Talk

Advanced search

To be amazed by the amount of people who think the state shouldnt help people?

(334 Posts)
malificent7 Sun 14-Apr-19 08:08:58

I mean with job creation, welfare, regulation of private employers etc.
I hear so many times...its not the state's job to do x, y and z.

So what is the point of gaving a state if it cannot produce conditions for people to thrive?

Of course some take the piss but the state shouldctry to peovide more jobs and less zero hour contracts, they should regulate how the private sector treats employees, they should moderate wages anf provide housing.

Of course, some take the piss but most have a genuine need and the state dosnt want to know.

SnuggyBuggy Sun 14-Apr-19 11:52:32

My workplace hasn't done paid overtime in years, you get TOIL (which you can't fucking take due to the workload). It also doesn't help people who would have to pay for more childcare.

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 11:57:16

Inliverpool1- I don’t understand your post- and what job pays less then it did 20 years ago?

SnuggyBuggy- Get a second job then

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 11:58:34

RosaWaiting-

We could offer young, healthy immigrants a 10 year working visa, after which they have to leave.

It benefits us, benefits them

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 11:59:09

I get what you're saying OP, but really state intrusion is getting a bit much. As an immigrant of nearly a generation, I find the British nanny state suffocating.

This country is over populated and NOT due to immigration. British people of all classes seem to think it's their god given right to reproduce as many offspring as they desire, without thinking of the long term consequences of doing so.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 11:59:30

Lots of jobs pay less than they do 20 years ago. Mine paid £26,500 plus car in 1999 I regularly see it advertised at £25,000 and those with 20 years experience command around £32,500 hardly in line with inflation is it ?

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 12:01:02

Inliverpool1- Why wouldn’t getting a second job help?

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 12:05:16

Minimum wage has increased from £3.60 to £7.83 since 1999!

Also, if you earned £25K in 1999, I find it hard to believe you couldn’t save up/ buy anything, especially with a double income, house prices were FAR lower

Iggly Sun 14-Apr-19 12:06:12

This country is over populated and NOT due to immigration. British people of all classes seem to think it's their god given right to reproduce as many offspring as they desire, without thinking of the long term consequences of doing so

What’s the average number of children per family..... I think it’s around 2. So you speak nonsense.

Kazzyhoward Sun 14-Apr-19 12:08:38

what job pays less then it did 20 years ago

Accountancy for one. There are jobs today being advertised for the same qualification/experience level as 20 years ago with the same or lower pay offered. I saw one the other week, fully qualified chartered accountant, 10 years experience, manager level for just £45k - a complete joke - I was on more than that in the mid 1990's in the same town. Wage levels have been vitually static in some professions.

scaryteacher Sun 14-Apr-19 12:11:10

Iggly Darkatendoftunnel has articulated beautifully what I wanted to say. I would also add, how deep do you want state involvement in our lives to be? I think the state should be legislating for far higher wages, as atm, the taxpayer is subsidising businesses. If a proper living wage was paid, that money could be diverted elsewhere.

I would like a small state doing the basics very well, rather than the bloated system of govt, agencies and quangos we have now.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 12:11:29

WitchesGlove - we did buy a house, it hasn’t helped because childcare swallowed one wage, the mortgage hasn’t been inflated away as it should have. Got divorced, crystal ball must have been faulty, suddenly here I am with a nearly £250,000 mortgage, 43, kids about to start uni. Thought I know the obvious solution to all this, I’ll get a job. Oh wait.

LakieLady Sun 14-Apr-19 12:12:58

I’m all for helping people in need. But I’m not paying tax etc for people to live a life of bloody Riley.

Yes, you can have an awesome lifestyle on £384.62 pw, when the "affordable" rent on your HA home is £229 pw, and you have 2 children.

Perhaps you'd like to work out a budget that will enable that single parent to feed and clothe them all on the £155 that's left after paying rent, and pay the council tax, water and energy charges (£10, £9 and £22). Oh, they'll need a tv licence too, as they won't be able to afford to go out, and internet access. And £6.50 every fortnight for the bus fare to the job centre, and the delivery charge for the online shop, as the nearest supermarket is also a £6.50 bus trip away ...

This particular mum was in tears of despair when her DS (13) came home from school with the sole hanging off one of his school shoes. She had no idea how she was going to afford another pair, and couldn't send him to school in trainers.

Livelovebehappy Sun 14-Apr-19 12:13:21

To be honest the overpopulation problem is largely due to immigration and free movement. Women are having fewer children these days, and many women remain childless through choice compared to 20 years ago, so not sure massive population increase can be blamed on increase in having children because i see most parents with two children these days rather than three/four averaged 30 years ago.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 12:14:08

I mean obviously you do get a job or create one in my case and go self employed but it’s not made a dent. I cannot really spend a single penny because if the mortgage isn’t gone by the time my child support dries up I’ll be out on my ear ... homeless at 53 despite having bought at 23 and worked two jobs

Toddlerteaplease Sun 14-Apr-19 12:14:11

I think it is some people's sense of entitlement that is the issue. Not what the state provides. I.e I can have 6 kids that I know I can't afford and the council have to provide me with a 5 bedroom home attitude.

Kazzyhoward Sun 14-Apr-19 12:15:06

You can’t get a state pension without paying NIC, you have to have a minimum of 35 years contribution for a full pension.

Yes, you can. You get "credits" when you don't work due to home responsibility. You get "credits" on certain benefits. You get "credits" if you earn more than the lower earnings limit for NIC, a level at which you don't actually pay any NIC. So, yes, people can get state pension without paying any NIC if they qualify for "credits" for enough years in other ways.

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 12:15:50

We could offer young, healthy immigrants a 10 year working visa, after which they have to leave.
shock
It doesn't benefit anyone. No one will spend 10 years building a life here just so they have to abandon it. That's bloody ridiculous.

SnuggyBuggy Sun 14-Apr-19 12:16:44

Why should I get a second job? Why would I want to give up more than 40 hours a week on work?

I mean if I was facing homelessness or starvation I'd have to but it doesn't make it right.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 12:17:50

Also although minimum wage may have been £3.60 in 1999 I don’t know anyone who worked for that amount. I had a weekend bar job, £7.50 an hour, rising to £10 after midnight. Main job working for British gas, still at uni so no qualifications, I think was £13.25 per hour, plus car.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 12:18:59

InspectorClouseauMNdivision - Australia does exactly that. 4 years then you’re out or retrain as a foreign student ie no student loan and fees up front. Thousands pay out every year

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 12:20:40

@Inliverpool1 4 years and 10 years is a bloody difference.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 12:23:09

InspectorClouseauMNdivision - not really, people settle pretty quickly

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 12:26:14

@Inliverpool1 as someone who is going on 11th year in uk I am telling you that 4 years and 10 years are completely different.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 12:27:33

This country is over populated and NOT due to immigration. British people of all classes seem to think it's their god given right to reproduce as many offspring as they desire, without thinking of the long term consequences of doing so

What’s the average number of children per family..... I think it’s around 2. So you speak nonsense.

Not nonsense. Large social welfare families who have 6, 7, 8 children and get: free education, free health care, free legal aid, free housing, discounts on just about everything. Then we have large "wealthy" families who also put pressure on the health and education systems, who also put pressure on the environment, who are also entitled.

The pressure on the state to provide is compounded by these families.

zsazsajuju Sun 14-Apr-19 12:28:57

Where does it stop though? Where is the balance? In economies which are entirely state provided there is still a privileged elite based on having the right connections (just a lot more poor people and a lot less opportunity). I personally the state should provide a safety net and regulate the excesses of capitalism to ensure fair competition and equality of opportunity. But it shouldn’t and can’t look after everyone all the time.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 12:30:48

I think it is some people's sense of entitlement that is the issue. Not what the state provides. I.e I can have 6 kids that I know I can't afford and the council have to provide me with a 5 bedroom home attitude.

Feckless women AND men who should be made to practise both restraint and birth control.

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 12:34:18

InspectorCloseau-

They can and do! Most immigrants I know at work are just here to save up as much as they can and are then going to buy houses etc in their home country

Oblomov19 Sun 14-Apr-19 12:35:03

I'm not sure I agree. Or I do, but where do you draw the line.
If you have a born sick child, who needs help and support, especially financially, that's not the same as creating jobs. And that's not the same as creating laws and policies on .... say zero hours contracts.

All the things listed are very different issues.

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 12:38:09

@WitchesGlove and how long are they here for? A decade is just too much. All people who I know who came here and planned on going back were here max 5 years.

cushellekoala Sun 14-Apr-19 12:38:34

My DH has his own small company (quite niche ) and no one including him has had a payrise for at least 9 years. Rents have doubled , bills have massively increased, workplace pensions have come in to effect but any small price increases passed onto clients has led to a drop in business.

NaturatintGoldenChestnut Sun 14-Apr-19 12:38:35

So much outdated nonsense on this thread - all you have to do to get benefits is rock up to the DWP every five weeks, tax credits for people on £58,000/year, Life of Reily.

NONE of this has been true for years and years.

It's all UC now. Even Child Benefit will soon be UC. Pension Tax Credit will be UC for people who have a partner under pensionable age as of next month.

Hats off to the Tory propaganda machine, they've done a sterling job.

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 12:40:20

Inliverpool1- why did they bring in the minimum wage if wages for such crappy jobs were brilliant anyway? hmm

I was 16 in 2004, and my first job only paid £4.80 per hour. McDonalds and places paid £4.50. A few of my friends only got £4 an hour for office jobs. This was London as well! I find it hard to believe people got £7+ for working in a bar- do you mean including tips?

cushellekoala Sun 14-Apr-19 12:40:27

I thought over population was due to people living longer not rising birth rates?

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 12:42:02

Kazzyhoward-

Accountants must have been massively overpaid in the past then!

£45K is more than enough to live on in most parts of the UK!

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 12:42:16

Witches that's anecdotal evidence. Most immigrants I know have 2 or less children, pay tax and have been employed, law abiding citizens the entire time they have been settled here.

That's in contrast to the widespread culture of entitlement in a distinct section of society. The attitude being "I have 10 kids with 3 - 4 different mothers/fathers, so give me a 7 bed council house and full state benefits"...

It's very dysfunctional and ought to be addressed. Not to mention all the social problems that come with it.

Alsohuman Sun 14-Apr-19 12:44:16

Over population is because people are living longer. The birth rate is 1.88%. That’s not even replacement rate.

IceCreamAndCandyfloss Sun 14-Apr-19 12:51:23

We've all seen the statistics, X amount of children in the U.K. living on poverty. That makes me angry to be honest

Not the governments fault though. They don't make people have children they can't aflord to support. There's free contraception etc available.

ChocChocButtons Sun 14-Apr-19 12:59:18

Sorry I don’t buy sob stories, can’t afford children don’t have them. I’m not paying for other people to breed like rabbits. And it’s a cycle born in poverty live of the state, have more kids they live off the state and we can’t keep doing it.

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 13:01:40

IceCream and ChocChoc-

I completely agree.

But everyone on this thread will tell you it’s because all benefit claimants are widows or highly disabled!

FissionChips Sun 14-Apr-19 13:09:35

Well, what can you really do about people having children they can’t afford the basics for? Let the children starve/live on the streets because of the parents they havel been born to? confused

Hearhere Sun 14-Apr-19 13:13:15

The States helps us all public infrastructure is maintained by the state we get free education a police force emergency services etc, and please stop with the ridiculous false dichotomy 'if you don't like it go and live in North Korea'🙄

The state is a mechanism by which we pool resources in order to improve everyone's life

Hearhere Sun 14-Apr-19 13:14:30

Falling birth rates and falling death rates
too many old people not enough young productive people

brizzlemint Sun 14-Apr-19 13:18:20

Such is the view of Tory voters. They are alright Jack and sod the rest of us.

lyralalala Sun 14-Apr-19 13:18:27

The myth of multiple generations of families not working and relying on benefits was found to be just that when the Rowntree Foundation looked into it.

The idea of 'three generations of the same family who have never worked' appeals to many, including politicians and policy-makers, as an explanation of entrenched worklessness in the UK.

Sums it up completely. Same with the idea that there are thousands of couples with huge amounts of children claiming benefits - there just isn't.

It's the kind of hysteria that allows the draconian benefit cuts like we've seen in recent times to be brought in and people only realise that it impacts them when their circumstances change.

WitchesGlove Sun 14-Apr-19 13:19:48

The Rowntree foundation is hardly likely to be unbiased

lyralalala Sun 14-Apr-19 13:21:33

But the government are?

Even the governments own statitics are at odds with the hysteria they have created over benefit frauds.

People see what they want to see and generally don't give a shit until they realise that all the cuts affect someone that they'd put in the "oh, bt I don't mean you" category.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:25:17

Well, what can you really do about people having children they can’t afford the basics for? Let the children starve/live on the streets because of the parents they havel been born to? confused

Being made to pay for maternity care, education and health care after child 2/3 would put a stop to it.

Sums it up completely. Same with the idea that there are thousands of couples with huge amounts of children claiming benefits - there just isn't.

Denying that there is distinct section of society who are feckless wrt reproduction is like denying that the Pope is Catholic.

silvercuckoo Sun 14-Apr-19 13:25:41

My nephew's wife is Ukrainian. She is horrified at how many people in Britain live on benefits because in Ukraine you have to work.
With no offence intended, Ukraine hardly can boast a society model worth emulating. But yes, the welfare culture in the UK is a very common shock for Eastern Europeans on arrival, which often evolves into unpleasant stereotyping of British people as exceptionally lazy.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:27:43

People see what they want to see and generally don't give a shit until they realise that all the cuts affect someone that they'd put in the "oh, bt I don't mean you" category.

Maybe if some people tied a knot in it, those in true need of benefits would get better state support.

IceCreamAndCandyfloss Sun 14-Apr-19 13:28:13

what can you really do about people having children they can’t afford the basics for

Make it punishable by law for failure to financially provide. Harsh penalties would soon correct the situation.

JuniorAsparagus Sun 14-Apr-19 13:29:49

I am pretty sure she wasn't holding Ukraine up as a model society. She is married to an Englishman and has taken UK citizenship. It was just a conversation based on her experience and her own work ethic.

FissionChips Sun 14-Apr-19 13:30:07

Being made to pay for maternity care, education and health care after child 2/3 would put a stop to it

But that doesn’t work in countries that already have that approach, why would it work here? All that happens is the children would suffer.

So, what would you do with the children who are born to parents who can’t afford them?

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:30:16

Make it punishable by law for failure to financially provide. Harsh penalties would soon correct the situation.

^ This ^

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:31:27

But that doesn’t work in countries that already have that approach, why would it work here? All that happens is the children would suffer.

Which countries have that approach?

RosaWaiting Sun 14-Apr-19 13:31:59

Witches

my parents were immigrants and I heard a lot of chat about this over my lifetime.

if we are talking about getting people in to do jobs like caring, why on earth would they bother with a 10 year visa? And if they did, how are you going to stop them having children and using housing and health?

I can see a 10 year visa would work for a single, childfree forever woman working in Artificial Intelligence and being offered a spectacular position here that she couldn't get in her home country.

but how on earth would we recruit people for caring jobs on that basis? Are you just thinking of the value of the pound when they go home? They will still have to pay UK accommodation prices while they are here, so how much, if any, can they save to take home at the end of the visa?

2 year visa might generate some interest for that, I guess.

SinkGirl Sun 14-Apr-19 13:32:32

Benefit related fraud is a lot bigger than people want to believe and needs to be acted upon.

Nope. Years ago the BBC did a documentary about disability benefits where they asked the public what percentage of disability benefit claims they believed to be fraudulent. Average answer was over 40%, whereas the government’s own figures put it at 0.5%

IceCreamAndCandyfloss Sun 14-Apr-19 13:33:17

Being made to pay for maternity care, education and health care after child 2/3 would put a stop to it

It would have to be before 2/3 as three already makes for a large family.

Interesting idea though, it could be linked to tax/ni contributions. You have to have x years to cover Heath/education for one child, double for two etc. No child related benefits either, just job seekers in the event of job loss to tide people over short term.

lyralalala Sun 14-Apr-19 13:33:39

If people got as het up about CMS failing to use the harsh powers they have to collect maintenance from NRP’s as they do about benefit claiming RP’s then quite a few more kids would live in less poverty.

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 13:33:42

But yes, the welfare culture in the UK is a very common shock for Eastern Europeans on arrival, which often evolves into unpleasant stereotyping of British people as exceptionally lazy.

Sadly, I have to agree with that. In our countries benefits are really just the absolute safety net. That's it. If you have 3 kids and can't afford 3 bed property, that's your problem. Kids will have to share room, or parents sleep in living room, like mine did. It was 4 of us in 1 bed flat. And it wasn't horrible. We weren't even "that poor". It was quite common, most of my friends grew up sharing bedrooms. And no one ever went around expecting to be put up into social housing because there is only tiny bit and that's agian the absolute safety net. And horrible. 6 ppl in 1 bed flat is not uncommon.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:34:14

10 years visas. Maybe we should give pass books to feckless, lazy Brits? Ship them to the Scottish Islands?

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:38:35

Average answer was over 40%, whereas the government’s own figures put it at 0.5%

The government doesn't know of half the fraud that goes on. I can count on two hands the number of BRITISH people in my area who are known by residents to be commiting benefit fraud. Many more who have multiple children with multiple partners.

EvaHarknessRose Sun 14-Apr-19 13:39:13

I agree with a safety net and good universal services. Unfortunately agreeing the height of the safety net is always going to be difficult and never fair.

NaturatintGoldenChestnut Sun 14-Apr-19 13:39:50

10 years visas. Maybe we should give pass books to feckless, lazy Brits? Ship them to the Scottish Islands?

What an ignorant, arsehole post. angry

RosaWaiting Sun 14-Apr-19 13:40:32

"6 ppl in 1 bed flat is not uncommon."

to me, that is part of the definition of overpopulation and it's a global problem.

interesting that lack of state help hasn't done anything to prevent that scenario.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:41:12

10 years visas. Maybe we should give pass books to feckless, lazy Brits? Ship them to the Scottish Islands?

This is not meant seriously BTW. Just to highlight the absurdity of the suggestion of a 10 year visa.

IceCreamAndCandyfloss Sun 14-Apr-19 13:41:45

Whilst fraud costs the country, its the cost of the benefits to people who could do far more but choose not to or who make choices they can't afford but expect others to pay for. Imagine what we could use that money for instead.

If we removed most of the benefits and just had a welfare state for job loss (limited time to claim), sickness and disability then we'd really lower costs and be able to afford more teachers, more nurses, treatments etc.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:42:06

Cross posted NaturatintGoldenChestnut

Trull Sun 14-Apr-19 13:43:26

These are the statistics for fraud and error in the benefits system, so we can stop the underinformed catastrophising:

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/fraud-and-error-in-the-benefit-system-financial-year-2016-to-2017-estimates

British people of all classes seem to think it's their god given right to reproduce as many offspring as they desire, without thinking of the long term consequences of doing so.

The current UK birthrate isn't even at replacement rate.

what can you really do about people having children they can’t afford the basics for

Make it punishable by law for failure to financially provide. Harsh penalties would soon correct the situation.

Do elaborate. Imprison offenders, so that you remove any possibility of them working and providing for their children, and which is expensive, and take their children into care, at a huge cost to the state? hmm

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:43:42

IceCreamAndCandyfloss wages would have to increase to make that possible.

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 13:43:55

@RosaWaiting that's in a state provided social housing. It's never meant to be forever. It's just so they are not on a street for the time being.

Cupfullofjoy Sun 14-Apr-19 13:45:49

Do elaborate. Imprison offenders, so that you remove any possibility of them working and providing for their children, and which is expensive, and take their children into care, at a huge cost to the state? hmm

Community service - so they can at least contribute to society for once, and at the time they will hopefully learn the value of doing so.

silvercuckoo Sun 14-Apr-19 13:47:11

@JuniorAsparagus
I would not call it work ethic in the traditional definition of "ethics". It was beaten into people during Soviet times that it is shameful to rely on state handouts (and there was special government-approved terminology for non-working people - "drones", "idle" etc.).
To a large degree the same attitude prevailed even after the system collapsed.

slipperywhensparticus Sun 14-Apr-19 13:48:13

I pay more on my childminder than on my rent (she is worth it) but those two Bill's wipe out my earnings so what do we eat? How do I pay council tax? Water? Shit i dont need to list them if i work more hours i lose it in childcare in the holidays i work for nothing approximately 60 earnings a day same for childcare I rely on tax credits to eat and that is wrong but I'm stuck with it it's my life now I'm on my own my ex wont pay he looks after them one working day in the holiday but that will change soon so it's even tighter I hate this life but the alternative which is benefits doesn't exist anymore as my youngest is five what the hell am I supposed to do 🤷‍♀️

wheresmymojo Sun 14-Apr-19 13:49:42

When I create a time machine I will take these people and deposit them in the 1800s without any money and let them crack on.

CanILeavenowplease Sun 14-Apr-19 13:50:16

Make it punishable by law for failure to financially provide. Harsh penalties would soon correct the situation

Then what happens to the children whilst their parents are being punished? They go into the care system? At what cost? Do we not hand such children back until their otherwise working but not earning enough parents earn more?

Iggly Sun 14-Apr-19 13:52:29

I can count on two hands the number of BRITISH people in my area who are known by residents to be commiting benefit fraud. Many more who have multiple children with multiple partners

I don’t anyone who’s committed benefit fraud etc. What’s your point exactly? You live in a small microcosm and have no insight into the % of fraud across the whole of the population.

lyralalala Sun 14-Apr-19 13:53:29

It's funny how it's so socially unacceptable to claim benefits to provide for children you live with, yet it's also socially acceptable to dodge paying maintenance for your kids if you don't.

Lets fine people for having kids they can't afford - when was the last time you heard of a non-payer being fined or having their driving license removed? Or heard of someone walking away from a partner in disgust because of their neglect of their children? That's as likely as someone being sent to prison for it.

whiskeysourpuss Sun 14-Apr-19 13:55:40

*what can you really do about people having children they can’t afford the basics for

Make it punishable by law for failure to financially provide. Harsh penalties would soon correct the situation.*

How do you determine between those who fecklessly had children they can't afford or those of us who had children we could afford when we made the decision to have them and ended up a single parent due to leaving an abusive husband who has had no contact or financial involvement in the children's lives since then - I can't get CMS out of him & he works for the bastarding DWP so how the fuck would these harsh penalties be administered... or will I be the only one punished for being unable to financially provide for my kids without state assistance because they live with me & I'm technically the only parent?

IceCreamAndCandyfloss Sun 14-Apr-19 14:00:59

I don't think it matters whether resident or non resident parent, both should be providing.

Punishment doesn't have to include fining or imprisonment. As others have said community service, remove driving licences, passports etc.

It wouldn't be instant but it may make many think before choosing to have children knowing there would be no money forthcoming and that penalties were in place. They have to think about their current circumstances and those of the future. It should be the absolute starting point to look at finances deeply before even considering a child.

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 14:03:36

Punishable by law for not financially supporting your children ? Great well ex owes me £5,000 in CSM ... they apparently cannot trace him ... took me less than 10 seconds to find him on fucking google,
Email and mobile number. If we are truly reliant on the state and it’s systems and employees we are frankly fucked.

Kazzyhoward Sun 14-Apr-19 14:06:09

£45K is more than enough to live on in most parts of the UK!

So why pay doctors more then?

Reality is that wages need to be higher for people doing jobs that require more skills, ability, experience etc.

Otherwise just pay everyone the same average wage and see how long the country would last.

lyralalala Sun 14-Apr-19 14:06:14

Icecream Do you realise the CSA/CMS have all those powers already, but don't use them?

They are so impotent that a change had to be made between my childhood and now whereby maintenance payments ordered by CSA/CMS don't count as income for benefits purposes.

There would be no forward thinking or fear of sanctions like that because it's already been shown that they don't work.

Although perhaps the government of the day would be more into using said powers against resident parents than they are NRP's.

Dapplegrey Sun 14-Apr-19 14:06:28

We could offer young, healthy immigrants a 10 year working visa, after which they have to leave.
If they had married and had children then presumably they would have the right to remain based on the human rights law of a right to family life.

silvercuckoo Sun 14-Apr-19 14:07:01

If you have 3 kids and can't afford 3 bed property, that's your problem. Kids will have to share room, or parents sleep in living room, like mine did. It was 4 of us in 1 bed flat. And it wasn't horrible. We weren't even "that poor".
Same here, only we had a 2 bed flat for 2 kids + 2 parents + granny. My childhood was still very happy (although would probably qualify as extreme poverty / overcrowding by the UK standards). All my friends had similar living conditions, many went on to become world-renowned in their field (research, medicine etc) now that we are in mid-30s, even though no state money was thrown at them in the early years.

Kazzyhoward Sun 14-Apr-19 14:09:46

1.5% of benefit expenditure is lost to fraud. It's much less than people want to believe.

Easy to be glib and use percentages. How many hundreds of million pounds or even billions is that 1.5%? How many more doctors, nurses and teachers would it pay for?

In reality, it's a nonsense to use the entire benefit total - some benefits like state pension make up an enormous part of the total and aren't easy to defraud. How about a different percentage, i.e. percent of disability fraud as a total of disability payments? Percent of unemployment benefit fraud out of total unemployment benefits. The figures would be far, far, higher than the measly 1.5%. You can scew statistics however you want.

SnuggyBuggy Sun 14-Apr-19 14:10:57

Enforcing punishments on people who can't provide for their children would surely cost more

Alsohuman Sun 14-Apr-19 14:23:19

Less money is lost to benefit fraud than the amount retained in unclaimed benefits by those entitled to them, eg attendance allowance. Inconvenient, huh?

PinkBlueStripes Sun 14-Apr-19 14:23:21

I don't think you want a state interfering in people's lives too much. However there is and should be a huge role for the charity sector.

InspectorClouseauMNdivision Sun 14-Apr-19 14:25:06

@silvercuckoo exactly. My brother has masters, so has his girlfriend. Only 2 of my friends never finished Level 3 education (which pretty much means no chance of proper job). I did have a good laugh when I told once to friends here about how I grew up and they were HORRIFIED. It made me laugh a bit, because it seriously didn't do any harm to any of us and it's still quite common with the prices of property. But in here that's like an ultimate poverty I guess🤷‍♀️. I think people have bit high expectations of living standard. Not everyone can have 4bed house🤷‍♀️

lyralalala Sun 14-Apr-19 14:36:10

In reality, it's a nonsense to use the entire benefit total - some benefits like state pension make up an enormous part of the total and aren't easy to defraud. How about a different percentage, i.e. percent of disability fraud as a total of disability payments? Percent of unemployment benefit fraud out of total unemployment benefits. The figures would be far, far, higher than the measly 1.5%. You can scew statistics however you want.

Disability benefit fraud as a whole the DWP says is around 0.5%

For PIP in 2017 fraud was 1.4%. Underpayment was 3.6%. Errors accounted for 1.8% of payments.

Kazzyhoward Sun 14-Apr-19 14:58:14

Less money is lost to benefit fraud than the amount retained in unclaimed benefits by those entitled to them

Perhaps some people have a moral compass and don't claim all the benefits they're entitled to because they don't actually need them? That would explain why some benefits are unclaimed.

Puzzledandpissedoff Sun 14-Apr-19 15:23:52

I like to see a balance, whilst it's great the state helps out with things and pays money for things, you must remember that everything that we ask them for help for gives them more power. If you're asking them to take responsibility for more and more then you're giving them more and more control over everyone's daily lives

Very well put

I'm another who fully supports the essentials - and I include an effective safety net in that - but too much state interference isn't essential and is just empire-building for the sake of power and status

DarkAtEndOfTunnel Sun 14-Apr-19 15:24:06

Instead of just whinging about 'people having kids who can't afford them' you might want to look at why they can't afford them. As pp said, we are not reproducing our own population overmuch. There are a few large families, but they are rare.

It's also a fact, however much some people don't want to hear it, that wages are falling through the floor. We are expected to have far more skills nowadays while being paid less for them: while employee rights are reducing and legal fees unaffordable people have no choice but to conform to requirements.

Also those people who whinge about 'people having kids who can't afford them' are often the same people who support immigration. Odd that. Could it be that some people want a cheap endless supply of labour with no options of protest?

Backwoodsgirl Sun 14-Apr-19 15:29:19

I think people need to start looking at getting off the grid more seriously. I’m a long way from it personally but that’s my long term plan

That is our goal too, to remove ourselves from society as much as possible.

Kazzyhoward Sun 14-Apr-19 15:34:20

I think the number of people who say the state shouldn't provide ANY support is infinitessimally small. It's a balance that's needed. Enough help is needed to provide a basic standard of living for all, combined with education and training to get all of those who can, back into the workplace to undertaken useful/productive work. The state should never provide a similar level of lifestyle to the average worker - it should never be "comfortable" to live on benefits. Obviously, for those genuinely unable to work, it's a completely different matter, but even for those, there should be help/incentives for those who can do some work to actually do it, in whatever way is possible. Working has been proved to be good for people, reducing MH issues, social aspects, self-worth etc. Unfortunately, as with everything to do with short term politics, it swings from one extreme to the other.

Backwoodsgirl Sun 14-Apr-19 15:44:19

I get what you're saying OP, but really state intrusion is getting a bit much. As an immigrant of nearly a generation, I find the British nanny state suffocating.

Yep that’s why we left, I wanted my kids to be independent and have freedom.

Fifthtimelucky Sun 14-Apr-19 16:59:58

I think we all agree that there has to be a balance between expecting people to take personal responsibility for themselves and their families, and a safety net for those who cannot do that. The difficulty is that we cannot agree where to draw the line.

Some employers are taking advantage by offering low wages, in the knowledge that they will be topped up by benefits. But not everyone needs wages to be topped up as obviously what is needed by a family of 5 is very different from what is needed by a young single person living at home with parents, or an older couple who have paid off their mortgage.

On the whole employers have to offer a single rate for a job (I know the NMW has different rates for different ages for young people). They can't say 'person x has 3 children so we'll pay them more than person y who doesn't have any) or 'we'd better pay person x more than person y because their rent is more'. That's more or less what used to happen years ago, when jobs predominantly done by men paid a lot more than jobs predominantly done by women. Built into the pay system was an assumption that the man was supporting a family, so needed a decent wage, and the woman was working for pin money, so didn't. But quite rightly that should not be happening now. It's the welfare state's job to help where the parents' wages are not enough for a family's needs.

The problem is compounded by the number of single parent families. I don't have any stats to hand, but they must have increased in the last 30 years or so. Most families cannot afford a second home, yet many families are living in two houses: one for one parent and the children part of the week, and one for the other parent and the children part of the week. Obviously parents should be supporting their children, but supporting them in two houses is clearly more expensive than supporting them in only one, especially when both houses have to be big enough to allow the children to sleep there.

I'm not making any value judgements about single parents, by the way. Just making the point that they are more expensive model, because the same number of people need 2 houses, not just one.

Dragongirl10 Sun 14-Apr-19 17:12:52

Of course some take the piss but the state shouldctry to peovide more jobs and less zero hour contracts, they should regulate how the private sector treats employees, they should moderate wages anf provide housing.

OP how do you thinkall this ^ should be achieved?

Inliverpool1 Sun 14-Apr-19 17:16:12

Dragongirl10 - local councils used to employ hundreds of people that had secure jobs for life if they behaved themselves... now those jobs are done more cheaply by contractors because job security has been removed.

Bungalowbeth Sun 14-Apr-19 17:26:15

A friend of mine showed me a Universal Credit support group on Facebook while I was over there yesterday. While most posters seem to have valid points there was a rant about losing benefits because of an inheritance and also a 21 year old woman complaining she didn’t have enough to rent her council tax etc and she’s 24 weeks pregnant. I’m sorry but why go getting pregnant when you clearly can’t support a child?

IRL I know a couple, he’s about 23, she’s a little older (28 , I think) . She already has four children (pre tax credits cap ages) and in less than a year of being together she’s just given birth to another child in the last week. They both work 16 hours on minimum wage.

I’m all for benefits for the ill and disabled but blatant piss taking like this is crazy.

Join the discussion

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

Get started »