To find this universal credit situation unfair

Even if your child is in school you’ll still likely have to spend on wrap around care. So it’s not like you’ll have the same/ similar childcare expenses once kid is in school

I was watching a documentary about life in Germany, and they find it strange that British mothers prefer to go straight back to work, and they are helped by the government to stay at home with children. They also use credit cards less and have better pensions later. I suppose we're too much like the USA, with our economy is closely linked to USA banks, where people are encouraged to be greedy and in debt, and think they should own a home with a lifetime mortgage and renting is expensive.

If you read that poster’s posts, the friend is getting the work allowance, therefore if they don’t have a child on the claim they must have LCW or LCWRA on their claim. Hence still receiving some UC.

Yes, but presuming they are fit and healthy (the poster hasn't said otherwise) then the threshold for claiming is very low, most single people wouldn't be entitled to any UC, if they're working part time they'd be expected to find full time work unless they had a disability meaning they can't.

Yes, but presuming they are fit and healthy (the poster hasn't said otherwise) then the threshold for claiming is very low, most single people wouldn't be entitled to any UC, if they're working part time they'd be expected to find full time work unless they had a disability meaning they can't.

Second this - with two children at nursery you may be entitled

You don’t need to have a child to claim UC. They can both claim UC, but only one can claim the child element. For many working single claimants who are only eligible for the standard element it means their earnings wipe out the award, but there are other working single claimants who are eligible e.g. where they have LCW/LCWRA, a housing element &/or work part-time.

I am pointing out that the system is unsustainable. Because high earners are getting worn out from paying for this system. You would want your UC to continue, right? Then it is in your interests to wish there were enough taxpayers willing and able to fund it.

Only the person who has the child can claim. They can't both claim.

This really.

If people spent more time looking at how to improve their own situation rather that resenting those who are actually far worse off the country would be a much better place.

Then I haven't a clue - just going on what dh and I got told by them

Who knows

@Blondeshavemorefun claimants only get a work allowance (£673 for those without the housing element, £404 for those with the housing element) if they have DC on their claim or have LCW/LCWRA.

Sorry I can't quote a quote on the app @Headfirstintothewild

Sure she said she can earn 693? Before then losing 55p as she has a mortgage

Please do not underestimate the value of a pension which SIL will not be getting. I cannot see a scenario in which the state pension will be enough to live on in 20./30 years time. There are simply not the future taxpayers to pay for this.
So working and contributing to a pension is basically a no regrets scenario which means that as you get older you have options.

Now is hard, I get it. It will get easier

I am crital thinking even if I had a husband at home why would I go to work full time if I wasn't better off? If the system allows this perhaps its you that needs to adjust your way of thinking. You need to make it make sense! People do what's best for them... don't be too upset with others choices. As a "professional".

Having worked out the calculation, the tipping point is £716 for someone who only gets the single over 25 standard element (which is £393.45). There’s no work allowance for claimants without DC unless they have LCW/LCWRA). Earnings of £716 give an earnings deduction of £393.80 (£716 x 0.55 = £393.80) which would wipe out the standard element. If she is earning more than that she must have another element on her claim.

Oh really @Headfirstintothewild She said she got around £100

Obv the dad gets more as has the child element

But yes 2 costs of bills

I explained above what the issue is. But I will repeat. They work very little so that they put into the system less than they take out. Whereas high earners (whom the country needs to subsidise that - the tax income is now disproportionately on small-ish percentage of high earners) do not get subsidised childcare and obviously many other benefits and their jobs do not allow them to go part time that easily.

if large numbers of high earners will get fed up with this, they will (and it’s already happening):

• move to another country (so UK will loose out on tax revenue-> less money for benefits for low earners)
• find a way to go part time/reduce their earnings (UK again will lose out on tax revenue)

so what I said is that the system is very dumb because it at the same time discourages contributors from earning (and paying in) more, and at the same time encourages part time work, with top ups from the government. It is unsustainable.

I think it is pretty clear I am talking not about you but about those for whom it is actually a choice. There are plenty of threads even on mumsnet where people admit that they work part time because they don’t WANT to work full time, and enjoy free childcare hours (which high earners do not receive) and sometimes UC top up.

do apply some critical thinking please to understand not everything is about you - a mention of UC and part time does not mean I am talking about your situation. Benefits should be a safety net to help those who really need them. Like you.
But not those who have actually options and just made a lifestyle choice.

Unless your friend without the child element on her claim has other elements on, they won’t get any UC if she is earning £700+.

You are also forgetting they will have two lots of daily living costs, so not really better off.

From what I gather from my friends with one child born before 2017

I'm using new prices as easier

Single is £383
Couple £617
Child £333

They recently Split up but as a couple got just under 1000

But then as both work and had to earn think £1300/1400 and lost the .55per £ they ended up usually getting around 69/99 a month

But now they've split both 383 and the dad has custody (rare) so he gets the 333 but both still working and now need to earn around £1100 so being apart they are both better off each month esp by the dad by getting around £369 a month

@DodoTired I just want you to read a different perspective infact it's actually my own. Before I became a mum I had my life together and I had savings. However fast forward 9 years and I am a single parent to a 9 year old, ex is an abusive higher earner. I work part time because although on paper we co parent he has refused to do a single school run. Ds school does not have a after school club to enable me to even work till 4pm. Holiday camps are non existing in my area so whilst I travel it's only beneficial to a limited extent!. No family support. I do work 2 jobs also but there's only so much I can outsource.

This isn't a life style choice this is many people's reality. As a "professional" you seem to be very short sighted indeed!.

Plus how many have enough savings to cover a few months out of work? Not many. So many here are completely out of touch.

*not a choice for you

Obviously it a choice for you, but not all People on benefits choosing to be SAH parents have disabled kids ...