OK, so how would YOU change the welfare system?

[MathsMadMummy]

just wondering following on from various threads lately. sorry it's probably been done before.

I guess it's more a question of how you'd change the culture really, where people feel it's their entitlement to never work etc.

I have no idea what the answer is, please tell me your bright ideas

Yes people are amazing. If the mothers put themselev in the shoes of the fathers and thought how would I feel if I only had my children X amount of time that the father has you would have thought they would see both points of view.

Anyway the comeuppance is coming because we cannot afford the welfare state we had in its present form so the entitlement lot who could never even do things privileged I did like moving across the country, for work, 2 weeks off for a baby, no maternaity rights or leave or pay, working fo a year when 100% of the wage cost is the childcare cost because that would build for the future etc etc) will soon see the chickens come home to roost. Many of us have got sick of paying for their supposed "entitlements"

'world gone fucking mad'

Yes.

You should have seen the response of the people I had dinner with to my explanation of the welfare state in the UK.

They were speechless.

jillhastwoponies - my teenage children have several private school friends who receive £30 EMA a week for staying in the 6th form. The trick is to get divorced, claim the mother's home as principal residence, and then she just has to work a few hours a week to ensure she stays below the threshold. Meanwhile, daddy continues to pay the school fees, and very often cars, holidays, iphones..... the EMA is just an extra bit of beer money.
it's really not that uncommon, and as you say, is a bloody joke.

I can't work out the whole being paid to be a 'carer' of a member of your own family.
Isn't that what families are supposed to do anyway, care or is that a very quaint old fashioned notion.

Vilet if you aren't even married presumably you just say your relationship with your 'partner' has broken down?

I agree Xenia, change is on its way and long overdue

Yes, good on you Xenia. I love your 'can do' attitude and refusal to moan even if some of your posts are rather bizarre.

See Rocky you can say people have excuses

but if theya re trying and not getting a job what ampounts to basically insults is irrelevant anyway?

Unless you are going to come look after an aggressiv 10 year old asd kid?

no?

Would you be happy for said child to be inchildcare with your child probably injuring them?

No? (anmd if you say yes you're clearly nuts)

So what tehn? Seriously, what?

yes shirts etc- crap excuses. yep.

But there are crap excuses and tehre are reasons annd when they are reasons no matter ho much scorn you pour upon them they don't diminish.

MS- are you anti carer now then?

Wow.

What should we do, exactly?

Or are you emaning parents with NT kids?

Most children aren't aggressive ASD. We've already established that there are specific cases where it is really difficult to get childcare. That's not the case for most people. read some of the threads on MN, where people turn down job opportunities because they don't want to be out of pocket for one month of the year (August) when their childcare bill will be higher. Or they just don't want to invest a couple of years of not making much money for the sake of getting back into the job market.

Some people's sense of entitlement is unbelievable.

Or read SN perhaps and see how many people can't get childcare>

O am not unusual. Sadly.

Most children are NT. For most children, regular childcare is suitable and appropriate.

I was going to link to a relevant sn thread themn remembered thats considered poor form.

It workd like this:

A carerr gets £54 a week @ (just under)

childcare placements with 1-1 cost far more, even if pparent meets costs that nt child would pay

there is nothing in law making ssd depts provide childcare

most people even with real needs cant get a ssd service of any level

so equation is:

carers costs less than providing care therefore we wont bother

Ye

they are NT

but the rest of us still exist and dont want to be either forgotten and written off or lumped in with the scrotes

we seem to get both

lucky us?

Anyway am hiding thread now because whats the point>

we're too expensiv e and country can't afford us

and they know even if they bankrupt us we won;t give up

we don't have any bargaining chips so why bother?

Not everyone who gets ema has a rich daddy you know ..some have to use it for bus fare ...so much for the ones banging on about education being important ...I just love the generalizations and so and so down the road with the plasma tv examnples

I'm hiding it too ..leaving the daily fail brigade to it

Rocky, I think you're right in that many need to choose more wisely the partner they have a child with. I'm always astounded when I read threads re "accidents" as contraception is freely available and can be doubled up. Too many children are born into "throw away" relationships rather than long term stable ones.

I'd like to see no benefits for under 18s, whether they are a parent or not - they should remain the responsibility of their parents like in other countries. I'd also support hostel style housing for under 25's should they be on benefits - cheaper for the state and a huge incentive to not remain on them.

50/50 split should be the norm and the courts need to see that the child has two parents and why should the mother have control over when the father can see the child - the child is not the mothers property and if the situation was reversed I can safely say they would not settle for so little time.

Getting rid of the sense of peoples entitlement towards benefits and housing would be another thing i'd like to see change. Far too many excuses as to why they cant work be it childcare or min wage, far too many work the bare minimum to qualify for maximum top ups. We need to return to times when people supported themselves and only the sick/disabled saw benefits as the only option or a SHORT term in change of circumstances. The benefit liftstyle needs to end, its already repeating generation after generation in some families.

For most children, regular childcare is suitable and appropriate.

Actually that remains to be seen. 20 yrs fro now we'll know what the implications of being away from the family at a young age for hours at time are.

I am nearly 20 years on.

My children have achieved well at school, are very happy and well adjusted, and expect to contribute to society rather than take.

Good enough for me

I haven't read all the posts but part of the problem is that some people who are 2nd or 3rd generation benefit claimants, just expect that that is what will happen. I don't see what value there is in automatically allowing young people to qualify for JSA or IS. It just imbeds the idea that this is a socially acceptable way to function.

I also feel there would be some positive impact if benefit entitlements were linked to contributions. ie if you've worked and paid into the system and get made redundant, you would be entitled to more than someone who's never worked.

Other than that, raise the tax threshold so that those on lower incomes have more of an incentive to work. Provide return to work support rather than cutting people off the moment they get a job. Don't provide social housing to single people under the average age at which working people move out of the family home. Don't make becoming a parent an automatic entitlement to social housing.

I agree people should not need to be on benefits when they are working. We need companies to pay better levels that match the cost of living, not rely on the state to subsidise their workers and then for the fat cats to take the profits out of the country while barely paying any tax on it.

Companies should provide childcare by law.

They should stop firing people just so they can make fatter profits.

Mama it's not a new thing you know for people to leave thier kids to go to work. Whatever makes you seem to think it is?

That's what I can't grasp Limbo and I'm no economist. Whose insane idea was it to ensure the taxpayer props up the wages of people working for private companies making big profits?

It sure doesn't sound like a socialist concept to me.

Violet hill - you expect your kids to contribute to society - if they can find a job that is!

Maxpower - why should young people not get JSA, would you prefer them to starve? JSA is job seekers allowance - they have to prove that they are jobhunting to get it.