Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that resources are being wasted on underserving scrubbers

758 replies

rezbites · 20/01/2011 10:12

It makes me very angry to think that deserving parents, like Riven and her partner, are being denied the help the help they so clearly need when there are others in our society who are bleeding the system dry and giving nothing back. Please let me explain what I mean.

Where I live (and in other parts of the country too, I'm sure) there is a certain "underclass" of young women - you know the ones I mean - little scrubbers who clearly model themselves on Vicky Pollard - who are provided with everything by the State. They have not suffered abandonment, divorce or bereavement. They have not been made redundant or struggled to find a job - they have never tried to get one. They have chosen to become single mothers, straightout of school in many cases, so that they qualify for social housing and benefits to live on, claiming that they cannot work because they have a child. They think the world owes them a living and it is their right to claim all these things. I do not mean to suggest that they are typical of single parents or council tenants generally because I know that they are not. They are a feckless, but very visible, minority.

Why should the country waste resouces on these selfish, irresponsible deadbeats who have chosen that lifestyle, at the expense of people in genuine need of help - the disabled, the vulnerable and those who through no fault of their own have ended up in very difficult circumstances?

OP posts:
noodle69 · 21/01/2011 07:05

I completely agree with you and I am not rich (My husband and I work 70 hours a week for £1500 a month) dont claim anything but childcare. I see it all around me all the time and a large proportion of people I know say that we are stupid for working for that wage. I dont care though I think we are able to work so why shouldnt we?

I know someone that got a boob job on their benefit money. Its not a myth at all and if you think it is you have obviously never lived in a area with a very large proportion of benefit claimants/low wage earners. It also annoys me that I know people who wont work in poundland, maccy ds etc as its too embarassing but they dont think its embarassing to live in a completely workless house. (I am talking about couples I know who think its below them to work in these places but dont think its below them to spend all day in the pub, smoking joints and playing pool!)

I agree OP it is annoying. I will add I know not all benefit claimants are like this but the ones that do are ruining it for the rest of people who have no choice to claim. It makes me angry when there are so much more deserving cases out there.

Hopelesslydisorganised · 21/01/2011 07:30

Having had a few short weeks out of work on one occasion I can tell you that NOBODY can afford a "boob job" on the money given. Unless of course they are also working "cash in hand" and fiddling the system. Have you tried living on benefits? I am here to tell you it is not an easy ride.

usualsuspect · 21/01/2011 07:35

A boob job on benefits you say ...has her council house a swimming pool as well?

GooseFatRoasties · 21/01/2011 08:15

and a massive tv. Here we go again...

DameShirleyKnot · 21/01/2011 09:26

I think she meant blow job

tethersend · 21/01/2011 09:36

Good morning fucking morons Smile

Has anyone mentioned flatscreen dogs yet?

DameShirleyKnot · 21/01/2011 09:40
LDNmummy · 21/01/2011 09:42

I think blaming people is not the answer, why don't we as a society rather take a good look closer to home and wonder why things are like this in the first place. What socio-economic conditioning created this subculture as opposed to just thinking these people were just plopped onto earth with a view to being the way they are.

StuffingGoldBrass · 21/01/2011 09:43

Did anyone read that magnificent 'A boob job on benefits for Xmas' feature in one of the proleporn rags a few weeks ago.
If that wasn't a windup by some or other mischevious media studies students then I am the fucking Pope.

(THe clue was in the fact that this madwoman a) claimed to get up at 5am to do her hair and nails for the school run and b) that she had called her DC Joop (after the perfume) and DKNY (pronounced Dikini, after the designer label).

DameShirleyKnot · 21/01/2011 09:49

Joop!

Leaving out the exclamation mark is just disrespectful.

HappyMummyOfOne · 21/01/2011 09:58

I do think we encourage people to live on benefits and that it was done to keep voters voting for that party.

Perhaps if they made benefits contribution based and for a set time period people would not be able to abuse the situation. We may then have funding to assist those truly not able to help themselves rather than those who choose to live at other tax payers expense.

I expect the rate at which people had children would drop dramatically if they knew no assistance from the state would be forthcoming. It may mean we bring children into families that are prepared to work hard and support them rather than children being seen as a way to get a place and money for doing nothing or as an excuse not to have to work.

becaroo · 21/01/2011 09:59

What about the children? Not their fault.

What about the fathers? What name would you give them?

Oh! Of course, its the girls who are to blame for tempting the boys into sex!!!

Is it me or do we appear to be suddenly in the 1840's??????????? Put them all in the workhouse!! Then hopefully most of them will die of cholera/diptheria/typhoid and we wont have to spend any more money on them!!!!

Am guessing the OP is a Daily Mail reader?

expatinscotland · 21/01/2011 10:02

'Oh! Of course, its the girls who are to blame for tempting the boys into sex!!!'

It's all those benefit-funded boob jobs.

Anniegetyourgun · 21/01/2011 10:06

I was offered a "boob job" on the NHS a few years ago. Wouldn't have needed to spend a penny. That is, it would have been breast reduction for medical reasons which might well have involved "tidying up", and I'm sure yer average red-top rag would have made the fine distinction there. But as I was working at the time they wouldn't have bothered to mention it.

The occasional talk here about benefit fraud is irrelevant btw. The OP talked about the current system supporting a certain lifestyle and it's fair enough to discuss (a) accuracy and (b) fairness thereof. Claimants who lie about their circumstances - undeclared income, false mobility issues etc - whether true or not, receive a lot less sympathy. It's an interesting subject in itself but it is not this subject.

becaroo · 21/01/2011 10:12

expat Grin

cupcakebakerer · 21/01/2011 10:31

" Add message | Report | Message poster KalokiMallow Thu 20-Jan-11 23:45:03
"Kaloki - and you know all this how?"

It's called reading, I can read and therefore see that there are more articles on "scroungers" than struggling genuine claimants. And that the "scrounger" storylines get more column inches and are more likely to be front cover news.

Or have you noticed a huge amount of articles on how many people are struggling? How many articles have you read about people being refused benefits based on inaccurate reports?"

Kaloki - you are deluded if you think the media wish to 'help' the Government by running stories on unworthy benefit claimants so as to make the public angry and 'okay' with benefit cuts!!!!!!!!!! The media - for your information - couldn't give a s*t about a Government agenda. It's there to act as a watchdog - as in the MPs expenses scandal, of which we would be none the wiser if it wasn't for journalists. These threads.

And as for the woman who said these threads make women jealous of the younger women who have children at the peak of their fertility: Oh My God! What planet are you living on? I'm at the so-called 'peak of my fertility' and pregnant. Am I jealous?

Rollmops · 21/01/2011 10:35

This idiotic statement sums up everything that is so wrong with this bleeping country:

"...These women that can think of nothing else than to have a baby to push around have been failed by a society that convinced them that they couldn't do anything else..."

Society is NOT responsible for you and your life.
Grow a brain and and then look up the term 'personal responsibility'.

Makes me sick.....

Seems this forum is stuffed with fekless scrubbers.

ILikeMilk · 21/01/2011 10:39

And all these people saying that there is no jobs, therefore there is no point in looking for one. So how about all the people in the employment already? How did they get in there?

DameShirleyKnot · 21/01/2011 10:40

Dear dear Rollmops. That's not very nice.

I'm a slag not a scrubber thanks.

tethersend · 21/01/2011 10:41

I had roast chicken stuffed with feckless scrubbers once.

Not as good as sage and onion, tbh.

Rollmops · 21/01/2011 10:44

Care to share the recipe, tethersend, one way to make 'em feckers useful. Hmm

GooseFatRoasties · 21/01/2011 10:45

I'm idle not feckless thanks..

DameShirleyKnot · 21/01/2011 10:46

I don't really want to eat people. Call me Mr.Picky.

Aw, someone's going to come along in a minute and get all really RILED UP and angry at Rollmops instead of studiously taking the piss out of such a rancid and deliberatley provocative pile of shite.

StuffingGoldBrass · 21/01/2011 10:47

IlikeMilk: Do you suffer from that odd brain disease that means you have no memory or time perception? While there has not been full employment (ie enough jobs for everyone who wants one and is physically able to work, to have a job) for quite some time anyway, the number of available jobs is in rapid decline. People are losing their jobs all over the place.

And when benefit claimants refuse particular jobs because taking those jobs would mean they lose a considerable amount of money, why blame them for making a sensible economic decision rather than blaming the companies who think it's OK to pay less than a living wage? Or to 'employ' people on zero hours contracts ie there is no guarantee of work for them in any specific week, and they are only paid for the hours they do work so one week they might earn £100, the next week £20 and the week after that nothing at all?

Rollmops · 21/01/2011 10:49

...Knot, do you really think that I'd care? Shock