Ongoing welfare cuts that don’t get much attention
Why is nobody talking about the set limits for certain caps, etc:
Saving cap limit of £6000 and £16000 was set in 2006
Christmas ESA bonus of £10 was set in 1972
ESA pension threshold of £85 was set in 2008
None of these caps, figures have changed for nearly 20 years and one has remain the same for 50 years.
That’s a loss of income/welfare cut for those in poverty quite substantial on a yearly basis and nobody from Liebour is talking about it.
Obviously, parrots from the far right will completely ignore those yearly welfare cuts too.
Comments
-
I replied yesterday, but the replies aren't going through. Why I don't know
1 -
There are post's on here referring to the bonus etc. That's probably why there's no replies.
1 -
not worried about responses.
I just want people to be aware of something that it’s not being reported by the media.
0 -
I don't think that in the current climate the media are going to report on the capital limits. Their view would probably be that a large section of the public don't think that people who have savings over £16,000 should be entitled to means tested benefits. Also this isn't perceived to be a loss of benefits in the same was is the intention to cut the LCWRA for most new UC claimants from April.
1 -
the protection of £85000 in savings in bank accounts has gone up recently to £120000 I think.
why does that protection go up? Why should the public bear an extra cost for people that have £100000 in the bank?
why should the disabled people or people that can’t work any different?
£10 1972 is £120 in todays money if we use the inflation calculator.
£16000 in 2006 is £28000 in todays money£6000 is £10500
£85 is £140, people on esa as potential losing £120 a month because of this.
those are all cuts aimed at the most vulnerable while protecting the most well off. Especially those extremely well off as if you had £100k you could £50k in o e bank and £50k in another bank and all your savings will be protected.
that’s the problem1 -
and that savings protection of £85000 was set in 2010 and in December changed to £120000
0 -
You can highlight these things until you are blue in the face.
There is little to no political capital in significantly increasing state benefits. Any government that does, especially in this political climate, they will be hung out to dry by the media and opposition parties.
2 -
As I said before, it's already been discussed. People have moved on and as Chris, there's no gain in repeating things. Most of the people are in dire straights that ask the questions for help on here and have little more than a few hundred in their bank. Just a thought.
3 -
I think it's fair to discuss things that people are impacted by, whether or not they have been discussed before. I believe we all acknowledge that different people have very different circumstances but that doesn't mean we can't look to improve things for everyone.
Correct me if I'm wrong, @alexroda, but I believe you're also trying to highlight the discrepancy in how different kinds of savings, benefits, or protections are treated depending on people’s circumstances?
2 -
well, if the erosion of our rights to lead a dignified life don’t bother people, even if you only had £10 in the bank, we, as a community will continue to see the slow decline of our welfare rights. This should not be about you have more than me so I dont care, or race to the bottom, this is about defending fundamental rights for us and future generations regardless of personal circumstances.
And Liebour are doing exactly that, another example is the changes coming up this April regarding LCWRA.
Just a thought2 -
that’s right, all of those are political choices
1 -
I am a 50yo powerchair user, and I just want to try and live out the rest of my life in peace. I have no more fire in my belly, and I am done with spitting into a hurricane.
2 -
What i find disheartening is even on this forum if people dont agree your gaslighted almost dismissed its a slow creep of eroding of human rights the attuitude that we should almost be grateful as most of us are but im pretty tired of the labels put on people on welfare refugees centuries ago people was born into a world that had everything land water fruit foods all off the land no taxes ect now its cooperations running everything no humanity no care if we cant care for each other and spend all our time arguing its worked for centuries everyone to divided and that keeps the machine working for them not us
4 -
We literally have never had it so good. What kind of history books have you been reading? The mind boggles.
2 -
I'm sorry but I still think if you have over 16k you shouldn't recieve means tested benefits, most people on benefits struggle and are living month to month. I think theres something wrong if your savings lots of money while on benefits and everyones struggling.
2 -
just got to show that people back in 2006 were ok for people to be in means tested benefits with savings between £6000-£16000 and now, 20 years later some people on this forum don’t want that same figure to be uprated per inflation.
Wonder what has changed in people’s economic welfare over these last 20 years. Obviously more and more people are struggling and we have entered a race to the bottom while the super wealthy accumulate all the wealth.
Dark times ahead of us, very dark times ahead.
2 -
But most agree that if you're savings were above that figure then you wouldn't be allowed benefits and I think that's a correct assumption.
2 -
Im sorry but I don’t think you understand the problem nor what I’m saying.
They accepted the figure 20 years ago, cost of things have gone up.
Some of the unemployed, disabled etc in this forum accept that the figure of £16000 should not have increased in line with inflation.
however the super rich press on the government to increase their protection savings, which were set 15 years ago.What does it tell you about us? About the level poverty mindset that people in this country has fallen to? The thinking of I have it bad, you should have it too. That’s driven by envy between people in this forum.
And this will get worse as time goes by. If you can’t see it there’s no more I can say.
3 -
the capital rules were introduced in 1988, The capital cut off was set at £6000, and capital between £3000 and £6000 was treated as generating income of £1 per week for each £250.
that was changed in 2006 to the current ones.They changed it after 18 years but now people are happy to stick to the capital rules ser 20 years ago.
that’s the problem, the mentality people have regarding this now.3 -
£16000 felt like a lot of money 20 years ago, and it does still feel like a lot of money now but it isn't even a year worth of rent for me.
I'm not sure I think people should be able to claim while having high levels of savings but the fact it hasn't changed but the value of the money has is really interesting, yet protection of savings for the super wealthy has increased.
Most people in the UK don't have anywhere near £16,000 in savings so I can't see popular opinion ever changing, but I'd question why popular opinion is behind the rich receiving protections that increase but no one else
2
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.8K Start here and say hello!
- 7.5K Coffee lounge
- 105 Games den
- 1.8K People power
- 159 Announcements and information
- 25.2K Talk about life
- 6.2K Everyday life
- 508 Current affairs
- 2.5K Families and carers
- 873 Education and skills
- 2K Work
- 579 Money and bills
- 3.7K Housing and independent living
- 1.1K Transport and travel
- 642 Relationships
- 1.6K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.5K Talk about your impairment
- 879 Rare, invisible, & undiagnosed conditions
- 939 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 40.8K Talk about your benefits
- 6.1K Employment & Support Allowance (ESA)
- 20.3K PIP, DLA, ADP & AA
- 9.1K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.3K Benefits and income