Too Many Cuts...come join the #Frothers and have your say

your*

Santa - can't do that though as you have to send in yout tax return. The figures would flag it up, no choice but to work and work until you have earnt that minimum, even if it takes you 100 hours in a week to do it.

If you are at that level though you could easily simply lose too much.

The sad thing is how it affects future growth- most business start ups are non profitable. DH might be able to hoik his earnings up, we are going to give it a shot for a time limited period. When he started though- nope, too much investment (he is in a technology field so loads fo equipment / stock etc) needed. He can't work in his old field for medical reasons, so this is his best hope. Indeed, when the economy in his field picks up he has the makings of a good career as he has particualrly high (almost gained) qualifications for what he does, and an area of specialism (elecxtronics) that complements it. It's just biding that time.

presumably they would end up having to say there were earning that minimum and write off the tax payments they'd have to make on the nonexistant earnings in order to qualify.

Yes Rudolph: that's exactly where we fall with DH- he works bloody ahrd but not always enough profit; where we are work is notoriously hard to come by (the home of the porginal get on yer bike crap) but if they make him do workfare to top up then we are royally stuffed as his working from home is ONLY option we have for chidlcare as someone has to be here for taxi drop offs / Sn meetings etc. That will make me working a possibility IF I can find any.

I could be wrong with the 12 bit but absolutely agree that equitable would mean that single and carfer parents work 20 hours until (set age) then same thereafter.

That applies to me Rudolph - It means up to 60 hours to earn enough versus 30-40. Bye bye weekends! See ya later leisure

So what about someone who is self-employed? They could be working all the hours God sends, and not be making much money, especially at the start (or, due to the economic situation). Do they have to find a top-up job?

oh god yeah the euthanising sister! you can keep that one

i don't know peachy - i hope so! i'm so confused by it all! i thought i read it as being said on here that a single parent would have to do 35 and a married couple 55 between them. for it to be equable then you'd have to do both as 20hrs till 12 and both as 35 after 12. is that the case?

Is it not true that single parents need to work 20 hours until their child is 12 then? Which is the same concession a married parent would get, one of them.

Ah you should meet (one of) mine

Let's just say she's be here cheering Boffy on (see comment far above about euthanasia)

how so? he only has to earn mw right?

ah well if she's like a sister i can compare to my own sister and understand the cyclic nature and the need for forgiveness

Um, if your 'man' is low earning as mine is then the same rules apply don't they?

Santa LOL about friend

We have phases, we will be back on track again after a while of avoiding each other: tis cyclical. I see her more as a sister tbh.

sorry still ranting here - so basically a woman who gets and keeps a man (any man will do) is entitled to spend time with her children and work less. a woman who does not get and keep a man is not.

the same woman who married was allowed to work less than full time and spend some time with her children loses that entitlement when her husband fucks off with his secretary. she will have to find more work instantly and cough up to try and get any child maintenance and be stealth taxed on it even if she gets it when he refuses to make a private agreement with her.

quick ladies find yourself a man to be socially approved of and 'safe' - fuck off! i'd rather starve than be forced into a relationship just to keep a roof over my head. i'm not a prostitute.

disclaimer: i'm not saying all wives are prostitutes but me finding a man and having sexual relations with him for the right to work less and spend time with my children and putting up with anything and everything from him or society will punish me would definitely make me one.

Tianc nah, I told her to stop being so bloody reactive and quit reading teh DM (I should point out we've been friends since age 11, she knows my views and responses LMAO!)

I read there was a concession for parents of young children? Ending at 12.

Interestingly a SW friend of mine says she will be following closely any parent allowing their 12 year old to come home alone as a latchkey child, whilst acknowledging that childare admitting over 12s is very rare.

"she is contacting her (Tory) MP to advocate a cessation of all employment rights for anyone paid by 'our taxes',"

Hope you pointed out that included said MP!

I think the boffys can be quite useful if your blood pressure survives them, as they point up the areas people with no current experience just don't understand.

MmeLindor's post of 07:23 is a good summary, I think.

It's clear that Boffy had:
? a council house (and before that, private housing at pre-boom prices)
? extensive low/no cost childcare from family and friends (no requirement for CRBs or Early Years quals, etc)
? only one child when she became single
? no major health/capacity issues for child
? mild health problems herself which clearly didn't limit either the type or hours of her work (but which she now uses to validate her comparison to people with more serious health problems)
? an area and time where there enough jobs available that she was able to find not one but two (and of course she was unlimited in her hours of choice because she had so much childcare and there was a much more laissez faire attitude to children being home alone or going home from school alone)

I completely respect her for doing a degree while doing all this. Very well done for that.

But if the list above constitutes being right on the edge of coping, with the aid of cutprice food and low heating, then the worsening of even one item in the list would be enough to push a family into not coping.

And a large number of people on this thread have multiple items worse.

sorry x posted with you peachy!

i'd exchange the prefix 'supposedly' for 'ex' if i were you.

oh! single parents have to do 35hrs to qualify don't they - that's where the HUGE change is coming in. it's single parents again who are going to be hardest hit and put between impossible rocks and hard places.

they are more than doubling the amount of hours a single parent has to work to qualify for any help.

you can bet they'll be emphasising the 'average couple' constantly and ignoring the fact that over 25% of all households (don't know what percentage of households with children in) are lone parent households. and how come one of the married people are allowed to work less (acknowledging that they have children) but a lone parent is not??? married people are just more deserving? their children are real children and ours are not? even though there are two of them to manage childcare etc they will be required to work less per person than a lone parent?

it's so misogynistic. and it is misogyny because 90% of lone parents are women so we are basically talking about households without adult men in them. not having a male in your house means your household is penalised. wtaf?!

(I say supposedly becuase last month she called me becuase someone had told her that sutistic kids actually recover if you ASK them to. FFS!)

And people like me who have disabled people to care for. I can foresee a choice now between placing ds1 in care as he is both non-visibly disabled and twelve.

Thing is people who voted Tory are IME liking this. They bite on the DM crap and the rest- my supposedly best mate the other night told me she is contacting her (Tory) MP to advocate a cessation of all employment rights for anyone paid by 'our taxes', and amssive extra cuts to such jobs.

At the same time she bitterly complains that the nurses were too busy to care properly for her father when he was dying.

Clealr some people would not suffer noticeably should they decide to tax logic and joined up thinking.

the difference being that it will now apply to thousands of people too ill to work

ho hum.