You deserve credit for drawing attention to the failings of universal credit (Report, 24 November). Yet despite all the evidence of this inadequacy, you appear to assume, like the two main political parties, that with sufficient pause such a system can be made to work in a way that is ultimately sustainable. Universal credit is unfixable. Whatever the merits of the original idea, it is astounding that the government could not have foreseen in the early stages of development that as an overall system of benefit, it would prove to be unworkable because of the large variety and complexity of cases to be dealt with, and the inevitability of frequently changing circumstances of some beneficiaries.

If the government really wants to make work pay for the unemployed, it should adopt a policy of introducing a universal basic income, payable unconditionally to all resident adults, to be set at the level of the poverty line. This is the only possible alternative to universal credit or other fluctuating, means-tested forms of benefit. Even if such a system has to be introduced gradually, it can be pursued confidently in the knowledge that basic income can be paid for out of the proceeds of rapidly advancing technology, on the basis of a fair distribution of the abundance created.

William Shutt

Leeds

• Denying hardship is also denying the undeniable evidence that low incomes and debt impact on mental and physical health (Such is their poverty of ideas, Tories must deny all hardship, 27 November). Dr Angela Donkin of the Institute of Health Equity has collated the relevant evidence and concluded: “Income impacts on health directly, for instance, because of insufficient money to heat your home or buy a healthy balanced diet. Cold homes increase rates of respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, excess winter deaths and mental illness. Inadequate diets increase the risk of malnutrition, obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.”

That evidence has been sent to UK governments for decades and yet the Tories have shredded working-age benefits. They are then taxed by local authorities, with draconian enforcement and threats of prison and the bailiffs. Council tax is not covered by the personal tax allowance, so £317 a month universal credit is taxed.

Rev Paul Nicolson

Taxpayers Against Poverty

• It is saddening to see child poverty still existing in the UK in the 21st century. There are currently 3.7 million children living in poverty in the UK. That’s over a quarter of all children, with 1.7 million of these living in severe poverty. In the UK 63% of children living in poverty are in a family where someone works. When kids grow up poor they miss out – and so do the rest of us. They miss out on the things most children take for granted: warm clothes, school trips, having friends over for tea. They do less well at school and earn less as adults. Any family can fall on hard times and find it difficult to make ends meet. But poverty isn’t inevitable. With the right policies every child can have the opportunity to do well in life, and we all share the rewards of having a stronger economy and a healthier, fairer society.

The UK is the sixth largest economy in the world and a regular contributor of foreign aid to other countries, yet in its own backyard poverty is rampant. This situation is untenable and has to be fixed first, before UK taxpayers’ money is diverted elsewhere. Furthermore, the UK has no control over how that money is spent by the recipients’ countries. First we must put our house in order before fixing others. It is time for the government to tap the magic tree to release funds to alleviate child poverty. Poverty in Britain is jeopardising children’s health, lowers living standards and promotes inequality. Child poverty will only increase due to benefit cuts and austerity policies.

Baldev Sharma

Harrow, Middlesex

• I am shocked and saddened to read that the government plans to remove women’s refuges and other forms of short-term supported housing from the welfare system (Society, 26 November). Potentially this will result in the wholescale closure of refuges, and injury and death to women who will no longer be able to flee from danger. In 1976 I was one of a group of women who established the National Women’s Aid Federation, now known as Women’s Aid, to provide support to the growing number of women’s refuges starting up. These are places of safety not only for women, but also their children, who might otherwise have to be separated from their mothers and cared for by local authorities if they are witnessing violence in their homes. It is incredible that in 2017 the government is prepared to fly in the face of overwhelming evidence as to the benefits of refuges and condemn many women to a life of violence because they have nowhere to run, and subject children to the care system because they cannot be left in a home where there is violence. I hope that this retrograde, repugnant and discriminatory proposal will meet with universal condemnation and be reversed.

Pat Monro

Brentford, Middlesex

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters