much waste.  

 

The subsidies that you speak of are for employers  and landlords 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   29 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.