workers are an underclass?

[soggy14]

Does anyone else feel that we are heading into a society where anyone working is becoming a poor underclass whilst the "well off" are those on benefits? Okay not as bad but approaching the Downton Abbey type senario where those of us in paid employment are downstairs and (some of) those on benefits upstairs.

And yes I know that some people on benefits need them and genuinely cannot work but many I think do not need them. And I know that I will now get flamed by hundreds shouting that they are struggling on benefits :) but we are struggling on our incomes but also need to work all the time and seem to be worse off than those doing nothing yet are having to support them :(

thgrudge " I don't get to choose what other people spend their money on and neither do you." my point is that it is not "their money" if they are on benefits. What have the done to earn it?

And I too would love to live in a meritocracy :)

Then you reap the benefit of his finely honed physique

That is a very dangerous idea, Soggy. We'll end up giving people foodstamps with that atitude - can't trust the poor to choose what to buy!

It is "their" money, it has been given to them. They may also have paid tax for years. If you gave something to someone, it belongs to them not you surely?

I hope noone thought I was being serious with the quadriplegics quip.

My point being that in order to work and make their contribution to society, some people do need extra funding. Also that there will always be some who still cannot work, because they are needed as carers. And they would be very, very expensive to replace by paid workers.

soggy14 - it doesn't matter in the slightest how much you value your free time. The only thing that matters is how much someone else values your working time.

If you sat and thought about the system for any length of time the only way to win the race is to not have any children.
They are what holds us all back and costs us a fortune, take them out of the equation and we'd all be laughing.

I think everyone knew what you meant. It was very clear, and surely everyone with any sense would agree with you.

About the meritocracy, how did the Danish prince put it: Use every man after his desert, and who shall scape whipping?

You DO live in a meritocracy.

It's just a new way of justifying why rich people are better than poor people and deserve their wealth and should be able to pass it on to their children because genetics prove that they will be better than other people too.

"They have a lot more to do with the scarcity of their skills."

And they have EVEN more to do with the salaries of the people that they know.

Check out remunerations committees for details.

"my point is that it is not "their money" if they are on benefits."

It is their money, they have been given it in the form of benefits. That is what the welfare state is. The alternative is homelessness and soup kitchens. Maybe what you should have asked in your OP should have been more along the lines AIBU to think that all benefits should be stopped because its my money and I don't want people on tax credits to watch tv or have any toys.

Riven - I should have said 'the scarcity of their skills and how much they are valued'. If the value of your skills isn't recognised you are screwed :(

None of the people I know who did maths/physics PHd's are still in research and only a couple of the biologists :(

spidookly - renumerations commitees are a bit of an exception, for when you get to the "voting each other payrises" executive level. Most, even very highly paid people, are paid as little as there employers/clients can get away with.

Everyone I know in the arts says there's no money in that either...so what are people meant to do to make a mint...all the dosh can't be in IT can it? How depressing.

Marketing and recruitment? They are the only skills society values these days I think.

Many workers are on benefits: it's not either or.

DH works, I get carer's alowance.

We're better off becuase DH works. I;d like to work but the state knows too well that SN childcare would cost them more than manyc arers would earn so it is impossible.

We're nto starving, but it's so tight at times it's painful as well. It was better when we both worked plus we owned our own house and had a pension.

I wish it was still that way, it ain't.

Nancy66 - Find something that lots of people need done and that not many people can do or are willing to do.

If it makes the first group of people a lot of money that helps.

'Minimum wage is definately not enough, maybe the government should be subsidizing that rather than giving out benefits quite so much. There should be a limit to how much anyone can recieve on benefits, regardless of the number of children.

it comes in next year, with disabled [people and their famillies being excepted.

'"my point is that it is not "their money" if they are on benefits."

tehre's an assumption tehre that people on benefits never paid in.

benefits should work as a sort of karma: you get what you sow. We paid in for many years, we need help now. The only exceptions to this should be if you are unable to work becuase you cannot locate work (unlikely to be permanent but there are a few examples, say if you were older and lived in the valleys in the eighties) or are disabled / sick.

That cannot be ebforced becuase it would place vulnerable others at risk- dependents etc. But the work as a moral requisite attitude is what I raise my non (or 'les') disabled kids with, certainly. If they claimed as an option i would be shamed; but I don;t feel guilty that autistic ds3 will be dependent on the state as it was unasked for.

Erm, very briefly, No. But I can totally understand why, for very many hard working but not affluent people it feels exactly like that. The benefits system has become too complicated and yet too easy to manipulate. I don't blame the people who manipulate it to do the best they can for themselves, I blame the people who warped the system.