Finding it hard not to resent friend on benefits

Both.

If you can afford a holiday you don't need taxpayer dole. I stand by that. Dole is for survival, not for luxuries. Or should be.

I have so far spent 32 days away from home this year, including San Francisco, New York and London in 4-5 star hotels, paying for them and the long-haul business class flights out of my EARNINGS. What a concept. We are most decidedly not jealous of anyone on benefits.

If you can't continue the debate without ad hominem remarks about fellow commenters, maybe it's time to bow out.

I'm not a landlord, I'm a 62 year old woman who's been in the workforce since age 15 and by far a net contributor. Never been on the dole of any kind. I have a great lifestyle now but I also paid my dues and made sure not to produce offspring I couldn't rear.

Furthermore I see nothing wrong with landlords. Investing in real estate is just as valid as investing in stocks, precious metals or other valuable assets. Most of you have no clue about the sort of hard work it takes to become financially comfortable in middle age; so many expect the lifestyle of an established older adult who's worked all of their lives, with zero dues-paying, zero patience and extremely low effort. People who want things without working for them are not admirable.

Despite working full time in a stressful public sector role i am entitled to UC for my one teen DC.
We have an annual overseas holiday due to me having great budgeting skills and an eye for a bargain-this year it's 3 weeks in the school hols to a popular destination. You sound jealous.

Should they just dock the mother’s pension, or that of the feckless father who has decided not to provide for his kids too?

Who I deem worthy are people experiencing involuntary misfortune or illness or disability. Not those who lead their merry life with no savings, no contingency plans, no self-control and no thought about prudent family planning.

Yes, we have to feed their kids, but we should be providing nutritious food, not cash to be spent on whatever.

And for those whose "need" is because they reproduced imprudently, we should collect it back on the other end by docking their pensions. One or the other: assistance now or pension later. Not both.

Exactly!!!

🙄

So who exactly do you deem 'worthy' then? And what do you foresee being the long term social implications of that?

You're going to tell us you "earn" your living as a landlord with an extensive property portfolio in a minute, aren't you 🙄

Absolutely!
I've seen many, many threads on here where the OP lists an absolute catalogue of awfulness on the part of her DH, and then goes on to say "But I can't leave him, I told myself I'd never be a single mum!"

And why is she so scared of being a single mum?! The relentless hatred and negativity single mums cop, as evinced by some of these posters upthread 👆

Every time there's a thread about abusive relationships someone will ask why women stay and put up with it. Here's your answer. Single mums are called leaches, scroungers, fools and more. People speculate about if our kids have the same father, why we had them, if we're planning more and so on.

I have 2 friends that had several kids and milked the benefits system, i worked every hour around the clock, their kids had more than my one child, they had more food in their cupboards whilst my fridge was filled with reduced food.and my clothes were charity shop finds,Once their kids left home they continued milking the system with fabricated mental health and back problems, the thing is, they think i,m the richer one as i work every hour (huge mortgage) i get quips and sarky comments all the time, now in their 50s and never worked a day in their life, an absolute disgrace

And if the father paid for his kids, or cared for them 50% of the time so that their mum can work full time, they may not need benefits at all. But he doesn’t. So the burden on the taxpayer is surely down to him?

This woman gets the benefits that the DWP have decided she is entitled to. She has budgeted that money in a way that means she is able to take her children on holiday. How other people budget their money is up to them.

So should the taxpayers pay for an overseas holiday for anyone who's experiencing adversity? I know plenty of people who could use a break. Oddly they pay for their own or they don't go at all.

100% this. These children have a father, who has just fucked off and left 4 children and decided he doesn’t need to provide for them or care for them. Where is the outrage against him?

Totally! This guy has just upped and gone. Left her with a 10 month old, young twins, and another young child.

I am really scratching my head at the multiple comments and posters on here that are actually blaming the woman in this case. She is just coping as best she can. She is using the benefits system as intended. Even OP said she is not playing the system or abusing it.

What really gets me is that Fathers just don’t seem to held to account. They’ve left a woman with all the responsibilities and even news stories on TV never question it. Like the fairies got her pregnant. How they get away with it really pisses me off!

She has twins, so I think the 2 child cap is different in that case.
She was married and her DH left her. He is not paying anything towards his own kids.
She works part time in a field related to her degree and intends to increase her hours once all her kids are at school.
She is already showing her kids how it is done.

Can you imagine what she'd have got before the 2 child policy. I've worked in benefits a lot of people left as they couldn't do it, people with very large families were on benefit packages equivalent to 60/70k salaries and more. But long term her benefits will stop she'll be renting and probably no pension, it'll sort its self out. You're showing your kids how it's done properly.

The welfare cuts wont affect OPs friend as she is not claiming for illness/disability.
In fact, the gov are proposing to increase benefits for those job seeking or working. OP is in this category.

Again, OP's friend was raising her 4 children with her husband... who left her. The benefits system is there for this. Of course he should be paying for his kids.... but it is the mum here that is getting all the hate. Why is that?
So much internalised misogyny on this thread. It is fucking depressing.

She is still a taker.

The vast majority of private individuals are takers though. If you add up the cost of health care for mum and any pregnancies, any subsequent health care, subsidised childcare, education, any specialised public services very few people are paying more in personal tax than the resources they use cost.

For all I’ve always worked and have been a higher rate tax payer for most of that time, I couldn’t have covered my child’s health care costs if I tried. Mind you my kids are adopted so I’m saving the state a good million in care costs over the course of their lifetimes.

She is still a taker. Working part is unlikely to lead to contribution sufficient to raise 4 children, unless you are a professional footballer. It’s a simple matter of math. No amount of mental contortionism can change the fact that this count to has a problem with too many people taking from the system.

These freebies have run out now. Hence the welfare cuts. But not quite deep enough yet.

Not only that, she probably wants to go to Greece herself.
I hope she has a bloody fantastic time.