Poverty in the UK - disappearing according to Boris

'Spare cash'? I guess you're talking to the public school brigade there quizqueen, because I can assure you, most state schools only provide pads in an emergency. And I have yet to work in a state school that has mixed toilets, although I'm sure they are on the way.

Quiz queen , can't you see that for some families the essentials for sanitary protection are just too expensive. There is no spare money and it could be a case of food or sanitary ware. Perhaps a trip to your local food bank might open your eyes.
Gagajo I agree with you completely . It's surprising how many people think that students do not have to pay to do the PGCE.My grandson is in that group and is now doing a Masters which is essential .No wonder they have to go abroad to work to try to cover their previous costs.

oldg tbf to GB, the idea of topping up low wages was not his idea although it’s true he expanded the concept. If you want the full history of supplementing low pay, it actually started in the 18th C with the Speenhamland System but it’s more modern incarnation was Family Income Supplement which then became Family Credit

Yes, all those teenage girls in 'period poverty' will be able to get free sanitary wear at school now, it seems. They can now use their spare cash to top up their smart phones or buy computer games or make-up. Should be good fun in those school toilets which are now gender neutral- the boys will be having a field day.

While I disagree with your first point, GG13, I agree with your second.

The problem is, NOW people pay for their training. Teachers do not get a bursary for doing a PGCE. They take out student loans. You can't get someone to pay for their training and then lock them in. If you want to lock staff in for a specific period, then their education needs to be state funded.

If someone has paid £50,000 for a degree and a PGCE, of course they will immediately want to go overseas to work, to enable them to start paying their loans back with higher wages.

Importing cheap low skilled labour from abroad has helped to keep wages low.

Businesses/Employers need to train their workforce from the bottom up. If the training is expensive then the employee should sign a contract to stay with the employer for a set amount of time.

This would incentivise business to train people as they would know that once trained the employee will not up and leave immediately they are qualified/trained.

(This should apply to Doctors, Nurse and Teachers also)

Can I just "like" the last few posts. I really haven't the energy/patience to post my views. I will say there are a couple like Ladymuck and JenniferEccles who get ?

That’s it! And it was that he didn’t have when he came out of hospital. They told me the order to apply for things to make sure he didn’t trigger a move to UC. Very helpful as I wouldn’t have had a clue.

When he came out of hospital every single benefit was wrong. It took hours and hours of my time to sort. PIP, Mobility, Housing Benefit, ESA, the watersure stuff. It took over 3 months until he was on the correct benefits. Constant phone calls from me. Then I was randomly sent a supposed unpaid care bill from 3 years ago. Had to drag all the info out of storage to find out what had happened (was a correction to an LA mistake - so he did owe the money but only because the had incorrectly calculated it in the first place).

God knows what happens to people like my son if they don’t have someone who can sort out all the above for them. A social worker wouldn’t have done it.

gracesgran that's a really good point, actually.

I'd rather see a system that rewards people properly for working than one where poor wages are topped up by the state. There's no incentive, in such s system, to pay decent wages because an employer is very well aware that the state will pick up the tab.

Unfortunately a culture of low pay affects everyone, not just those entitled to benefits, as low wages are normalised.

And - much as I'm a fan of Gordon Brown - I think the introduction of Tax Credits to top up wages has had the unintended consequence allowing employers to pay crap wages.

netzumi it sounds as though he may have, or be entitled to get, a SDP which protects against having to move to UC. Glad for your son, and for you.

I have worked hard, came from real poverty and now am comfortable, financially. Not well off, but I can pay my bills and I have a roof over my head. Do I 'deserve' it? NO MORE than any human deserves to be fed and housed

I really don't think some of you understand how pinched the benefits system is now. It is IMPOSSIBLE to cheat the system. What happens now, repeatedly, is that people in genuine need are turned away OR made to wait months with no money at all. NOT no money for extras. No money to pay rent. Bills. No money to buy food.

The UK no longer has a proper safety net that catches the genuinely poor and needy. The system we have now is designed to make it very hard for people to access it. It is deliberate.

I remember a poster on here, before the election, saying that the poor wanted to put their hands 'in my pocket' (not literally, from the benefit system). That comment made me feel actually, physically sick. That someone VERY comfortably off resented their taxes going to the poor so much that they regarded it as theft.

Let us be clear. Universal Credit is a system designed to make it as difficult as possible for the poor and needy to get help. All the stories we hear about people dying, waiting for a payment, are not a shock to the Tories. The system is DESIGNED to do that. They don't care. The poor can (should?) die for all they care because they are not productive.

If you are warm, fed, have a nice bed and a roof over your head, you (we!) are LUCKY. Many, many British people aren't. This isn't a civilized country anymore. Civilized countries don't treat their people like this.

No worries annep1!

person ( I'm having a bad morning!)

Netzumi65 so sorry. I've just read your posts. That should have been aimed at Lemongrove who says most people see nothing wrong with UC. I don't know anyone person who thinks its ok.
Apologies again.

I should have stayed off as I promised myself.?

ladymuck couldn't have a better username if you tried!

My parents worked hard, I worked hard, in fact at one point my husband and I were quite wealthy comparatively .... then my health went, and now I am asset rich and VERY cash poor - in a hole with no way out. Your perspective changes when this sort of crap happens to you. I now look like shit, feel like shit and half the time I am covered in shit - I hope it doesn't happen to you, but if it did I expect your shit would would come up smelling of roses anyway ....

Perhaps GG13, we should turn it on its head and make the employer apply and do the paperwork so the employee gets enough income to live on.

Obviously, the employer would then have to show why they cannot afford to pay a proper living wage.

Let's face it you know exactly how it all works and could sort it in an afternoon for anyone needing it.

I was quoting a previous post annep1 - I know how hideous UC is.

Having been an employer for over 30 years, and we still are. We know a fair bit about work, salaries, along with in and out of work benefits.

It was designed to save money

Nezumi65 there is PLENTY wrong with UC.
My very intelligent AC had extreme stress when claiming it. Her MP told me she was dealing with over 1000 complaints.
Its a very unfair complicated system. You obviously don't know the details.
Imo it was designed to save money.
Thankfully AC is working now.


It was designed to save money.

Oldgimmer1 they managed to get him into the group for those with the most severe disabilities. It was difficult because during his time in hospital he had lost a lot of entitlements so as he had to restart claims should have switched to UC then. I was VERY grateful to them. I have no idea who they were or how they knew about him - but it has made things a lot easier for me let alone him (I’m his deputy so do all the admin - am very grateful not to be wrestling with UC on his behalf).

nezumi I'm heartened to hear you've had a positive experience with the DWP. It sounds as though he has, or is entitled to, some form of "protection" which means that he can avoid UC.

As a very general rule it's best to avoid UC if possible for a number of reasons. These are not just financial reasons. It is extremely difficult to revert back to your previous entitlement once you are claiming UC, for one. There is the wait, the advance payment, the deductions you may or may not be aware of, and the claimant commitment.

UC is paid calendar monthly not fornightly or 4 weekly, which can make budgeting difficult. You have to report every change of circumstance, which makes it unwieldy for workers, and almost impossible for the self-employed.

I do find the "I'm right about the laziness of others even though I obviously know nothing about the system for those who need to use it" far, far worse than "rude".

It is downright insulting both to the people trying to negotiate a very difficult regime with the worst systems I have ever come across and to those you are supposed to be "discussing" it with.

You do not "listen" and are not prepared to learn. You are just obstinately sure of the truth of your own opinions which would usually be seen as sheer arrogance.

grannyg people cannot claim UC just to top up wages without there being strings attached.

All UC claimants are assessed according to how much work they can do, even those with health problems and dependent children.

A claimant will sign a commitment to look for work or undertake extra work. It is no longer possible to "just" work 16 hours a week and expect the state to cough up the rest. The strings are tight, and breaking your commitment will mean a sanction.

The overwhelming majority of part-time workers are women with children claiming child costs under UC.

The UC calculation is made each month and is adjusted according to earnings. The Greggs situation is a case in point. The bonus is extra income calculated into UC. So any financial gain is lost in the adjustment process.

“as opposed to relying on Universal Credit to top up your money”

This just shows limited understanding of the system or world of work these days.

As for ‘there’s nothing wrong with UC’ the DWP itself rang me when my son came out of a long stay hospital & said ‘we have had a meeting here to try and work out how we can keep him on ESA and avoid UC - this is what you need to do’ (& I have been forever grateful to them - they got him onto the last group that will be switched, so making life easier for a few years).