Note: Please bear in mind that whilst this topic does canvass opinions, it is not a fight club. You may disagree with other posters but we do ask you please to stick to our Talk Guidelines and to be civil. We don't allow personal attacks or troll-hunting. Do please report any. Thanks, MNHQ.

I dare you to think this benefits couple is reasonable

(179 Posts)
lainiekazan Tue 23-Jul-13 07:58:36

Dh's brother and wife are very comfortable: large house, Range Rover, etc.

Their dd lives with her boyfriend in a country cottage on housing benefit. Neither work due to depression. They run a car, have holidays, nice clothes financed by their parents.

Now the dd is having a baby, and they are awaiting a new-build HA home in dh's brother's village.

The boyfriend is a professional student (he told me he can always find funding as he is unwaged and independent) and he said that their dc will be privately educated because it/they will be eligible for bursaries.

Surely IANBU for all this majorly sticking in my craw?

DaddyPigsMistress Tue 23-Jul-13 07:59:53

Whats the point of the post?

TheSecondComing Tue 23-Jul-13 08:00:24

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

StickyProblem Tue 23-Jul-13 08:03:32

Great, soon you will have three generations to feel jealous of.

Let it go OP. There will be something you don't know, no-one can "always" get funding for student courses. Perhaps he has an inheritance or something else that's none of your business.

Read some of the threads about people suffering chronic pain, count your blessings, and get on with your own life.

Snazzyenjoyingsummer Tue 23-Jul-13 08:03:35

What kind of student funding? I am doubtful.

Moxiegirl Tue 23-Jul-13 08:03:41

Which bit annoys you? If the parents want to subsidise their lifestyle then they are no different to any other unemployed couple having a baby. Just let them get on with it.

HalfBakedAlaska Tue 23-Jul-13 08:03:43

It seems like there's one of these threads daily atm.

From your brief details, it sounds like there is far more to it. And anyway, for the tiny, TINY minority of people who play the benefits system, there are thousands who need benefits desperately to keep their heads above water. So if this is a benefits-bashing exercise, YABU.

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 08:04:03

I don't care.

Still a benefit bashing troll goady thread makes a welcome change from all the vomit inducing Maic Royal Baby love.

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 08:05:06

Magic not Malc, they haven't called him Malcom.

No wide screen tv?
Do they have enough land for a goat?

TabithaStephens Tue 23-Jul-13 08:08:01

I think they are very unreasonable. Someone should report them to the fraud dept. You can bet they aren't declaring all the help they are getting from parents.

hardboiledpossum Tue 23-Jul-13 08:09:22

Maybe they really are too depressed to work? I remember when I was depressed I could barely drag myself from bed most days. I don't see what their parents giving them money has to do with anything. I had a baby youngish and my parents pay for me to go on holidays. I'm pretty sure you only get four years of loans/grants from the student loans company

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 08:12:12

Have they got a horse?

MalcolmTuckersMum Tue 23-Jul-13 08:13:07

Magic not Malc, they haven't called him Malcom

An oversight which has not gone unnoticed here............ [thin lipped disapproving look]

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 08:18:52

yep this thread is better than hearing Radio 4 tell me 'its a boy' in yet another way.

primallass Spain Tue 23-Jul-13 08:22:17

They might be eligible for bursaries but it doesn't mean they will get them.

Trills Tue 23-Jul-13 08:23:59

YOU are being unreasonable to use the phrase "benefits couple".

ComposHat Belgium Tue 23-Jul-13 08:33:18

The student funding thing isn't true...in England you get funding gor one undergraduate degree and then funding for masters and doctoral level study are on the basis of academic merit not financial circumstances. funding for both of these is rarer than rocking horse shite.

WilsonFrickett Tue 23-Jul-13 08:36:30

He doesn't get unlimited funding, no-one does. If their child is bright and they remain low-income then yes s/he may be eligible for a bursary but so would any child tbh. Although I find it a bit ick you are speculating on the future education of an unborn child...

As for the ha house, I thought their was a shortage of low cost housing in the country so great that a young couple are able to get a secure tenancy.

RhondaJean Brazil Tue 23-Jul-13 08:37:58

IF and I say IF you have got this story right they had better watch out dwp don't notice their lifestyle and count their parental contributions as income.

Also, they will be very very lucky if they Waltz into a new build ha house, endless funding to study is not available anywhere unless he is extremely gifted (see above re post grad study) in which case trust me he will be working his arse off to keep it and I think doctoral funding is usually around 13k a year, and would effect other household benefits, and NOONE. Can predict their unborn child will receive bursaries.

What your bil does with his money, though, is sweet fa to do with you or anyone else really.

bunchoffives Tue 23-Jul-13 08:38:49

TabithaStephens It is not fraud to accept a present from your parents whilst on benefits.

OP YABU - you don't know the finer detail - nor do we. What you have told us is that the 'benefits couple' are depressed - they must be diagnosed to claim benefits on that basis. Same with applying for a Housing Assoc house.

Their parents wealth is not theirs - and young people spout all kinds of nonsense are sometimes mistaken about what sort of help may be available to them. Student loans and bursaries are not available indefinitely.

Your post would have more value if it attempted to draw attention to the millions of disabled people who are losing 14% or 25% of their meagre benefits because they have the temerity to occupy a hone with a spare bedroom even though there is no smaller accommodation available to them. Now that really is an injustice that we should feel outraged about.

quoteunquote Tue 23-Jul-13 08:39:04

they are awaiting a new-build HA home in dh's brother's village

Your DH's brother has a whole village, where did he get that? What did your DH get? I hope it was fair, at least a couple of hamlets and a woodland.

and have they been told that villages are only for rich people?

Shocking I spilt my coffee, and broke my pearls.

BatwingsAndButterflies Tue 23-Jul-13 08:41:55

Benefit bashing goady fucker thread.

I notice that the OP does not claim that they have enough to live on from benefits, all the nice stuff comes from their parents.

How do you think they would live if their parents stopped giving them money? They would certainly not be able to send a child private even with bursaries because they could not afford the extras like uniform.

WilsonFrickett Tue 23-Jul-13 08:45:04

Also students don't get JSA because they are not available for work. Or HB iirc. In fact, I don't think students get anything so it's a bit off to call them a 'benefits couple'.

Mind you, it's a bit off to call anyone a benefits couple, not that you give a shiny shit about that I suspect...

lainiekazan Tue 23-Jul-13 09:36:06

They are playing the system. Sil is very knowledgeable about such things and has accessed dubiously-warranted benefits for her other dc.

Frankly who cares if neither ever goes to work ever again if dh's brother chooses to support them, but I think they're making a mockery of things with their cottage on housing benefit.

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 09:40:40

ODFOD

ComposHat Belgium Tue 23-Jul-13 09:41:50

ODFOD?

mynameisslimshady Tue 23-Jul-13 09:42:14

I get 8 miliion a year on benefits and live on my own island, this couple obviously aren't playing the system well enough. I can give them a few pointers.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 09:43:11

Of course it's not reasonable. That's my money and everyone else's money.

Bluestocking Tue 23-Jul-13 09:43:52

That's nothing, Slim, I have my own planet and a golden space ship so I can get back to earth to sign on.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 09:44:15

Compos hat -Oh Do fuck off dear, I think people do that when they don't want to get deleted for being rude.

WilsonFrickett Tue 23-Jul-13 09:46:31

Then report them. Seriously. But I suspect you don't know the full picture, and the boyfriend is (successfully) winding you up.

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 09:46:59

this whole thing about the 'country cottage' is pissing me off.
should 'the country' be reserved for the rich or as an escape trope for the middle classes? should 'the poor' live in a terraced street?
and they run a car?
boo hoo hoo - guess what u have to run a car if u live in 'the country'.

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 09:47:02

I'm quite happy to be deleted.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 09:47:41

Do people not realise that those who suffer worst from all of this kind of behaviour is not the royal family, or the Middletons, or the Tories. It's the people who need that HA flat but can't get into it because someone who doesn't need it has it instead. And so it goes on. But apparently some people don't care about that. Just shrug and don't care. What - someone who needs an HA flat can't get one because someone who doesn't need it is living there? So what? Who cares?

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 09:48:02

and 'crumbled walnuts' that is not 'your money' any more than my WFTC and CB is.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 09:48:47

Yes, it's my money - I pay taxes. Don't you?

Viviennemary Tue 23-Jul-13 09:51:39

Benefits come from other people's money. Where else do benefits come from. Good when people need benefits. Which is precisely why the system needs to be reformed.

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 09:52:35

get real crumbled walnuts - so you would rather what you rather endearingly like to think of as 'your money' went on killing children in Iraq and Afghanistan?
you have really swallowed the benefits lie that this government is pushing haven't you?
i pay some tax yes but i think of it as payback for the WFTC CB and HB I have received over the years. I find that helps keep a sense of proportion.

MammaTJ Tue 23-Jul-13 09:54:24

Yes, crumbled walnuts, but who is to say they don't need/deserve it. PEople might say I don't need my HA house as we both work FT but we do. The Council and the HA agree, and that is enough for me.

TabithaStephens Tue 23-Jul-13 09:54:38

I would rather my money stayed in my own pocket so I could spend it on my own family, instead of the families of others.

Country cottages are fine, as long as you are paying your own way.

babybearsmummy Tue 23-Jul-13 09:57:23

Apart from reporting them to whichever companies are financing them, there's not a lot you can do. Even if you did report them and they lost their money, would you not feel bad with them not being able to affort to look after their baby. At the end of the day, it's what they've been allocated :/ Just try to ignore it and get on with things

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:05:47

Get real burberry - that's not really the choice is it? I'd rather spend it on my own children or on what I want to spend it on. I did earn it, after all.

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 10:11:46

So you don't use state schools then,or the nhs?

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 10:11:51

you need to get reall, walnuts, an awful lot of taxpayers' money does go on oil war - that is why the present government is encouraging benefit bashing as it deflects attention from that. The sooner we all cop on to that the better!
of course it is not a straight choice ! I was just being rhetorical.

RoxyFox211 Tue 23-Jul-13 10:11:57

You can't be a professional student! No matter on your income you only get funding for one undergraduate course ( including a year or two for retakes if you need them), depression is a debilitating illness that can affect anyone from any social background. Yabu. Why do you care so much how other people live their lives?

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:13:34

No I don't use state schools. Yes I use the NHS. What's the relevance? Are you offering me the option to just pay for what I use? Can I bite your hand off now?

No you need to get reall burberry if you think the choice is pyaing people who don't need it and killing children in Iraq. What a bizarre and polarised view.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:16:42

In fact why don't we calculate what everyone uses and send them the bill. Great idea usual. I'll have school fees lopped off and my boss will have schools and the NHS lopped off. And I didn't agree with the Iraq war so I'll have that lopped off too, and I dont' use social care so I'll have that lopped off as well.

How crazy. Paying for some redistribution shouldn't mean you have to be a mug and a doormat and pay for cheaters and taking the mickey. Otherwise people want to stop paying for any kind of redistribution at all.

OnTheNingNangNong Tue 23-Jul-13 10:17:42

' It's my money' Do you single-handedly pay for all these benefits then. You must be loaded then and can't begrudge sharing your vast wealth.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:19:18

No I don't. Does that make it not my money? Because it's not ALL my money, NONE of it is my money? Have you thought this through at all?

usualsuspect Tue 23-Jul-13 10:19:28

That's what you were saying though.You want to choose not to pay for benefits.

Nice bit of back tracking there.

Whothefuckfarted Tue 23-Jul-13 10:20:05

Country cottages are fine, as long as you are paying your own way.

I'm betting you are all for putting those on housing benefit into workhouses..

WilsonFrickett Tue 23-Jul-13 10:20:12

People with low incomes are allowed to live in the country. Some of them live in cottages in the country. This couple are moving to a HA flat which presumably they have been allocated based upon need, just like all HA flats. You don't just waltz in to the HA and say 'I'll have a flat please'.

And I rather 'my' money was being spent with a HA then on lining a private LL's pockets, though I suppose that's a separate issue.

ComposHat Belgium Tue 23-Jul-13 10:22:47

I did earn it, after all

After being (presumably) being cared for by NHS doctors as a child, being educated at the state's expense (even if you went private, who do you think paid for the training of the doctors and the teachers) and I presume you travel to work on a transport system paid for and maintained by the state? Presumably when you retire, you will want to claim an old age pension and other sundry benefits? With average life expectancies going up, don't kid yourself, what you've paid in NI will cover your pension.

We all get 'handouts' from the state at some stage in our life, people who have this 'I, me, mine' attitude would do well to remember this. We all benefit from living in a welfare state.

daisychain01 Italy Tue 23-Jul-13 10:24:08

It the young couple cannot work, for whatever reason, when the baby is born the child will benefit from having both parents present. if the man is trying to better himself through education, maybe one day his aspirations and self esteem will be raised and he will get a job. Who knows the full picture. i feel good that taxes I earn have improved those peoples' lives... and, NO, the tax isn't MY money at that point it all goes into the central government coffers, and I am "bought into" that system because I am a UK voter, so dont get a choice in how the money is spent, but I can put an 'X' in a different box on polling day if I wish. There is a system (not perfect) which does try to assess people's eligibility, admittedly increasingly controvercial, but by and large I feel good about living in a country where I can work and put back into society. If ever I were to fall on hard times, I know there is help at hand. If I sat and thought about some of the crackpot things taxes are used for, yes it would be easy to get wound up!

OP you have two options that immediately spring to mind - maybe more but here's a couple:

1. Why not put your emotional energy into engaging with those people and getting some enjoyment from helping out, being a friend, finding out how things are going especially as they are in your extended family and they have a baby due?

2. If they really are so abhorent, and YANBU having your point of view by the way... then just detach and get on with your life, doing things your way, rather than being so bitter about something you probably cant change.

Life is full of injustice, but no point letting it eat away. I say this having a couple of friends whose families (or who they themselves) have, shall we say, worked the system and I have had to accept it and not judge them, coz actually they are still people I have great affection for!! When i scratch beneath the surface, they have had a lot of issues to deal with, so its "lazy thinking" to slag them off as cheats.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:25:12

No - I'm saying I'll pay for some redistribution - that's fair. I'm happy to spend some of my money that way. Most people are.

I'm not happy for any of my money to be stolen and cheated. Because it's my money and I earned it.

You think that people who don't want their money to be stolen and cheated, also don't want to spend any of their money on redistribution. It helps your argument to think that. It's wrong, where most people are concerned.

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 10:25:30

Country cottages are fine, as long as you are paying your own way
so it would be OK to be on benefits in a town but not in the country?
is that what you are saying tabitha?
Have you thought this through at all
i would suggest that from your posts it is you who has not thought this through and that you have swallowed the government line completely, as you were supposed to. Dare I mention the (whisper) Daily Mail?

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:26:03

Usual is there something you don't understand? Like the difference between theft, cheating, and redistribution?

OnTheNingNangNong Tue 23-Jul-13 10:26:22

It is not your money. It is the Tax mans money. It is not for you to decide who is deserving or not.

OnTheNingNangNong Tue 23-Jul-13 10:27:22

You could be seen to want to cheat genuine benefit claimants of their money, so why are you so much more important than them?

ouryve Tue 23-Jul-13 10:28:26

Bursaries tend to depend on families proving that there's nothing they can do to improve their financial circumstances.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:30:01

You can mention what you like burberry but I don't know why you believe people can't think for themselves, look at the tax they pay and understand that some of that money is stolen. Not just stolen either - it can be perfectly legal but people are still taking money from taxpayers who need it more. You want to think otherwise - you're living in a dream world. But the people who agree more and more are those who earn little more or even less than people on benefits and who see other people, who don't work and don't earn, having their choices unrestricted. So you can think whatever you like but being silly about the Daily Mail isn't an argument, it isn't even a thought process, it's a knee jerk attempt at an insult.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:31:12

It is the taxman's money See that's one of the most corrupting economic belief systems and it's the reason why communism and socialism fails and continues to fail and repeatedly fails.

TabithaStephens Tue 23-Jul-13 10:31:44

Anyone who pays taxes has the right to an opinion on where their money goes.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:32:04

"You could be seen to want to cheat genuine benefit claimants of their money, "

How? Only by people who want to lump together genuine benefit claimants and cheaters. No idea why people would want to do that.

Viviennemary Tue 23-Jul-13 10:32:05

It's everyone's money. That's why we have elections to decide who we want to represent us and decide how this money should be distributed. I did vote Labour last time but won't again. Why do people think Labour didn't get in. There will never be 100% fairness but a lot of people do want a fairer system.

daisychain01 Italy Tue 23-Jul-13 10:32:26

whothefuckfarted no that would never do, you know those damn workhouses these day, they all have wall-to-wall carpet, satellite TV and playstations. Easy life!

[she says wetting herself typing whothefuckfarted...]

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 10:33:55

it really doesn't sound like you think for yourself tbh crumbled walnuts, you are just parroting a line....
some women come out with this kind of stuff when they are living off their husbands...not that i am suggesting that this is your case, just saying.
and i bet you do read the Daily Mail, no insult meant by that, it is just obvious.

daisychain01 Italy Tue 23-Jul-13 10:34:44

There is no such thing as a fair system, we do need to get real, peeps! There will always be winners and losers, sorry.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:35:47

Well the winners ought to be people who do the right thing not the wrong thing. Obviously.

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 10:36:25

in the end they will be walnut.
i hope.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:36:37

Burberry, believe you me, I'm thinking for myself. It doesn't actually take a very large brain to work out that nobody has the right to steal your money.

TabithaStephens Tue 23-Jul-13 10:36:58

Why has half this thread just disappeared?

cheerfulweather Tue 23-Jul-13 10:37:43

It sounds like the life of riley on benefits (though personally I'd like to know a little more, as that doesn't sound typical to me, what with the cuts and all). You are right to be envious.

What's your point, by the way?

KittensoftPuppydog Tue 23-Jul-13 10:37:50

When I saw this thread title I thought we were talking about the royals.

OnTheNingNangNong Tue 23-Jul-13 10:38:05

George, is it you?

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 10:41:41

It doesn't actually take a very large brain to work out that nobody has the right to steal your money
hmmmm there are plenty of organisations that 'your' money is spent through, including the NHS, the armed forces, the education system etc etc. are they all 'stealing' from you personally?
and why are you talking about the size of people's brains?
are you into eugenics or something? it is downright odd!

cheerfulweather Tue 23-Jul-13 10:41:45

Ah, so the parents are financing cars, holidays and clothes. That is shocking <angry face>, they ought to have withdrawn support as soon as their family became reliant on the state for their income. It will only encourage them to remain feckless for longer.

TabithaStephens Tue 23-Jul-13 10:43:17

Surely the benefits agency should be informed if this couple are recieving financial support from parents?

BridgetBidet Tue 23-Jul-13 10:44:25

Well if they are receiving an income from her parents which they are not declaring this is benefit fraud which is illegal. Report them.

But don't think that it means that there is something inherently wrong with the benefit system - it's not designed to support people like this and won't if those who know about the fraud report it.

Incidentally if their parents are just providing occasional gifts (e.g. a holiday or car) I don't think there is anything wrong with that. It's their money, they've earned it and payed tax on it so they are entitled to spend it as they see fit.

Owllady Tue 23-Jul-13 10:45:58

There is a really screwed logic with the people can only get out when they pay in. A lot of people (most maybe?) who are heavily reliant on the welfare state and the nhs are people who were born chronically ill or are very severely disabled and will never be able to contribute as much as other people, those with severe learning disabilities for example.

I am sure there are people who are lazy and who take from the system when they are able to put in, but most the people who I know who are reliant on welfare care and benefits are those who have worked previously and have had to become carers for their family, children with disabilities, an elderly relative etc. One of my children attends an SLD/PMLD special school and there are lots of Mums who have not been able to work since having those children, they most probably have HA houses but I really do not think many of you would want that life of emotional pain and stress of looking after someone 24/7 and knowing that is all you will have to do until you reach old age and die. I think when these types of threads pop up, people need to put things into perspective and question what is part of being civilised in society and what isn't

wrt the student finance, you can only have access to it once, for so many years, you cannot flit and change. The rules are quite rigid and it is a debt you should have to pay back (I believe most people do)

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:46:20

Burbery I think you missed the conversation about being happy to pay for redistribution but not happy to pay for cheaters or people who don't need it. It was earlier up the thread. I'm talking about the size of people's brains because you seem to think you can get away with saying "you read the Daily Mail" without actually addressing the argument. I do actually have a brain large enough to work things out for myself, I'm rather old and very well travelling and I don't need to get my arguments from somewhere else. No I'm not into eugenics, no it's not odd, it's a fairly obvious point I'm making but you seem to be struggling with it.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:48:04

a really screwed logic with the people can only get out when they pay in again - someone who doesn't understand that people can be happy to pay for redistribution but not cheaters or people who don't need it

This isn't actually very difficult to get, I don't suppose people want to understand the difference

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:49:34

This is where you say by the way that yes we understand what you mean but actually benefit fraud is very small 0.000001 per cent and think of the bankers and the royal family

(helpful)

Owllady Tue 23-Jul-13 10:50:47

Maybe it's a bit more complex than that. Maybe people like myself feel defensive every time a thread like this comes up and people start harping on about those not contributing having access to the nhs and so on and so forth. My daughter didn't ask to be disabled, she didn't ask to be so heavily reliant on me, on the state, but she is here and deserves to be treated like a human being and so do I as her carer. I really don't think there is any need to be so rude

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 10:51:23

i am not 'struggling' with anything and i note you are still talking about your brain size - well done you if it is above average, but i doubt that.

cheerfulweather Tue 23-Jul-13 10:51:35

Yes, if they're just providing gifts of clothing and taking them on holiday then I'm sure that's fine.

Perhaps the OP will pop back and shed some light on this.

merrymouse Tue 23-Jul-13 10:54:25

It doesn't really sound as though the private education is a done deal though does it?

(Unless I have missed something and private schools really are full of children on benefits...)

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:55:05

Owllady - if I were you I would be annoyed at those who constantly lump together people who are genuinely in need and people who aren't and just take the mickey. Because apparently if you criticise people who take the mickey you are also criticising people in genuine need. Not the way I see it but certainly posters above have made the connection.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 10:55:37

Burbery it's alright don't worry.

WilsonFrickett Tue 23-Jul-13 11:00:09

I'm sure if the OP's BIL bought her a car and a holiday that would be OK though, because she is 'hard working' hmm

There are countless threads on MN where people castigate parents for treating their grown-up children as independent, and who don't put their hands in their pockets for holidays and clothes and things.

That's really all that's going on here - the BIL is wealthy so treats his daughter to things she otherwise couldn't afford. She has depression and can't work. Her boyfriend is a wind-up merchant who takes great delight in telling the OP a lot of horseshit and seeing her explode all over her copy of the Daily Heil.

Oh and they live in the country in housing which is not a flat or a terrace.

Is it just me or does none of this really seem wrong?

burberryqueen Tue 23-Jul-13 11:00:47

grin yes i was going to lie awake at night worrying about walnut's 'brain the size of a planet' ... but thanks i won't now!
anyway it is good to discuss things like this, I do understand your view as well.

IneedAyoniNickname Tue 23-Jul-13 11:16:14

They sound entirely reasonable to me!

Snazzyenjoyingsummer Tue 23-Jul-13 11:21:15

The student funding and bursaries mentioned are red herrings. As has been said, student funding has been tightened up considerably. Not sure what the hell the bf is on about with this 'can always find funding as he is unwaged and independent' - what funding? You can say that you don't get money from your parents but that will still only get you a loan of about 3K, plus a loan of about 3K (it's reduced if you get a grant) which will have to be paid back. Hardly the life of Riley, plus you will actually have to study! Plus most universities are removing the resit years that someone mentioned upthread, so you can't hang around endlessly resitting - if he doesn't pass, he will be chucked out, with the debt still to pay back.

'Their dc will be privately educated because it/they will be eligible for bursaries' -if this option was available to everyone 'eligible for bursaries' then state schools would be empty! You can't just rock up and say 'hey, we're on benefits' and be ushered in to claim your private school place. Either he is being wildly optimistic or yanking your chain.

So all this comes to a princely 3k a year. I don't envy them.

aquashiv Tue 23-Jul-13 11:21:54

The boyfriend is a professional student (he told me he can always find funding as he is unwaged and independent) and he said that their dc will be privately educated because it/they will be eligible for bursaries
^^how so^^

ComposHat Belgium Tue 23-Jul-13 11:25:04

aqua he isn't.

Either the poster is misinformed or someone is making stuff up.

Has the op been back to her goady thread yet?

BridgetBidet Tue 23-Jul-13 11:25:54

Aquashiv I suspect when the OP has heard that she's just jumped to the conclusion that he must mean he's getting money from the state. Personally I'm wondering if what he actually means is that he's sponsored by private companies or has research grants off them. I certainly don't think the government would provide endless loans without question. I think that bit is bullshit.

Snazzyenjoyingsummer Tue 23-Jul-13 11:29:23

Bridget even private companies would want to see results for their research grants, he'd have to be filling in progress reports and so on. It wouldn't be 'money for nothing' and he couldn't keep doing it and expect to get more grant money each year! Definitely misinformed.

merrymouse Tue 23-Jul-13 11:35:21

Well atleast the OP should be reassured that the BIL is paying quite high taxes, especially having a fuel thirsty car. (or maybe she thinks he is a tax dodger. Christmas dinner must be quite lively in this family!!!! )

merrymouse Tue 23-Jul-13 11:37:06

And if he is doing research, doesn't that mean he is actually working, albeit not being well paid?

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 11:44:28

The OP in this thread has more holes than a piece of swiss cheese.

You are not eligible for benefits if you are a student and you are only funded for one undergraduate degree. If he's a professional student he's doing it through independent means.

And if their country cottage is so great, why are they wanting to move into a HA house?

The car/holidays/clothes paid for by his parents are irrelevant. That's no one else's business. It's not funded by the state.

You could argue that it is irresponsible for them to deliberately conceive a child while they have no jobs, but you don't know if the pregnancy was deliberate or accidental and there is a huge debate to be had on the ethics of denying the disadvantaged the right to reproduce. I don't mind having that debate - it's quite interesting in many ways - but I suspect you just want to be morally outraged.

IneedAsockamnesty Tue 23-Jul-13 11:49:20

Unless they are committing fraud then they are only claiming what they are entitled to claim.it does not really matter if its town or countryside.

What are these 'reasons' for claiming extra benefits for children? I expect its only you who think they are dubious as I know the only way of getting extra benefits for children and I know how hard they are to obtain, the dwp have a list and if your reasons not on that list then your fucked you also have to prove it with evidence (anybody who hasn't figured it out its disability related) actual formal NHS medical evidence.

People who are on benefits are allowed to have gifts they are even allowed to receive cash gifts (as long as it does not put them over the savings limit) what they are not allowed to accept are regular payments intended to regularly be used to fund normal household costs.
So cars,clothing,days out,holidays, expensive items are all ok as is someone giving you cash as a gift even if it was to pay for your sky tv or broadband someone taking you grocery shopping a few times is also fine, as is someone funding activities for your children but it would not be ok for someone to give you £50 every week with the expressed or implied intention of you including it in your normal household budget for essential living costs.

Now purely due to your comment regarding the extra children's benefits I'm having a hard time working out if your disablist or just lack knowledge

eccentrica Tue 23-Jul-13 11:50:29

you know what, my sister is very much like this and it does fuck me off. she has never worked. she lived with, and off, my parents until my dad finally put his foot down when she was about 28. she moved 10 mins down the road, has a nice flat on hb and still spends loads of time with my (very over indulgent) mother, and at their house, eating all their posh food, lounging on their expensive sofas, watching sky tv on their huge flatscreen.

I contrast this with my friends who are on benefits without rich parents, or myself when I wAs living hundreds of miles away and refused to take money from them. I lived on white bread sugar sandwiches ffs. my friends who are on benefits struggle to get through the week, if they have a car they often can't afford petrol, of course holidays or even visiting friends are out of the question.

when I see my sister living a life of luxury funded by my parents while also taking benefits from the state it does stick in my craw tbh. she has no incentive to work becayse my parents cushion her from any hint of hardship

there's nothing to be done about it but it's not right and is unfair on those truly relying on benefits.

eccentrica Tue 23-Jul-13 11:53:53

I should also add that she is literally the laziest person I've ever encountered (doesn't put lid back on milk, doesn't pick knickers off bathroom floor, will only eat ready sliced food level of lazy) and this does not apply to any of my friends who are or have Been on benefits, who mostly have to work fucking hard to survive.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 11:57:55

It's not right that some people play the system. eccentrica your sister sounds like a selfish lazy arse and I can understand your frustration.

For people like your sister, that is life. Stretching on endlessly with no achievements, no aspirations, and no financial security for old age. It may be 'easy' on a day-to-day basis but it is foolhardy, slowly erodes self confidence and self-esteem (though she may put on a bravado act to hide this) and is a complete waste of a life.

Presumably you are proud of what you have achieved, proud of your resilience, working towards a better future, have hope, dreams and ambitions for that future, are creating a life where you will hopefully have some financial security in the future, etc.

I know which life I'd rather have, despite it being much harder work.

catgirl1976 England Tue 23-Jul-13 12:06:53

Who gives a fuck?

I certainly don't.

You shouldn't either.

You will find life much more pleasant if you stop worrying about what other people are doing and concentrate on enjoying your own life.

ComposHat Belgium Tue 23-Jul-13 12:09:54

ecent in the situation you describe your beef should be with your parents for the 'top ups' she gets from them, not the welfare system.

eccentrica Tue 23-Jul-13 12:18:30

compos it is, mainly (my mum more than dad). but I wanted to add a non 'benefit bashing' voice to the thread to acknowledge that there can be something quite off about people bring supported by wealthy parents while also claiming benefits.

dahlen thank you, that is very insightful - as my partner says, I wouldn't want to swap with her. she plays on being depressed, having panic attacks etc but I am familiar with mental health issues and she is basically fine. but it's not doing her, or the rest of my family, any good.

catgirl not sure if that was aimed at OP or me. if me, the reason I care is because it's really tearing my family apart (plus she's my sister, we all live nearby, I see a lot of it and it does stick in the craw when she buys things we can't afford)

lainiekazan Tue 23-Jul-13 13:00:06

Well, perhaps I am misinformed, but all I know is that the bf (who is about 30, btw) said that in order to maximise benefits, you have to look like you have nothing, and leave no paper trail of any assets.

I' m not complaining about what the parents hand to their dd, that's utterly their right and prerogative, but to be plotting how best to position yourself for what the state (taxpayer) can give you as well... It just seems wrong.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 13:02:29

People who don't care what happens to your money or if other people take it illegally or on the mickey, can I come to your house and have some of your money? I've got low self esteem and think it will really help me.

MummyMastodon Tue 23-Jul-13 13:13:42

yanbu.

from upthread

"If the young couple cannot work, for whatever reason, when the baby is born the child will benefit from having both parents present"

ugh. just, ugh.

My kids might have benefited from having either of their parents at home, but we were out at work subsidising people like this.

And yes to the bursary thing. private ed. out of the question for us - both work full time - but very much within reach for a couple I know who don't work (no health issues) and are blithely confident of getting enormous bursaries for their dc.

How is the situation in the OP ok? How?

I don't get MN sometimes, I really don't. The posters seem so intelligent, but then there is this massive, hysterical blind spot about pisstakers on benefits. Why is nobody allowed to speak out without being buried under hail of biscuits?

Snazzyenjoyingsummer Tue 23-Jul-13 13:27:33

MummyMastodon I have just found this on getting private school bursaries (advice from the Telegraph):

"5 Be ready to be means-tested

Schools want to know about all your financial circumstances, not just your take-home pay. What kind of house do you live in, what car do you drive, what savings do you have, what size is your mortgage, where do you go on holiday, do both parents work, could you borrow against your house, are there relatives who could help?

“Schools today are much more aware of people’s sources of income,” says Mike Lower, general secretary of the Independent Schools Bursars Association. “And if parents claim they live in a humble two-up, two down, Google Earth is a wonderful beast in showing whether that is true or not.”

To me, this says it will not be an easy ride for such parents to get bursaries for their kids. And surely too many scholarships will be merit-based so the kids will have to be bright and/or talented at a particular thing to get a scholarship? Why are the couple you know so confident?

I don't think the situation in the OP is ok, but I do think there is more to it and money isn't being handed over by the state quite so freely as it seems.

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 13:29:04

"If the young couple cannot work, for whatever reason, when the baby is born the child will benefit from having both parents present"

yes - this shows the benefits system needs to be overhauled.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 14:00:30

There is certainly a difference between a baby having both parents present because neither can work for various valid reasons and a baby having both parents present because neither one of them has any intention or desire to work. Unfortunately, we have no way of discriminating between them.

The trouble with making benefits so watertight that they cut out all but the deserving is that you automatically exclude a great deal more who are deserving. That's a price you have to pay in a fair society I think.

Benefit fraud - even extrapolated - is tiny. It's less than a 5th of the amount in benefits that goes unclaimed each year because people don't know they are entitled to them or choose not to claim them.

So-called scroungers may exist in greater numbers. I wouldn't ever deny that as I think most people know one and to deny them fails to acknowledge a wider social problem that needs addressing. However, again I am convinced that for every scrounger there are many many more who deserve that helping hand and find themselves in unfortunate circumstances for no price of their own.

Lastly, we have to consider the human rights element. Even lazy entitled wasters are human, and as such have human rights our country has enshrined in law. If we start awarding those only to the deserving we are on a slippery slope. You can judge a society based on how it treats its most unfortunate members and all that.

I double dare you to flash the postman.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 14:03:30

Dahlen: you can't deny it would be better to have fewer lazy entitled wasters, and to stop paying people to be lazy entitled wasters. Hope you don't mind me borrowing your phrase.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 14:22:07

Crumbled I can't stop you doing anything but I can point out that your phrase bears no similarity at all to mine bar the words 'lazy entitled wasters'. wink

Personally, I'd rather keep the lazy entitled wasters out of starvation and homelessness because to punish them punishes many more innocents and leaves the wasters with nothing to lose if they resort to crime.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 14:22:27

I think flashing the postman is the best way to deal with all of this though. grin

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 14:27:15

Personally, I'd rather keep the lazy entitled wasters out of starvation and homelessness because to punish them punishes many more innocents and leaves the wasters with nothing to lose if they resort to crime.

Yes - that's not really the choice is it? The choice is giving money to people who need it and giving money to people who don't, OR giving money to people who need it and not giving money to people who don't.

As for the rest - the threat of crime in most civil systems is known as protectionism. I have to give money to people to stop them robbing me?

ComposHat Belgium Tue 23-Jul-13 14:30:53

irony of ironies that today we are besieged by benefit bashing threads when the country's biggest amd most costly 'benefits family' the Windsors have addes another to their number.

I bet most of the daily mail types who resent benefit claiments having anything more than bread and water and believe all the poisonous made up shite in the Daily Mail are foaming at the fanjo with excitement about the costly royal sprog.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 14:33:09

Crumbled - don't be facetious. It adds nothing to the debate.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 14:37:07

The point is how do you make that choice? What parameters can you put in place to ensure those who deserve get and those who don't, don't.

Do you have the answer? Because right now there are countless people who are suffering. A case in point - 59 year old woman suffering from autism and who needed heart surgery had her benefits stopped because she was declared fit to work. If you think that's a price worth paying to weed out those with a 'bad back' falsely claiming incapacity benefit, you and I will never see eye to eye.

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 14:39:14

Is there some kind of competition on to come on MN and write goady threads about benefit claimants?

OP if you think they are committing fraud report them, if you are jealous they have more than you do what they are doing, otherwise err get a life?

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 14:41:17

In what way is that not the choice, Dahlen ?

Of course that's the choice and it's not facetious to say so. Obviously there are parameters, and there will be new ones.

Your friend fell victim to scroungers, cheaters and Labour. Without them there'd be no need for extra stringency.

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 14:46:15

What I said also applies to those who are on some big power trip and bang on about "their money" as they pay tax.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 14:47:12

A power trip lol. In what way, Fanjo, is it not my money?

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 14:48:57

Many of us pay tax. And use different resources. And don't sit there with calculator lording it over others.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 14:50:56

In what way, Fanjo, is not wanting my money stolen or taken advantage of, "lording it over others"?

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 15:13:36

May I direct you to my first post grin

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 15:26:21

It doesn't really explain what's wrong with not wanting my money stolen or taken advantage of smile However if you don't mind that, perhaps I can pop round and you can make up the difference to me out of your own pocket. To do otherwise would surely be lording it over me, and we mustn't have that.

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 15:29:58

Sure..I will give you the 0.00000001 pence you are probably contributing to the couple in the OP.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 15:32:28

That's nice, and the rest of the country? Or just for this couple? Can you do it on a continuing basis? I need commitment.

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 15:41:58

Ok..I will give you the 2p a month you prob contribute to genuine fraudsters if you insist.

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 15:53:35

benefits payments exceed income tax collected.

that is a very bad situation to be in and will only get worse.

we have an ever aging population so everyone of working age, who is able to work, must support themselves.

otherwise not only are they a cost, but they are not helping support old, young, disabled people and carers.

at the very least, we need to pay for ourselves and dc. and most people need to make a positive financial contribution.

Dahlen Tue 23-Jul-13 16:06:59

As mentioned earlier, the entire welfare savings cut just made was less than the amount of income tax George Osborne let Vodafone off from paying last year. Then there is Google and Amazon.

Plus income tax is largely a measure of how stupid most politicians think we are - since all parties have reduced income tax in favour of whacking up indirect taxes, such as VAT. It is not the case that the country's only income is from income tax.

I agree that we should be encouraging people to support themselves but that isn't possible if the cost of housing is simply untenable unless we abolish overcrowding laws and go back to living in slums.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 16:10:11

Will you make up for all the ones who aren't doing it illegally but are simply taking the mickey? I have been talking about that all the way through the thread as well. I'm awfully consistent.

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 16:17:15

Is that the people actually taking the mickey or these mythical scroungers described in the Daily Mail

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 16:17:54

dahlen - I agree with you that the last head of HMRC rolled over to big business.

but actually getting tax from companies that operate in many countries is not as easy as you appear to think.

if you were head of HMRC today, how would you make Amazon pay more tax in the UK?

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 23-Jul-13 16:29:23

Come back when you can give me a real actual figure of how much you personally are contributing to real actual people "taking the mickey" then we can talk

merrymouse Tue 23-Jul-13 17:06:55

fasterstronger, it works both ways. I completely agree that hmrc can only collect tax according to the rules laid down by government.

However, equally, unless we all want to register all our assets, both tangible and intangible and register all gifts, there is a limit to how much of our wealth hmrc can measure.

Taxes and benefits are never going to accurately judge each individual's moral value or come up with an accurate fair value for every person's advantages and disadvantages.

The OP might have annoying in laws, but she doesn't actually have detailed knowledge of their financial situation. If she has clear evidence that they are committing fraud she should report them, however as others have said, her biggest problem seems to be her niece's partner likes to pull her chain.

IneedAsockamnesty Tue 23-Jul-13 17:15:20

Has anyone flashed the postman yet?

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 17:16:24

merry - i agree that this thread may bear no relationship to the couple's reality.

but I used to live in central London with as high unemployment as the poorest areas of the country.

^ ^ ^ that is an issue and shows the system is broken.

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 17:17:43

my postman is veerrry attractive.

I could open the door and pull him inside while he tried to deliver the mail.... grin

OnTheNingNangNong Tue 23-Jul-13 17:20:10

Crumbled, how would you plan to find out which benefits claimants aren't fully deserving of 'your' money?

foreverondiet Tue 23-Jul-13 17:20:42

Perhaps someone could write to Conservative HQ and suggest that anyone with parents with more than x in income or more than y in assets shouldn't be eligible for benefits wink.... Go on I dare you....

merrymouse Tue 23-Jul-13 17:20:44

Out of interest, faster, where does that figure come from?

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 17:26:45
merrymouse Tue 23-Jul-13 18:00:15

That is interesting, but I think unemployment in tower hamlets vs. places like South Wales and the north east is probably another thread....

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 18:05:30

NingNang :I trust this government to do that for me. Of course if all the turkeys vote for Christmas and we get Labour again I wouldn't trust them with that job at all.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 18:06:25

Fanjo it's hard to get a figure for that because it's not illegal is it? But if you think it doesn't go on you're living in a fantasy world.

FasterStronger Tue 23-Jul-13 20:10:29

I dunno merry, vast numbers of people living in central London, paid for by the work of others (who cannot afford to live there) seems a lot more relevant to the debate about benefits than a couple mentioned in the OP.

but as you wish.

cory Tue 23-Jul-13 20:55:48

Seeing that the boyfriend has clearly been pulling the OP's leg about serial student funding (as has been pointed out repeatedly on this post) and about combining student funding with benefits (again pointed out on this thread) and seeing that he can hardly have any practical experience of actually getting any bursaries for his dc (an unborn baby!), I wouldn't take anything else he says on trust either.

It all reminds me of the other thread from this morning: my dh has just left his job and we're going to get umpteen thousand in benefits when he signs on. Well dear, you haven't got it yet. I think I'll just hold off my pearl clutching until I see if you do.

AlwaysSleepingBeauty Tue 23-Jul-13 21:06:18

I feel that for clarity, I should add simply that as someone who works in student funding, although the comments made regarding the limits of student finance are so far correct for higher education; for further education there is further funding available for people who are unemployed and on benefits. Someone who is long term unemployed could get course fees waived for a considerable length of time, and often help with childcare, although financial help with living costs is usually very limited or unavailable.

AlwaysSleepingBeauty Tue 23-Jul-13 21:08:00

I should add though that in most cases, although being unemployed and on benefits would mean funding is available, once the student enrolled they would lose most of their further benefit entitlement.

Snazzyenjoyingsummer Tue 23-Jul-13 21:13:47

Always thanks for that info. It does fit pretty well with what I and others said earlier, anyway; help is there to do a course, and to make that possible, yes, but not just to hand out sums of cash to cover living expenses beyond a very small amount. So, again, the bf is not going to be living the life of Riley on that. And, as you say, they would lose other benefits.

missmarplestmarymead Tue 23-Jul-13 22:45:59

People who are disabled (including children), those who become seriously ill, the old and those who simply cannot care for themselves and have to rely on 'care in the community' should not have to 'beg' for money.

I have heard but I don't know if it is true that cancer sufferers get no extra help with bills when they have to give up work. I hope it isn't true.

These people, who have extra stress, should not have to worry about money on top of everything else. So, I think that there should be a re-distribution, maybe even enlarge the welfare budget, so that they are taken proper care of.

Other welfare claimants would have to take less. By 'others' I mean those who have never worked, not people who find themselves on the dole after a lifetime of working and have to make do with a pittance. I guess I mean those who never intend to work or who spend their lives getting pregnant to avoid getting off their arses.

I'm all for giving more, much more, to the sick, the disabled and those who have worked and for giving less to the Jeremy Kyle type of claimant and unless they are all, every man jack of them, concentrated in a town about 20 miles from me, there must be a fair few of them about. I am quite ready for someone to come along and say these arses are only a tiny percentage and I will accept that if this is so, then yes, they must all be concentrated in this area.

A tiered system of benefits because one size fits all is insulting and not fit for purpose.

Crumbledwalnuts Tue 23-Jul-13 23:25:39

People who are disabled (including children), those who become seriously ill, the old and those who simply cannot care for themselves and have to rely on 'care in the community' should not have to 'beg' for money.

When someone suggests this it will be well worth arguing against it. I think you're jumping the gun though.

Owllady Wed 24-Jul-13 10:52:47

missmarple is talking about funding at a local authority level, something everyone chooses to ignore as it only affects minority groups

SelectAUserName Wed 24-Jul-13 12:43:00

My DH was medically retired in his early 50s and is in receipt of DLA. He also pays tax on his pension. We occasionally - gasp! - go on holiday together.

So, is he a workshy benefit claimant or a hard-done-by taxpayer? As it's obviously so clear-cut and black-and-white, and as some people seem to have the amazing ability to judge a situation on less than the full facts, medical records etc, it would be useful to know whether I'm married to the scum of the earth or an upstanding pillar of society.

hmm

FeegleFion Wed 24-Jul-13 13:24:45

I hate benefit bashing threads.

It is not your money and if you don't like contributing to our welfare state, go live elsewhere!

Those of you up in arms about all the unemployed benefits scrounges are deluded!

Here is the welfare spending for the UK...Those damnable pensioners. Liars cheats and thieves the lot of them

Very true

Why not try being informed before being incensed?

FasterStronger Wed 24-Jul-13 14:46:16

It is not your money and if you don't like contributing to our welfare state, go live elsewhere!

yes is it the tax payers money. we don't have to go somewhere else. the UK is a democracy - the people get to decide what we should pay for.

yes pensioners are expensive. which is why everyone of working ages who can work, needs to support them.

lainiekazan Wed 24-Jul-13 16:43:34

I'd bet the entire welfare budget that if one of David Cameron's dcs, or George Osborne's, or Prince Harry, were claiming housing benefit as well as being supported by their parents then many on MN would combust with rage.

I think the circumstances of the parents should be taken into account. In Italy, if your dc has a child and can't afford to support it, (or in fact if any relative can't support themselves, including the elderly) the authorities come knocking at the next of kin's door.

Is this a real thread? I thought it was some kind of royal family piss take.

FeegleFion Wed 24-Jul-13 17:22:58

"we don't have to go somewhere else. the UK is a democracy - the people get to decide what we should pay for."

Then stop fucking whinging, if you're staying! The UK is a democracy, thank fuck it is! The UK is also a shining example of a welfare state.

As for people talking shite about how everyone of working age should work...pray tell where these jobs aplenty for all are hiding (not even going to get into people who are unable to work for medical reasons etc)?

Those of us who are still lucky enough to have a job should be mindful that, that could change very quickly.

merrymouse Wed 24-Jul-13 17:25:05

I'm not sure I would look to the Italian government for ideas on how to run a country...

FasterStronger Wed 24-Jul-13 17:31:58

Then stop fucking whinging, if you're staying!

i am not quite sure why you think you get to say what anyone else thinks...but maybe its the best reasoned argument you can come up with?

or can you do better?

FeegleFion Wed 24-Jul-13 18:26:09

Pretty sure I asked about these mythical jobs for all you and your ilk propose but yes, that's about as much effort I'm prepared to put in when I have no real interest in debating with people who don't see the real picture.

missmarplestmarymead Wed 24-Jul-13 19:14:35

Hi Feegle,

I think the benefits system should be expanded, so that people suffering from life changing and life threatening illnesses should have, if they need it, all their bills paid.

I think that disabled people should be paid above the average wage- who who has full use of their bodies or brain would jib at that?

Pensioners should have their state pension because they can no longer work and who would begrudge old people. We will all be old.

Carers who have dedicated their lives to looking after disabled children or relatives should not have to worry either. Who would want them to worry about money.

people who have worked all their lives, get into their fifties are made redundant should have much more than £70 a week.

Young people with bugger all wrong with them, can most certainly find work..maybe low paid work, maybe crap work but work. If not, they should be given the absolute minimum to keep body and soul together and yes, maybe live in a hostel to keep their bills down.

Women who have children and who don't work and whose partner doesn't work should again be given the bare minimum with vouchers for food and children's clothes unless they fall into one of the above groups.

I haven't done a survey on how many of the last two groups there are but on the evidence of my eyes, there seems to be quite a few. If there aren't, is that any reason for not doing it? Does there have to be a certain number before action is taken?

You would find that most people wouldn't dream of benefit bashing any of the remaining groups.

More money is needed and it should be given to those who through no fault of their own need it, because there but for the grace of God, go any of us.

missmarple
Did you see the Benefits programme on the BBC the other night (Nick and Margaret from the Apprentice) where reports show that at the lower skills end of the market there are 45 applicants for every job. So no, many can't find work because there just isn't that much low skilled work around.

missmarplestmarymead Wed 24-Jul-13 19:34:17

No. I didn't. How many of the 45 applicants fell into my last 2 groups?

FeegleFion Wed 24-Jul-13 20:22:14

So basically, missmarplestmarymead you would like to point a big shitty stick at some members of our society and tell everyone how these people they are untrustworthy with money, as they would just piss it up the wall and smoke their lungs out, so they should be stigmatised further by enforcing a food voucher system, therefore ensuring that confidence and self-esteem levels never rise further than the feeling of utter shame and embarrassment reserved for these 'waste of space and resources' people.

missmarplestmarymead Wed 24-Jul-13 20:58:52

Sometimes, we have to exercise a little discrimination, Feegle, If some will piss their benefits up against the wall that is not their right to do so. Sometimes choices have to be made. if the pot was running out and some say it is, who would you decide should get the last fiver?

Using dramatic language and silly images is a thin smokescreen to try and drive someone into a particular reply. It's a bit like 'how often do you beat your wife?' and absolutely transparent.

lainiekazan Wed 24-Jul-13 21:15:37

If I said my bil was a banker, would you still say that his dd is entitled to housing benefit etc?

merrymouse Wed 24-Jul-13 21:25:12

Yes, assuming nobody is breaking the law. (What etc? I think we established that the private schooling and endless money from being a student was imaginary).

Presumably he pays a lot of money in tax. If his daughter has a mental illness I don't begrudge her receiving help.

FeegleFion Wed 24-Jul-13 21:25:43

miss I was using descriptive language and I actually do not care what your reply is, or anyone else who is in agreement with you. We are never going to come to any kind of compromise on our opinions. I'm not too keen on wasting my energy on trying to educate people with such nonsense ideals.

lainie Yes, I'd say his DD is not him and is just as entitled as the next person who needs it.

missmarplestmarymead Wed 24-Jul-13 21:51:30

I shall have to wallow in ignorance!

Crumbledwalnuts Thu 25-Jul-13 08:58:31

It is not your money and if you don't like contributing to our welfare state, go live elsewhere!

It is my money, I'll vote for how I want it spent, and you should be careful what you wish for. People do go elsewhere when all the turkeys vote for Christmas, and when lots of contributors go, perhaps you will be in rather a pickle.

FasterStronger Thu 25-Jul-13 09:17:32

feegle - not really sure why you are contributing then.

Crumbledwalnuts Thu 25-Jul-13 09:49:32

45 applicants for every job or 45 applications?

Statistics like that are misleading If 45 people apply for 45 jobs then all the jobs have 45 applicants but there's no shortage of jobs.

You really don't have to exaggerrate the unemploymnet problem we have. Sadly many thousands of jobs created during the boom were not taken up by people who were entitled to welfare. They simply weren't, and that's a fact.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now