(UK) Benefits cap 'could make 80,000 children homeless'

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

The government's benefits cap could make more than 80,000 children homeless and push many thousands more into poverty, says the Children's Society. In a devastating critique of the plan to limit the amount even the largest families can claim in benefits, Bob Reitemeier, its chief executive, said there would be a huge "human and social cost" if the reforms went ahead.

The welfare reform bill, which proposes a £500 a week cap on the amount families can claim for housing, childcare and sustenance, is set to return to parliament in the House of Lords on Tuesday after making unsteady progress through the Commons earlier this year.

The society says 200,000 children will have their lives affected by the changes to the amount their parents can claim and 27,600 adults and 82,400 children could be made homeless.

While supporters of the benefits cap claim it would simply mean families would be forced to move into cheaper accommodation, government figures suggest 70% of those who will be hit are already living in social housing.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/sep/10/benefits-cap-make-children-homeless

---

This coming from a country with a royal family whose children are entitled to all sorts of wealth!

[defendandprotect]

1. Nice point re the Royal Family -- a disgraceful concept -- what does that make the rest of us?

[LeftishBrit]

2. This is even more revolting...

because this government dress it up as 'compassionate conservativism' and claim that it is *good* for people to be weaned off welfare dependency, and that the benefits system is immoral because it rewards laziness, single parenthood (a current scapegoat for all evils), etc.

Of all the ministers in the government, I think I HATE Iain Duncan-Smith, the main minister involved with welfare reform, the most!

Not to mention Osborne, the cuts fanatic. When you are so fanatical about deficit reduction at any cost that even the *head of the IMF* urges caution on the matter, then you are a true fanatic. Not to mention an idiot - which Osborne certainly is.

The LibDems are mostly as weak as water, and so in a way is Cameron - he just lets all his Ministers loose to do whatever nutty stuff they please, and then pontificates about how great their plans are.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. The UK government has no problem in funding wars

no matter whether they are Labour or Conservative.

[pennylane100]

4. That works out to $800 per week.

plus free medical care. I never want to be on the same side as the Tory government, but that is a lot better than people would get in this country.
Did I miss something.

[boppers]

7. I think it's the "housing, childcare and sustenance" full amount.

Assume you have 5 children, and are a single working mother. $800 a week doesn't even cover the cost of a six bedroom house, and a full time nanny, let alone the cook and the maid.

[provis99]

8. geez, that's 41,000 per year.

that's middle class in this country; upper middle class in some states.

In Mississippi, AFDC pays about $170 per month. Try living on $2000 per year for you and one child...

[dipsydoodle]

9. exactly

You might wonder why the poster didn't also research avarage wages here too.

[zalinda]

10. Do any of us know how much housing is, in the UK?

Those living in New York City, and those living in Birmingham, AL, while both big cities, are worlds apart when it comes to living expenses in those cities.

Next someone will tell us how poor people aren't poor if they have a refrigerator, because the poor people in India don't have one.

Oh, I found a chart of housing rates from 2008 for Central London and Outer London. A 1 bedroom house or flat was 265.12 pounds in CL and 160.36 pounds in OL, this is the price per week. A 2 bedroom house or flat was 375.70 pounds in CL and 212.26 pounds in OL per week. I'm sure the prices are higher now.

zalinda

[pennylane100]

13. I think many of those on assistance qualify for council housing.

That is usually subsidized. Unfortunately, the council estates that I remember, were not considered desirable locations. Sadly, it had nothing to do with the quality of the housing. The homes were far from luxurious but still they were fairly decent. However, the crime rates in these estates was a problem and brand new neighborhoods soon deteriorated.

[LeftishBrit]

22. Yes, but ithat is currently being reduced - one of the main sources of the problem.

[provis99]

14. you can't just count London as UK.

rents in Durham England, for example, run about $600 per month for a 3 bedroom house. You could live pretty well on $41,000 in welfare benefits in Durham.
http://www.findaproperty.com/areadetails.aspx?edid=00&salerent=1&areaid=1667

[LeftishBrit]

20. Yes,. But you couldn't so easily get a job in Durham

One main problem here is that there is a huge north/south divide, with jobs much more available in the south (though they're being cut everywhere!), but rents and house prices are much higher in the south.

People are on the one hand expected to 'get on their bikes' and relocate where the work is, and on the other hand housing is increasingly unaffordable in those places where the work is. One big problem is that subsidized council housing is being reduced as one of the main government cuts. So you can't get a job in the north, so you move to, or stay in, the south, and then you can't get affordable housing anywhere close to where you might work, and so you depend more on benefits, and then these are cut, etc.


ETA: Here is a link to some informative comments on the matter from the Mayor of London:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23857705-housing-benefit-cuts-will-harm-capital-says-boris-johnson.do

Boris Johnson is a Conservative by the way; and I don't normally quote him with approval; but here he's talking accurately about things on his doorstep that he knows about.

[provis99]

24. they dont have jobs; they're on welfare; you've totally missed the point.

[LeftishBrit]

25. A significant and increasing number *had* jobs and lost them

And now either must move to, or stay in, a place where they are most unlikely ever to get another job in this recession; or must risk homelessness.

[Cool Logic]

5. £500 is approximately $800...

Many people in the UK live quite well at the expense of their fellow citizens.

[bhikkhu]

11. $800 per week seems like a very generous cap

...and the article sounds like ridiculous hyperbole.

If you're going to be homeless because welfare only gives you $800 a week, I would think something seriously needs fixing, and applying more cash might be counter-productive.

[Cool Logic]

16. "I would think something seriously needs fixing,"

Indeed, more than half of the homeless are substance abusers or sufferers of mental illnesses.

[rpannier]

15. At the expense of...

Nice...I see some of us have been picking up the talking points

[Cool Logic]

17. Well, it is indeed an expense for those who are "pulling the wagon."

[LeftishBrit]

18. Even more of one to the children who suffer from this!

Here's a suggestion for reducing spending on benefits: spend more on creating jobs, or at least stop cutting them!

Either you don't have a clue what's going on in Britain with all the cuts, or you are to some degree a sympathizer with Thatcherite policies. I'll be charitable and assume it's the former.

[Odin2005]

19. If you want to hate on poor people Free Republic is down the road.

Your crap is unacceptable on this board.

[totodeinhere]

6. And yet a lot of people on this board compare the USA unfavorably with European countries.

But it looks like at least the UK has nothing on us.

[LeftishBrit]

21. Yes - I will fully admit that we are luckier in the UK than in many parts of America

We have a welfare state and some public services that you don't, and I am not complaining about our situation as compared with yours; but we still need to fight to protect our welfare state against those who wish to erode it, or things will become much worse.

And it's not just the welfare aspect; it's a question of reducing unemployment rather than increasing it, so that people won't *need* welfare.

[ShockediSay]

12. Wanna bet there'll be more riots and crime?

[Synicus Maximus]

23. The average income for working class household is about

33000 BPS.