"Strivers vs Skivers" - what do you think?

[KateMumsnet]

Hello all

Prompted by a blog post this week from MN Blogger Sonya Cisco, and this opinion piece by BlogFest panellist Zoe Williams, for our first blog-prompt of the New Year we thought we'd ask for your thoughts on the current debate around benefits cuts.

According to both Sonya and Zoe, politicians have deliberately encouraged us to think of people as either 'skivers' or 'strivers' in order to pit people on low incomes against one another - and to divert attention from the fact that the economy simply can't provide enough jobs.

Do you agree with them? And if not - why not? Post your URLs here if you blog - or, if you haven't got a blog (why not? ) do tell us what you think here on the thread.

there appear to be no figures ssd. it's one of the things i find most shocking about it - the public can't be consulted or have a chance to respond without the actual facts. this starts rolling out in a few months time yet we have no information on what it actually amounts to therefore no right to respond.

i suspect as a low income worker and single parent with one child i might end up better off. reading between the lines i'm assuming it's people who have lots of kids and relied on really high wtc and/or ctc who may lose out. i may be wrong but you'd think that'd be the tory agenda - to discourage poor people having more children given they see it as a pay per pop system we have currently.

imo we shouldn't be 'guessing' though - if they're rolling this out in a few months they know exactly what the figures are and they should be sharing that info with us. public servants was my understanding of what they were meant to be.

i would really appreciate it if someone could explain to me why we have no figures. is there nothing to say they have to tell us? can they literally do what they like secretly and let us have no say?

also want to state that despite being very much not a tory fan i am suspending judgement on universal credit because i cannot judge something that has no details. it might be a marvelous idea for all i know because i don't know anything. none of really do.

i am judging the fact we have no facts though. that seems disrespectful to say the least given how this will effect every single one of us, is huge and radical change to the fundamentals of our welfare state and yet we are left entirely in the dark whilst it is executed by a government that didn't even get a majority in an election.

Hi, ssd.

In answer to your question above and obviously depending on your circumstances your entitlement and amount doesn't seem to change much, unless your situation does and that is the same under this system. I did an online comparison and we aren't losing anything at all. I was surprised as there were several on here saying that sahp's on TC were going to lose alot.

society is structured thus: if you are born into wealth, you shall control public policy and countries will be run based on your and your close privileged friends interests. one will introduce workfare programmes to highlight skivers

grrr you skiving bastards [more grrr] you skiving bastards should now go and work a real days work and i the tax payer can pay through the nose to the owner of tesco or some such Cameron friend /supporter/contributor/business interest whom this inevitably benefits.

then as a sun reader with an IQ of -3 i can say "yeah dat Cameron, nearly as ok as that farrage blokey innit, he makes them bloody workshy cunts get a job - now all he has to do is sort out the pikeys and the blacks."

and i scream and scream - your paying for his friends to get richer you thick striver if a job exists - give them a fucking job - its a job, they dont just turn up and do shit all - its a real job - pay them.

the economy is broken, it was broken by rich untouchable bankers. who still keep their bonuses.
disgusting
huge
bonuses

the bankers were allowed to get away with it by the Labour party, under the leadership of Tory Blair. There wasn't enough control of the banking industry

The Tories at this time, did not want control either - lets make this clear.

but Labour, was in charge when shit hit the fan and they fucked it up. not that they has any idea who the working man was by that point, Tory Blair was too busy sending them to die in an illegal war to aid his Monetary legacy - businesses, tour curcuit, books... He killed them for oil. for rich businessmen friends, american links and interests

the people who run the free world, are a small circle of people - they know each other, or know someone who knows them.

There used to be ideology, it did exist - now it only exists in third world countries and on a bookshelf. I think the ember died when the lib dems put a nappy on and shit themselves to death.

self interest has replaced ideology and thats sad, ideology was a whimsy that really could come true, really. not now. i digress.

Labour or Tory. Rich pricks, shaping policy for self interest.

Sorry ssd forgot to say, I used a link from here but it was a while ago now. I can't even remember where it was. Is there a search for past threads here that may help. Another poster provided the link. How reliable it will be in the long term though, is anybodies guess.

Bravo Custy.

The real ones to blame for screwing the economy get off scott free whilst the most vulnerable take 25% of the cuts 'Cos it's all their fault'.

Lovely.

Hear hear custy.
Abso fucking lutely!

Exactly Custy.

Your post needs to be widely disseminated.

I used to enjoy working when it meant I actually did work, but increasingly in many jobs, "work" is just about paper pushing. I used to see clients for hours each day, build relationships, have banter and also be empathetic and caring.. now I mainly design protocols and pathways as to how other people who are being paid naff all should take more responsibility for care of these patients... it is like being down the rabbit hole sometimes.

So I am supposed to want to "strive" to do more of this bullshit and in so doing leave my kids in a nursery all day long, 7 until 6 so that I can pretend to do a job I'm not really doing at all, paid for by the taxpayer, while being told that the care I provide is rubbish (and knowing that it is) with no power to do anything about it?

Indeed, thunksheadontable - ending up not doing anything that you feel is purposeful with your day and not seeing your DC either. And probably not making much profit either, if you have childcare to pay for. There is no point to that lifestyle.

excellent post custy

and thanks for answering me girls, I hope my tc dont change, but with no info available we'll have to wait and see!

if anyone does know where you can allegedly see how you'd fare under UC i'd love to see a link. i have googled and googled and can find no figures.

That's the problem and the worry swallowed...no one knows yet.
The govt are being very cagey about it (

Thunk It sounds time for a career change. There are jobs out there that allow you the stimulation of work whilst still being around for your family. You have to be creative about finding them.
It is possible to do both but you do have to really dig and work hard to find something that can work for you and your family.

Before anyone jumps in, yes I am referring to the relatively qualified. I am aware that those on lower wages do not tend to have the luxury of choice.

Link to the calculator I think morethan is referring to. Quite what figures it uses are anybody's guess, as none have yet been revealed. Personally I find that deeply suspicious.

I have checked the link but not sure if this is the same one I did. I couldn't remember if it asked for area on the one I did. I could be wrong though. I too would treat it with a fair amount of suspicion as nothing has really been announced yet.
I know there were several threads on here when news broke so suppose they would be in news, maybe work and childcare,.

It says I would get £24,000 a year !! for doing absolutely nothing. Benefits are so so generous. It is no incentive to work at all.

Id love to see you live for a year or two on benefits Xenia.

£24k including housing benefit Xenia. And I am here to tell you tgat the calculator is not that accurate either. I dont get the amount it says Id get.
...
Benefits are not generous ....you need to try living on them before making such a sweeping statement.

I know it includes rent paid but it is ridiculously generous. No wonder the nation is bankrupt.

The calculator that I did was spot on considering our circumstances stay the same. The amount was exactly the same and it said that we would be aprox £800 and something worse off per year if I woh, which there is absolutely no chance of.
I'm not sure about any other benefits though only WTC/FTC/CB.

No benefits are not generous I know many families struggling on welfare benefits. I think it disgusting that anyone would consider differently.

@amberleaf

24k is a gross income of £32k is you are PAYE.

Most people who work full time in the UK are on a lot less than that.

Are you really suggesting that living on £24K net would be a hardship.

Xenia that includes housing costs etc... So most people would be living on half that -at most. When I see how quickly money flies out of this house despite us being really very careful I don't know how anybody would with a family manage on £12000/year. I suppose there are some things that are free when you are unemployed (like dentistry, school meals etc...). But there are all sorts of things that people wouldn't be able to afford on that small amount of money. So it should already be a fairly incentivisingly low income to encourage people back into work, if there are jobs that people can and are able to get.

@duchess but plenty of families do survive on £12K after rent and taxes per year. To suggest otherwise is a bit offensive tbh.