to loathe this sense of entitlement we hear/read/see everyday

[scuzy]

the idea of some taxes is to pay into a pool for those in genuine need of some kind of benefits. but i am sick to death of people who feel that just because they paid tax for a certain amount of years they can now claim benefits just because they say "its their money". these people are making fraudulent claims but its justified to them because they have paid into the pot so to speak and now its their turn to give up working and relax.

if i hear "i am entitled to ..." one more time i'll smack someone!

we have become a nation of "entitlers".

even my own family ask why do i work x amount of hours when i coudl claim this that and the other. "you are entitled to you know"! er .... no i'm not.

[MissPenteuth]

YANBU, benefits should be there for those that need them, not just those that want them.

Benefit threads never seem to end well though, and I don't know enough about the system to comment in any more depth. Good luck :)

[scuzy]

thanks MissPenteuth. It has nothing to do with those on benefits who genuinely need it - its the entitlement of those that think because they have paid taxes at some point in their life feel it should be paid back to them!! thats what bugs me.

[tethersend]

It's no accident that you're hearing it all the time. It's the Zeitgeist. It also acts as a nice justification for proposed government overhaul of the benefits system. Handy.

I think this may help:

entitled past participle, past tense of en·ti·tle (Verb)

1. Give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something.
   
2. Give (something, esp. a text or work of art) a particular title.
   

So, when somebody speaks about being entitled to (for example) child benefit, they are not asserting a moral standpoint; they are simply stating what they are legally entitled to claim.

Personally, I am getting tired of people being denigrated for having a sense of entitlement about things they are actually entitled to.

You make a good point about the tax system though. People seeing taxes as 'their' money, or some sort of savings account really does bug me. Once you have paid your tax, it is no longer your money. It's the government's. If you don't like how they are spending it, exercise your democratic right to elect a different government.

[usualsuspect]

I'm sick of reading the phrase sense of entitlement if that helps at all

[scuzy]

good post tethersend. what i refer to is the wrong use of the word entitled .... as in i paid taxed i am entitled to claim them back even though financially i dont depend on it. like a paid holiday from work.

[tethersend]

I could read that one of three ways, I think scuzy:

1. The welfare state is there for all, irrespective of who has paid in. Anybody who is entitled to a benefit can claim.
   

1. Benefit fraudsters feel that they are entitled to money which they are not, and this is a big problem.
   

1. Some people claim benefits which they don't need.
   

Am I way off? I agree with (1), but not sure about (2) and (3).

[Spuddybean]

I don't really understand what you are saying OP. Are you saying these people say they are entitled to it when they aren't, ie aren't eligible for the benefit under the current law? Or if they are genuinely entitled to it but don't need it?

Entitled is the word the benefits office use, so therefore i am not entitled to any help as DP earns over the threshold but if he earned under a certain amount i would be.

Child benefit is/was a universal tax which everyone was entitled to no matter what they earned. Just like pensions. But i know loads of people who are loaded and never needed it but they were still entitled.

This is how our system is explained in schools and to immigrants and it is true. They are entitled.

Whether you think the terms of the entitlement should change is another matter entirely.

It's like being angry with the police about the law - they just uphold it.

[scrambedeggs]

the "sense of entitlement" seems to be good bedfellows with "its not my fault, its everyone else's fault"

[scuzy]

guys maybe i am not explaining myself .....

please see exhibit A

my MIL think that because me and dp aren't married i should claim single mothers allowance because i am entitled to it as I am working since i was 16!

exhibit B

a friend gave up her job and though was disqualified for a few weeks for leaving her job is now getting job seekers but she quit so her partner can do the earning for a while as she is entitled to it as she paid her taxes.

exhibit C

a neighbour of MIL who loves gardening and spends all day doing it was made redundant. sad i know but now feels sure he worked all his life has no intention of looking for work and is only claiming back what he put into the pot as he puts it.

[tethersend]

A = If he's not living with you, then you are entitled to it. If he is, you're not.

B = She is entitled to it

C = He's entitled to it.

So, being that the second two are actually entitled to the benefits they are receiving, it's fitting that they should have a sense of entitlement.

[Cocoflower]

I hate it too, it has such awful connotations. However, I do not have a problem with people who have paid fairly into the system, then fall onto hard times. As they have actually helped other people at times through their taxes and now it's their turn for help. I cannot see an issue with that.

I have more of a problem with people who have contributed nothing at all, perhaps even cheat everyone and still feel a great sense of entitlement.

[Spuddybean]

But they are entitled to it. if they go to the office and give all the details honestly then they are entitled to it.

Whether you think they should be is different.

On the point about working and putting in i don't think people realise how little they put in compared to how much they get out.

That money doesn't sit there in a pot - they have more than likely already used it. If they calculate every subsidised service like public transport, leisure centre they use. What about illness? how much do they think each visit to the doctor/hospital costs.

Have they ever had children? just the labour and post natal care has probably swallowed a massive chunk. Do those children go to nursery? school?

Sadly if they think if they put a pound in they get a pound out they have more than likely used up more than they have put in and owe the pot money.

The gov invest gamble the money to earn on it to cover the growing population of tax payers (which is why people have to keep having more children who grow up to consume and work).

In their theory, any money over what they have put in is not theirs, it belongs to the government.

[deepheat]

scuzy

Exhibit A - Assuming you are living with your DP and benefitting from his income then your mother is simply wrong.

Exhibit B - Your friend is not entitled to JSA because she is not actively seeking work. If she is merely pretending to seek work then this is a fraudulent claim.

Exhibit C - Need more detail here. What benefits are being claimed etc. Possibly a similar situation to Exhibit B?

All I can suggest is that maybe you're not fed up with people who have a sense of entitlement but are fed up with people who commit benefit fraud? In which case, this puts you in the same boat as the vast majority of the population and isn't really very contentious.

[tethersend]

The fact is that there is far more money laying unclaimed in benefits than the government's own estimates of the amount lost to benefit fraud.

Which sort of flies in the face of the notion that we are living in a sense of entitlement society.

But, funnily enough, we never hear about that...

[scuzy]

corvax at least you understand.

i am with my partner so NOT entitled to lone parents.

my friend/the neighbour are not seeking work so are NOT entitled to jobs seekers.

but they FEEL they are as they once paid taxes.

[Spuddybean]

Oh i see, they are lying to get the money! Sorry. Report them. That is fraud.

Apologies for confusion.

[scuzy]

ah no bother spuddybean i wasn't explaining myself too well. yeah i should report them.

it just bugs me when they say they are "entitled to". ah no your fecking not!

[usualsuspect]

If they were not looking for work the benefits would stop ,you have to give proof of looking for work as well as attend interviews

so you wouldn't have to report them for their sense of entitlement to the benefits they are entitled to

[Spuddybean]

Also explain to them they have spent their allocation anyway - even the road is subsidised.

Although we think things are expensive, almost our whole lives are subsidised by government. just going to school, having children, getting ill, costs money and if you only earn a normal wage you are already in deficit - and if they use it now are they not planning to retire? Surely it will be gone then if that is their logic.

[Spuddybean]

usualsuspect i was made redundant in 2009 and claimed JSA till July when i found work. I sent lots of applications and only got 2 interviews. I was never asked once to prove anything.

I just wrote down on my book what i had done and they believed me (i wasn't lying tho).

[scuzy]

it is hard to make someone appear fradulent on the basis of seeking vs not seeking work.

[fargate]

I just loathe the expression ''sense of entitlement'' - I think it's offensive neocon propaganda promulgated by the likes of the present government and their mouthpiece the right wing press.

It's hugely divisive at a time when with a massively indebted economy we need to protect the social contract and pull together - not scapegoat the most vulnerable in our society. I realise that this is not a popular opinion on MN but couldn't give a flying fuck....

Why on earth is the DWP website called ''entitled to....'' if entitlement is so vilified.

[usualsuspect]

Exactly ,fargate