AIBU to think that I shouldn't have bothered working and paying into National Insurance for the 35 years I have done so?

The problem isn't that Woman 1 is living in a big house and benefitting from Pension Credit and Woman 2 has worked hard all her life, is living in a much smaller house, and loses out on Pension credit.

The problem is that so many benefits have been hung on to Pension Credit entitlement that there a large number of people just outside entitlement to Pension Credit who are much worse off than those on Pension Credit with all their entitlements. That needs to be sorted. I don't know how to do it without increasing the administrative cost, and it would still leave pockets of unfairness,

My parents and uncle say they have more disposable income on pension credit than when they worked.

Posting again, just hours after my last post. Sorry. The hot humid weather made it difficult to sleep!
There's something I need to express, after reading a few other posts now, though I still haven't read the whole thread. I just read the title quickly yesterday, and posted in a brief moment of a busy day.
My first post yesterday wasn't adding to any chorus on here, one way or the other. It was just my own voice. My own independent thought.
I'm a bit upset @XenoBitch after reading a few of your other posts that you might have misunderstood, and thought my post was adding to an anti-benefits claimants chorus? Your comment about not being able to eat bricks. I know! I'm left-wing. I believe we need a strong social system and a safety net for hard times any one of us could fall in. I struggle with my mental health and due to trauma I had a breakdown a few years ago. I lived on savings initially; but they eventually ran out and I had to claim incapacity benefit for a few months. If it hadn't been there I'd probably have died. I'm so grateful for that safety net. I never felt entitled, just very grateful. I'm very happy that some of my taxes paid over years contributes to that pot for others at times of need.
But, to me it's possible to have a nuanced view. I don't have to pick a side on this issue, or any issue.
My comment about property ownership was in relation to the specific cases I mentioned. I actually think the first lady I mentioned is probably quite unusual. She comes from an upper middle-class background, but now lives on pension credit. Probably in past times she'd have been described as a gentle woman in need or something! Genteel poverty. You know how such women might have relied on a wealthy benefactor 200 years before social security! But wouldn't have dreamt of working in certain jobs, and often still lived in fancy houses. The second lady comes from poverty. Grew up working class and poor, but with a strong work ethic. No opportunity for higher education, she worked liked crazy in poorly paid jobs for years to get out of poverty, provide for her family etc. Not a handout in her life. Fast forward to now - she owns (due to hard work) a humble little dwelling and lives on a modest pension, probably just misses out on pension credit. She (or her situation) is probably far more common and typical than the first lady. The first lady bothers me a bit, as she defines herself as very poor. When she floats around in a giant grand 3 storey house. It's a bit galling to be honest, when I myself rent a tiny flat, and due to cost of rents these days, wonder if I'll ever be able to be a home owner. My own income is low, but I'm self-employed and work every hour. I don't claim now at all. So, if anything my comment was as much about housing injustice as benefits.
It's possible to have a balanced view. I can strongly support a social system, and believe we need to care for everyone and help those who need it. But, I do think within the system there are injustices, and some people who misuse it. I do think the two situations I mentioned highlight that. If someone owns a £500k massive house outright, they're not poor no matter how much they say they are; and it's unfair on the other lady, and others like her, who've worked themselves to the bone, but could no more own a £500 k gaff than fly to the moon; but who aren't entitled to a penny of handouts. That's clearly unfair!
Anyway, sorry my post is so long. I was a bit upset that you and others may have misunderstood my post yesterday, when I actually can't bear demonisation of the poor. I've done lots of voluntary work with homeless people. Now that really is poverty. Total compassion for marginalised people in our society. A very very different case from the asset rich woman I've case studied to prove my point about the unfairness of pension credit in some instances.
It's not a black and white issue. Few things are I guess!

Yes, I think she does. She could sell it and downsize, free up some cash. She'd still be a homeowner, but a home better suited to her lifestyle and cheaper to heat and maintain. A better quality of life and less stress overall.
I really don't think it's fair that she gets pension credit and freebies, and others living in studio flats don't because they qualify for the full state pension. Clearly the person living in the giant house is the wealthier one.

The issue is just how poorly paid workers are now. Person B (the worker) should be making more money and so therefore having a better standard of living than Person A (the person on benefits).
Lower working class/working class type jobs have had the reward element of the deal totally removed. Wages now just put people on a treadmill of coping.
If there were a noticeable difference between what workers and those on benefits got, then there wouldn't be so much frustration and anger at the situation we find ourselves in.
We should not be reducing what those on benefits get, as they are given just enough to scrape by. But the uplift that working traditionally gave has just been eroded....

I know you can't eat bricks. But, if someone is choosing to live alone in an enormous house it's a luxury lifestyle choice really. Very different from someone who owns a one/two bed flat or bungalow.
Said lady I mentioned could take in a lodger, do Airbnb, release equity, or, in my opinion most sensibly, sell and downsize. She could free up about £200k and have a better life in many ways.
Of course it's up to her, but asset wealth is a form of wealth, and if someone owns a massive expensive house they can't say they're poor. They're making a choice.
I think the particular case I mentioned upsets me a bit, as she's quite posh and had a decent inheritance, then a rich husband who bought her a house. She chose to spend her money on hobbies and art courses and travel etc. Up to her. But, when I compare her situation with the other lady I mentioned, who comes from a very poor working class background, and worked all her life in low-paid jobs, scrimping and saving. Who most certainly couldn't afford to buy a huge house, but doesn't define herself as poor, as she saved etc. But, she's not entitled to benefits and freebies like the lady I first described. It all seems very unfair.

Not just your post but everyone that mentions, when writing regarding these types of senarios, that a person/person's getting this, that and whatever "FREE* is a bit misleading.

A brunt of it is courtesy of the tax payers.

@Shmee1988 I agree it’s unfair but I do think it’s right there are clubs and activities to make the children’s lives nicer (as parents won’t/ can’t).

The people who don't/didn't work have actually probably been better off. I work, my partner works. We have 2 young children. We rent privately, pay cou cil tax, child care fees etc etc. We have enough left for a decent life, don't get me wrong but we still have to be careful. Now, I have friends and acquaintances who do not work. They get most of if not all of their rent paid. Vouchers for food. Council tax discounts. Universal credit. Free childcare from the age of 2 and they get free child activity days in clubs for FREE so they can sit at home doing eff all and yet we pay for our childcare so we can work. Alot of them go out and buy their designer clothes/bags/ shoes, get their hair and nails done regularly. They don't pay prescriptions or dental fees. Sorry but o think the ones who don't work have it much better than the ones who do.

@MistressoftheDarkSide I agree it is V complicated, of course an average sized house should not be considered a luxury house because of the inflated price tag!
Realistically benefits wouldnt be enough to afford the upkeep of a very large place and so you'd have to move somewhere where the upkeep is lower, or release equity.
Both of which are also complicated!

you don't think clearly. We all live with the amount we got, get now , will etc. If some get it through benefits, big deal. You get what you get. Be glad you did it the moral way. Some call it carma, some God and we all will give account

Trouble is means testing against pensioners homes that they own outright and forcing them to sell is skewed by the fact that house prices have been inflated so an average family home or bungalow may command a luxury price tag, but isn't actually a mansion. Down sizing in realistic terms from a high price area might mean ending up far from family and support networks. Moving house is in the top three stressors and imposing it on a generation who may be already suffering health challenges could be very detrimental and cancel out perceived savings to the state in terms of extra health support then needed.

There are no easy answers obviously but residential care eats up the value of an average home pretty damn quickly as it stands.

Our system has been built on inherited wealth and for a while the working classes were encouraged to join in. However geopolitics and stock market shenanigans have precluded subsequent generations from working their way up and owning property, which has become another useful tool in the divide and rule arsenal so beloved of today's politicians.

What are you talking about? Seriously? If Labour could win an election on the basis of votes from people on benefits how would we have had a Tory government?

I don't think people should receive benefits to enable them to afford a large luxury home, of course assets should be taken into consideration when it comes to means testing.

If that was my parents or retired loved ones I would be encouraging equity release - it feels like pretty much the perfect situation for it.

DH PAID INTO A FUCKING PENSION AND THEY WENT BUST He has a very small private pension of £32 a week rather than the full amount. Topped up by Pension Credit. So bugger off with your handouts crap.
We live in a small one bedroom social housing flat. Got no kids so no handouts for that See? Not nice is it.
Another point is if i had reproduced we wouldnt still be in this tiny little sweatbox Oh and DH worked First for Marconi Comminications then as an engineer until an accident at work and then volunteered at a day centre for the disabled which is where i met him.

I think the point is, should someone like OP who's worked all her life and paid NI, but not been able to build up much of a private pension still get Winter Fuel Allowance? Of course she should! Even Sainsbury's gives me some money off my shopping if I go there every week. They don't say 'other people need it more so we're going to give your points away to a food bank!'

Epitomises the unfairness of it all. My family and friends could never have afforded 5 children and they are working

Spot on

Are you really suggesting people who cannot work should be left to die in the gutter by our society? Unless provided for by charities? I'll tell that to my 65 year old friend, who hasn't worked in 43 years. She's been a wonderful mother and carer for her severely disabled child for all that time, to the detriment of her own health. But by your standards, they should both be destitute? I'm so disgusted by your attitude. Many people have valid reasons for not having been able to work. If by any chance you didn't mean to include them in your cruel sweeping statement, please watch your words in future - they wound the unfortunate even more. I think you'll find the charity of those with the most in our society is sadly lacking - many seem to hoard wealth. In my experience, those with less often have more generosity. I'm glad I had the privilege of going out to work, and didn't receive a penny of the benefits my friend had no option but to claim!

Why is everyone so accepting of a system by which even white collar professionals struggle to make ends meet? Where families with two people working full time still need state top ups? Why is no-one up in arms about this? About employment and housing being so precarious? About health care and social care being a shambles? About those in power doing very nicely thank you at the expense of the people they allegedly "serve" ?

What about the fact that government's can be sued by corporations if they dare to interfere with their profit making ability? What about lobbyists and the revolving door phenomenon? The fact that our Lords and Masters can shuffle public money around in their own interests yet see children in poverty and shrug?

Oh no, it's all the fault of poor people. All of it.

Well you don’t speak for everyone.

I’d have loved to have worked part time to spend more time with my DC. But we couldn’t afford it, so I went back to work before they were 1.

We also had 2 children rather than 3 as we don’t expect other people to pay for them.

I think you are right.

I don't think Rainbowsponge is posting in good faith. I think they're enjoying giving us a kicking to be honest.