Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder what the govt has planned to punish those NOT on benefits?

493 replies

Glitterknickaz · 09/09/2011 16:41

News link

This is not the first time cutting benefits has been suggested as a punishment. How are the government proposing to punish parents who don't tackle truancy efficiently that aren't on benefits exactly? Just like the assertion that the rioters should lose benefits, yes because they were ALL on benefits weren't they? Hmm

Once again the government fuels the totally untrue daily mail esque belief that all of society's ills lie at the feet of benefits claimants. Apparently they are the root of all evil, eh? Hmm

Not one of the policies publicised has said what would happen to those who do not claim benefits.

Money designed for basic sustenance should not be removed imo. At the end of the day it is the children that will suffer from these measures.

OP posts:
kidzrfreaky · 09/09/2011 19:12

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

LadyOfTheManor · 09/09/2011 19:13

Unemployment can be avoided and at best supported-back to work schemes, new skills etc...disability cannot.

No I don't claim CB as I don't need it and I'm very conscious with what I take out of the pot.

tethersend · 09/09/2011 19:13

I emphatically agree that the welfare state is a Good Thing, and I count myself lucky to live in a country with one.

But the idea of being grateful for a welfare state, and denying access to it to those who are not grateful enough is directly at odds with the whole idea of the welfare state itself.

LadyOfTheManor · 09/09/2011 19:14

I don't think it should be denied but I think people should be aware that we're lucky to have a welfare state...and things like JSA are not lifestyle choices, they're temporary fixes and I think they've been exploited.

tethersend · 09/09/2011 19:15

"Unemployment can be avoided"

By getting on one's bike, perchance?

OpinionatedMum · 09/09/2011 19:15

Carers often save the govt money as it costs so much to get other people to do it. But bash away, facts and reason never seem to change bigotry.

K999 · 09/09/2011 19:15

Unemployment can be avoided? Are you for real? Do you know we are in the middle of a terrible recession? Tell that to the thousands who have been made redundant.

2shoes · 09/09/2011 19:15

kidzrfreaky can I suggest you walk in the shoes of a parent of a disabled child before you call them workshy..
you are a wind up merchant and I have to say not a very good one

kidzrfreaky · 09/09/2011 19:15

Well then Tethers would you perhaps be grateful for a hand out here and there if there were no such thing as state benefits? Or would you try a bit harder to get a job to make sure you eat?

Tortington · 09/09/2011 19:15

nice point well made tethers.

i don't unerstand how full time carers are work shy? explain please

bullet234 · 09/09/2011 19:16

"Bullet. The situation you describe would be very unfortunate. One we would all commiserate with. What exactly has that to do with a perfectly able bodied parent who chooses to stay at home because "I have a child with SN?" "

Because you can't have it both ways. You can't sit there smugly claiming that a return to the 1930s would be ideal and then not think that such a return WOULD make such occurrences as I described very hard to deal with.
And you still haven't answered my question.

kidzrfreaky · 09/09/2011 19:16

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

glitterkitten · 09/09/2011 19:16

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

tethersend · 09/09/2011 19:16

The whole point of the welfare state- and it's a good one- is that it cares for everyone; the grateful and the ungrateful.

The minute this ceases to be the case is the minute we no longer have a welfare state to be grateful for.

LineRunner · 09/09/2011 19:17

meditrina - You are right about the lack of fresh thinking. It's stale in politics and in society. Just look at this thread. Debate is often derailed by the repetition of worn-out thoughts.

I spy on Tory Spin Central via the magic of the interweb.

K999 · 09/09/2011 19:17

Didn't you know Custardo that being a full time carer is a breeze??? Jeez.....

OpinionatedMum · 09/09/2011 19:18

"Unemployment can be avoided and at best supported-back to work schemes, new skills etc...disability cannot."

Blimey! What ivory tower did you grow up in?

Dillydaydreaming · 09/09/2011 19:19

I am an able bodied parent who chooses to work part time. This benefits my son while allowing me to stay in the work place. I manage this with BENEFITS like DLA and Child Tax Credit.
I have no "woe is me"card for the more ignorant among you (LOTM among others).
I have a child who needs support and gets it courtesy of certain benefits. Anyone who doesn't agree/begrudged ne that can fuck right off and disappear in their own bile.
but then again - MN is full of smug right wing fuck wits these days - women, men and trolls too busy fretting gabout someone getting something they are not.
My "extras" £267 in DLA for my son which makes it possible for me to be around for him in a way I could not if I worked full time. His SN benefit from this.

kidzrfreaky · 09/09/2011 19:19

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

K999 · 09/09/2011 19:20

Clapping out loudly for that last post!

K999 · 09/09/2011 19:20

I meant Dilly!

noddyholder · 09/09/2011 19:20

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

Tortington · 09/09/2011 19:21

i would rather be in work than claim benefits as working pays more and gives me more opportunities.

i think those people who have this delusion that a life on benefits is cushty, should perhaps try it for the long term.

if they are not prepared to do this, they must ask themselves why. we will all come up with the same answers. there is more opportunity in work than not in work. work provides more than the job role itself. there is the training, the career progression, the additional benefits, pensions, eye tests, healthcare, work bicycle Grin, loan systems for transport and clothes.... many additional benefits than the wage itself.

so why are the feckless workshy content with living in poor housing, recieving poor services on poor money with no future, not wanting a future and not building towars that future?

its a little bit more complicated than - workshy.

Tortington · 09/09/2011 19:21

i would rather be in work than claim benefits as working pays more and gives me more opportunities.

i think those people who have this delusion that a life on benefits is cushty, should perhaps try it for the long term.

if they are not prepared to do this, they must ask themselves why. we will all come up with the same answers. there is more opportunity in work than not in work. work provides more than the job role itself. there is the training, the career progression, the additional benefits, pensions, eye tests, healthcare, work bicycle Grin, loan systems for transport and clothes.... many additional benefits than the wage itself.

so why are the feckless workshy content with living in poor housing, recieving poor services on poor money with no future, not wanting a future and not building towars that future?

its a little bit more complicated than - workshy.

tethersend · 09/09/2011 19:22

Have you read any accounts of poverty in the 1930s, kidz? Any? At all?

"Well then Tethers would you perhaps be grateful for a hand out here and there if there were no such thing as state benefits? Or would you try a bit harder to get a job to make sure you eat?"

Or would I die in a workhouse? Hard to say, isn't it?

Oooh, you are an enigma, aren't you?

Swipe left for the next trending thread