Benefit cap goes before the Lords.

[garinda]

The government are attempting to limit the amount of benefits any one family can get to £26,000.00, the average income for a family.

It's going before the House of Lords today, though it might face rejection, as it's opposed by some Lib Dem peers, and the majority of bishops.

A few examples of people who benefit, from benefits not being capped.

'The single household, revelling in a mansion in London’s smart St John’s Wood district, received a massive £2,050 a week in Housing Benefit.'
Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Family’s £106,000 a year benefit...just to pay rent

'A family of former asylum-seekers from Somalia are living in a £2.1million luxury townhouse in one of Britain's most exclusive addresses at a cost to taxpayers of £8,000 a month.'

'Abdi and Sayruq Nur and their seven children moved into their three-storey property in a fashionable area of London last month because they didn't like the 'poorer' part of the city they were living in.'
Somali asylum seeker family given £2m house... after complaining 5-bed London home was 'in poor area' | Mail Online

Personally I hope the law will be changed, despite the interference of the bishops and the Lib Dem peers.

Why should ordinary, hard-working families pay to subsidise those families who choose to live in expensive areas, with exorbitant rents?

If Somali asylum seeker Mr Nur still had his job on the buses, no way could he fund his present life-style himself.

Why should everyone else have to pay?

It's high time the state made people realise that you cut your coat according to your cloth.

If you don't like the coat you're freely given, sod off...and try another country's shop.

[maxthecollie]

How many families are getting £26k around here who arte working?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by maxthecollie

How many families are getting £26k around here who arte working?

The average wage, for those working in Hyndburn, is £18,740.

Lancashire County Council: Lancashire Profile

Well below the county and UK averages.

[Margaret Pilkington]

I never made a 26K in a year.......why should those who go out to work for much less(and pay taxes on their earnings) subsidise those who don't(and some who won't) go out to work?

[Benipete]

You would have to be earning in the region of £33-000 to come out with £26-000.

Not many jobs like that around.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Benipete

You would have to be earning in the region of £33-000 to come out with £26-000.

Not many jobs like that around.

There was a woman on the lunchtime news, opening the door to her house in a swanky part of London.

Asking why should she be forced to move.

Because you've no job, and couldn't afford to live where you are, if you did, you scrounging cow.

That's why.

[ToffeeGuy]

Whilst this seems to mainly affect people in London it does seem to be a case of the 'same old Tories'. The Tories - They know the cost of every thing and the value of nothing.

This is another case of smoke and mirrors by the Torys to distract from the rich becoming richer and tory-friendly corporate fat cats filling their pockets. As usual aided by their friends in the right wing media.

To quote today's Guardian:-

Britain is not poor. In only five years of our history have we ever been richer than we are today. The savings from the cap are very small – £270m. Yet we spend £53bn on welfare payments to people in the top half of the income distribution. Cutting their payments by one half of one per cent would be a much better way to save £270m.

Tax avoidance costs UK economy £69.9 billion a year (Source: The New Statesman, 25/11/11). £270m is a pittance compared to this.

Keep focussed on the real injustices in this country.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

Whilst this seems to mainly affect people in London it does seem to be a case of the 'same old Tories'. The Tories - They know the cost of every thing and the value of nothing.

This is another case of smoke and mirrors by the Torys to distract from the rich becoming richer and tory-friendly corporate fat cats filling their pockets. As usual aided by their friends in the right wing media.

To quote today's Guardian:-

Britain is not poor. In only five years of our history have we ever been richer than we are today. The savings from the cap are very small – £270m. Yet we spend £53bn on welfare payments to people in the top half of the income distribution. Cutting their payments by one half of one per cent would be a much better way to save £270m.

Tax avoidance costs UK economy £69.9 billion a year (Source: The New Statesman, 25/11/11). £270m is a pittance compared to this.

Keep focussed on the real injustices in this country.

Long before your time, the greater majority of us on here arrived at the conclusion that two wrongs don't make a right.

Yes, tax avoidance is wrong.

Equally wrong is a social benefits system, that's allowed some to outrageously milk that system, at the the expense of many.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

Keep focussed on the real injustices in this country.

Oh we are.

People are waking up, to those that are constantly on the take, and have no intention of giving anything back, and the soft saps who think there's nothing wrong with them doing this.

[ToffeeGuy]

But it would be a better idea to concentrate on getting the £69.9 billion a year before the £270m.

Surely we should mend the burst pipe before the dripping tap.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

But it would be a better idea to concentrate on getting the £69.9 billion a year before the £270m.

Surely we should mend the burst pipe before the dripping tap.

As I said, two wrongs don't magically make a right.

There's no reason why the hard pushed tax payer shouldn't benefit from having the £69.9 billion AND the £270 million.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

Surely we should mend the burst pipe before the dripping tap.

A wryly amusing analogy.

From a drip, putting forward a rather wet defence for not capping benefit payments.

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by ToffeeGuy

Tax avoidance costs UK economy £69.9 billion a year (Source: The New Statesman, 25/11/11). £270m is a pittance compared to this.

Tax avoidance isn't illegal-tax evasion is. If our laws permit tax avoidance on that scale they need changeing-it's legal but immoral.
But then it's immoral that someone who has never even worked here can live in a £2 million mansion free- it's not actually free, British taxpayers foot the bill after the landlord has more than doubled the rent once he knew Westminster Council were paying it! And that's only their rent-after that they really start getting money.
Could I live on £35,000 a year before tax? I wish! How many people on Accyweb who are working now or have worked all their lives live with pride on a hell of a lot less than that?
Ah, you say, but what about the children? We had the children we could afford at the time-one. If someone wants 4,5,6,7-13 children they should be sure they can afford them-not tell us it's their right and we can afford them! Child benefits should be limited to the first two children-after that it's what you can afford.
However, if you're a millionaire and live in a mansion you should be paying a Mansion tax, not band F.And you sure as hell shouldn't be getting child benefits.

[ToffeeGuy]

Trust me, once the government has watered down these reforms to get it through Parliament no money will be saved. There will be replacements payments or benefits will be renamed. The Tories are merely playing politics to pander to the Daily Mail reading types and looking at the polls it seems to be working. Divide and rule, divide and rule.

Yes, two wrongs don't make a right but some wrongs are bigger than others. We should concentrate on the bigger wrongs first.

[Gordon Booth]

As the Tories, Labour and Liberals all agree on this proposal why should it be watered down.
If the main three parties all with such different philosophies can agree this one time it must be right!
The taxes I still pay don't go to keep the millionaires in their mansions, they go to keep people who often have never worked in their mansions! That tends to make me look at the two wrongs in a slightly different way.