Large families

It would also depend I think on the 'household' income. You can now only get ESA for a year unless in you are in the top group.

Yes, in my original question to Nelliemoser I was referring to people without medical conditions or reasons why they couldn't work.

sunseeker Your comment on Orca's post seems eminently sensible to me - if any family needs extra support, either through parenting classes or home visits, that's probably a good idea. However, what I was saying was: how does that address the issue of welfare costs? At least in the short term - and maybe indefinitely - it would be an additional expense.

Movedalot I addressed the point you are making re limits on welfare benefits not being retrospective but only applying to future claimants. My response was that it's conceivable that this will not be a deterrent to the small number of people who have large families and, if that proves to be the case in some instances, such children will suffer. I also find it difficult to believe that a significant number of people have large families just to get welfare benefits.

Orca I think it's rather cheap to characterise people whose views you don't share as being "not capable of thinking for themselves" and merely guided by political dogma. I also think the use of the term "loony left" is unnecessarily provocative. ("righteous right" doesn't have quite the same connotations does it - and which of the "righteous right's" views do you not approve of?) Speaking personally - and no doubt for other posters - I can assure you I am perfectly capable of thinking for myself.

I think the extremes at either end of the political spectrum are actually very similar. The spectrum comes full circle and both far 'lefties' and far 'righties' join the circle at the same place. Both groups would deny personal freedoms in favour of more authoritarianism, though the forms may differ.

And, as usual, cheap labels don't help argument much.

Eleothan- thank you, you are speaking for me as well -words like political dogma and looney left are not helpful - I have an extremely well-thought out, intellectually coherent political philosophy which developed out of many strands - childhood and adult experiences, parental example, education. It's developed and nuanced over the years but it's certainly not a dogma. Right, as a champagne socialist (and yes I've worked that one out to and I'm quite comfortable with it) I'm off to have a glass of it!!

Cheers bluebell.

Bags - before I pop the cork, I agree with you about the extremes - ther's some interesting psychology styff on that, relating it to personality types - authoritarian as you say. Some people think of it as a political spectrum but I used to teach it as a circle.

or stuff even and I haven't had a drink yet

Ana
www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/lone-parent-pack.pdf

This gives you the current picture for parents, there is some acknowledement of the difficulties of working parents but given the difficulties the disabled currently face from ATOS I would not expect the DWP to be very understanding.

Given the the cuts in the rate of income tax to those earning over £150K the cuts in already low benefits make me very angry. I have not yet discovered a calculation of the revenue income lost to the state on the reduction in the higher rate of tax.

I've skimmed through it, Nellie, but I still maintain that the state won't allow children to be 'punished' by the withdrawal of their parent's or parents' benefits. It just wouldn't happen - otherwise we're back to the 'let 'em starve' scenario.

Apparently, the 50% tax rate raised 'only' one billion pound and it encouraged people earning over £150,000 to find ways to avoid it (legally).
It just seems crass, when benefits to the poorest are being cut, to give away even a 'small' amount to the richest.
Oh, dear, I suppose that comment makes me a loonie leftie

I thought you were a self-admitted 'leftie' anyway, Greatnan. I'm sure you don't think you're a loony, any more than right-wingers see themselves as 'righteous'. Just labels....

Exactly, Ana. I don't think they serve any useful purpose.
I am not a member, or even a supporter, of any of the political parties in the UK, so I am not sure why people have chosen to label me, but I don't care anyway.

I'm sure you've admitted to being left-wing in the past, Greatnan. Anyway, it's pretty obvious!

Ooooh the use of words!

'Admitted to being' or proclaimed, or aligned with, or covertly belonging to, or proudly belonging to, or clearly a sympathiser with, or even agreeing with.

They all carry their own sub text don't they?

And get us absolutely NOWHERE - sadly and tragically.

I think our political leanings are our own affair

I share many of the beliefs held by some people who are regarded as left wing but the term is so loose and ill defined it could mean almost anything.
I feel strongly that businesses should be held to account for the way they treat staff, suppliers and customers.
I feel strongly that certain essential services should never have been privatised.
I regard grammar schools as divisive.
I think prisons and detention centres should not be run for profit.
I think people who have to claim benefits should not be demonised.
I don't think Britain should be involved in illegal wars.
I don't think Britain should trade with ghastly regimes like Saudi Arabia.

I could go on, but why bother? It is obvious that some people think they know all about me and have already put me in a box. Do I care? Not a jot.

Join me in the box, Greatnan. Everyone else most welcome

You're Great nan. Don't change!

Oh, and I LOVE champagne. Santé

Oh, I do hope that wasn't directed at me, Greatnan -"It's obvious that some people think they know all about me...". I don't keep a notebook about other GN members and I don't profess to know 'all about' anybody.

So funny, everyone...

And I totally join you in that box.

I however do not agree that to question some aspects of the welfare state is 'demonizing' - but trying to better understand and actually try and find ways to improve things - and that 2 wrongs never make a right.

Things do need a ' bottom up ' look and review and a certain amount of rationalisation.
At the moment the benefits field is a nightmare.