To wonder how so many of you can know some lifelong dole scrounger when the official figures are so low?

[ValarMorghulis]

I am forever seeing ignorant rants posts on here from people who are appalled that Bob down the road has never worked a day in his life, that their relative is a career claimant or that Sue next door is knocking out child afyer child with different men and not one of them funding their children.

yet the statistics state, and there is no reason to believe them to be false, that the numbers of long term claimants ( 5 years or more) is actually 0.3%

This raises two questions for me.
Firstly, why are we all so convinced that half the world is a lazy feckless scrounger satisfied to sit back and have us taxpayers pay their way. It clearly isn't the case at all.
And secondly, if the numbers are so small how come they all manage to live within close proximity to a Mumsnetter?

Molly - just to clarify. I live on a housing estate in a town full of housing estates. The town is constantly mentioned by comedians to describe the utter shitness of life. "wart on the arse of England" type comments.
In my town i doubt anyone has ever heard of Boden. Whist the sloan rangers name their children Coco or Dolce, the mums round here have Reebok or Timberland.
We were one of the first areas to get a sure start, it is a deprived area with a high rate of unemployment.

I am not out of touch or living in MN land

But my opinion still stands.

It does make a difference. For instance, a member of my family recently said to me that she/they (couple) were skint as they only had 16k left in the current account. I nearly choked.

They are lovely people, but they seriously have no idea.

I live in one of the most beautiful, pictureseque areas in the country where loads of people flock from all round the country to be here in the summer. Its one of the best places to live in the country imo but everyone just doesnt particular like working to hard as you can get the decent life on benefits so why do low paid work for it. No one hides it though

I will also add it depends on your area. I was born and raised in the midlands if you lived where I was on benefits it was shit ugly council houses, nothing to do, awful. Now I am South coast down here live on benefits is so different its seen as more normal you can get private hb on anything a lot of people on it get sea view apartments and new builds. Most of the places advertise for Dss else otherwise no one would fll the places as the rest are second homes to londoners etc. All of it is geared round not working slower pace of life, people hanging out in the day. I do think it depends whre you are in the country in where I was in the midlands it was looked down upon, here it isnt at all cause everyone is doing it.

The worst kind of scrounger i've come across was a young girl I was training at work. She was lazy and spoilt. She had a house passed down to her, no rent, no mortgage. She spent every day at work on facebook whilst trying to chatter at me about her mate's trampoline when I was trying to concentrate on the payroll. She begged to leave early for a night out on Fridays and often didn't turn up on Mondays. When she finally got made redundant she had a wonderful larf about it on fb with her equally spoilt pals, said it made her feel grown up {giggle}

It made my blood boil when there's so many people out of work.

The catchment area for my girls' school was described as being 'one of the most deprived areas in the EU' by OFSTED (!)

I think for a fair few people round here it probably hasn't even occurred to them to look for a job.

Whereabouts in the midlands are you from Molly? (ok if you'd rather not say). I'm in the midlands too, I find it can really vary from town to town, even street to street but there's some pretty grim places to live and the wages in our area are beyond awful.

Ok, I'll come back AmberLeaf...and I was SO looking forward to my bed!

ALL my information was DIRECT from Mum.

Mum took DC to Hospital next day, no scratches or grazes on head/body anywhere. She later told me that it was not unusual for 'head injuries' to show no sign after such a delay - I didn't/don't profess to know if that's true?

Mum stated at the time she'd 'lost the little boy she's had' to Doc/DWP/ Professionals inasmuch as she said she had to do things for him that he could previously do for himself (dressing etc) I believe (looking back) SHE got a fright and afterwards (I'm not sure how to describe this) overcompensated ? and chose to do things for him. She/he DID receive HR DLA for at LEAST 11 years afterwards.

She was/is very knowlegeable/forceful and knows the 'system inside out' her words NOT mine! She was/is brilliant at dealing with officialdom, particularly by telephone, made calls for a lot of people, including me!

Household wasn't particularly dysfunctional (I've since seen MUCH, MUCH worse) drinking as a teen quite normal even if you're a Mum I think!, and housemoves were at her request as I said - she just wanted moves for various reasons, not all bad ones. DC1 did argue with Mum at times in teens, was not unusual then to appear at 'Homeless' and declare you'd been thrown out, and be housed (there's that word again!). Not quite given des-res in a leafy suburb but own flat at 17 pretty cool to your average teen.

I paraphrased a lot of events and squeezed many years into first post. When I first knew friend (30 years ago) she was never without a plaster or bandage and I believe (again looking back) this was passed on to the psyche of her children, that illness/medical intervention was something 'desirable'. (I still see evidence of this on DC1's FB, frequently describes illnesses, feeling unwell, Dr's appt's)

My OP was a very broad brushstroke of then to when I stopped being in regular contact, and described what I saw. It bugs me (clearly!) that her DC's were/are a product of a system they are unlikely to be able to 'escape' from ...and will only be more stigmatised and disadvantaged by futher cuts in the future through no fault of their own.

Another half-novel there, succinct I'm not

'til we meet again.

I dont want to write on here but relatively near coventry. Whats weird is it looks an ugly place to live there is still higher wages or a much more mix of wages jobs.

Here it is seasonal work so and everyone is minimum wage and benefits but even though the wages are lower or people are out of work the standard of living is 10000% better. As where I am now is so beautiful and laid back but it does breed a lot of laziness imo.

I think that is why here benefits isnt looked down on here as you can live a decent life on it whereas when I was in the midlands it was the stereotypical ugly council estates, typical benefit existence.

triggles I didn't say their depression was something to be sniffed at, I also suffer from depression and know how hard it can be, but I have also lived with the majority of the people I mentioned, they were my flatmates at one point or another. The couple; the man often boasted about being signed off so easily and afaik (and i do know them quite well) is far from being a danger, their child is also in school and they have a lot of family around them wiling to help so childcare isn't too much of an issue. She was unemployed for a couple of years before falling pregnant and having the brief job at the bar and tbh my opinion is that as spend all day smoking dope it probably has more to do with not wanting to get a job more than anything. But I was not sneering at them in my reply, i was answering the question in the op, that I do know people who are long term unemployed and they have no intentions of getting a job - I didn't say there wasn't more to it but I know these people personally having lived with most of them at one point too which is why I can make the assumption (yes my assumption, not stating a fact) that it is down to lack of motivation for most of them.

Its just another witchhunt

Ihatecbeebies yes, I suppose so, but as you suffer from depression, I would say that you're aware that lack of motivation is also part of it. It seemed from your other post that you were listing off and dismissing those things as invalid reasons for someone being on benefits, but as you're most likely aware (due to suffering from depression) it's never really simple or straightforward, is it?

previously each time you post about it, you actually make it clearer and clearer that you've made quite a few assumptions, that you actually don't have all the facts, and that the woman's situation is not as clear cut as you implied.

ValarMorghulis

You can indeed get a free tax disc with a blue badge.

My mother is registered disabled and does not pay for car tax, so not sure where you got the idea that you do not get a free tax disc with a blue badge

I can assure you that my mother does not pay for car tax, as many other disabled people don't either, so long as they meet the criteria.

I have no issue with disabled people getting their car tax for free, just clarifying.

Reading this thread it seems that most of us know people who use the system perfectly legally. You cannot report someone who is claiming legally.
The problem is that it is possible to choose to live on benefits rather than work. In a way it is comforting to know that there will always be people defending your choice.

Because I work in a public service and have access to all of their personal circumstances. And yes, I know a few personally t

I know 1 - and she does my head in. Her DH works, but she's been on sick for anxiety and depression for 10 years. I see her 5 days a week at school, 3 times a week at sports club (kids), and have spent 3 weekends with her and her family (organised sports thing). She is a self righteous Mother - disaproving of those of us who are working Mums, spends time in school - helping out every day. She is a bitchy gossipy disaproving HYPOCRITE!

She's the only one,

Of course there are people who are unemployed who want nothing more than a job. Of course there are people who are unemployed who will find it difficult to get a job because of depression, drug and alcohol problems, etc.

But if you live in a disadvantaged area, you do meet people who boast about being on benefits and say things like - you are a mug for working for that wage. And you do meet people who are on benefits who say they would have to be earning large amounts £20k, etc, to consider taking a job.

For people living near people like this who are working on low paid jobs, it will of course annoy them to hear others saying that. Many people still choose to work n low paid jobs because of self respect, etc - but it doesn't mean that this kind of stuff won't annoy them.

The bottom line is;

Some people choose to live on benefits rather than work for their income.

Some people choose to work for their income.

Some people want to work for their income but cannot find a job at all.

Some people want to work for their income but are only interested in particular jobs.

Some people would go to extreme lengths not to claim benefits.

Some people are unable to work for various reasons.

Some people do relatively well on benefits.

Some people are no better off financially working.

Some people are SAHP's who are not supported by benefits.

Have I missed anyone??

There appears to be a number of posters who for some strange reason, do not entertain the idea that some people choose to live on benefits rather than work for their income/some people do relatively well on benefits. I have no idea why this concept is so difficult to digest by some posters. The people who choose to live on benefits/do relatively well on benefits are in the minority, yes. Of course they are...if they were in a majority, the country wouldn't have the means to pay their benefits. That does not mean that there are only 1 or 2 in every town though, it just means they are in a majority.

Also, one more point I'd like to make is that benefit dependency is not ideal, not for the recipient or the country, and it never ceases to amaze me how some posters trot out the same lines on these threads over and over again, along the lines of "This govt pays far more to overseas aid/trident/war/MP's expenses etc" and "Companies using tax loopholes to reduce their tax bill costs the country far more". Whilst I agree with this, we are on a thread discussing benefits and benefit dependency.

If someone has no choice but to claim benefits, should it really matter whether the total cost of everyone in need of benefits exceeds that of other expenditure?? I don't think so, it is a moot point imo. If people need benefits to survive, it shouldn't matter whether it costs more than the expenditure for XYZ, we should just pay it to those who need it surely and we would need to work out a way to afford it.

It makes not a jot of difference to me if the govt has spent 50 billion on something else, so long as the people who depend on benefits get the money they need.

I honestly don't understand why people use 'govt spent XXX on XYZ so somehow that makes claiming benefits through choice rather than need okay'

Please can someone explain this to me?

Edit:

That does not mean that there are only 1 or 2 in every town though, it just means they are in a minority.

Yeah most people here are picky about what hours they do, you wont get many people working in poundland or anything as its seen as skanky. If you dont feel like turning up lots of people just dont even bother ringing in, or going back or not even turning up for interviews. We have lots of Polish people here and they do work hard they do lots of stuff the English wouldnt want to do. They do have a very strong work ethic and always turn up, which is a rarity here.

In an area like mine there really is so little difference between working and not working financially, you will never change it though as realistically unless you put wages up substantitally and thats never gong to happen. You can get properties worth up to about 180k on hb so they are really nice. Its different for the poles as they are used to less over in Poland so there is more of an incentive to do something or be committed.

But I think the issue isn't just as simple as "some choose to live on benefits."

There are many people IMO that are simply resigned to living on benefits because they are unable to see a way forward to change that.. especially in the current financial climate.

Keep in mind the cost (and availability and location) of childcare the cost of transportation, availability of jobs (including jobs that are suitable, for which they are qualified, and for hours that they can feasibly work). Someone who is a single parent is most likely going to have difficulty working shift work due to child care, especially if they have no local support system.

Sometimes it's not that they're being "choosy" about what jobs they can do, but they are being realistic.

Well I've certainly never ranted, and am definitely not ignorant, but I do live in one of the poorest areas of Scotland, with rock bottom employment, and there are quite a few here.

Good afternoon Triggles ...clearer and clearer that you've made quite a few assumptions, that you actually don't have all the facts, and that the woman's situation is not as clear cut as you implied...odd that you feel I'm the one making assumptions?! Are you not then presuming to be better informed regarding a stranger than someone who has known them for over 30 years? Anyway, I digress...

I said in my OP that it is a benefit trap. One that continued in my personal experience for my friend for over 20 years, and that people (claimants) deserve better. I will pay taxes regardless of where the money is spent by whatever ridiculous Government is in power...just want to see some improvement in people's quality of life for the money. (Maybe now you'll say I'm being imperious and judging by what I consider to be 'improvements'? but I mean encouraging people to aspire to more than their Monday Book?) I see no evidence of a happier life for aforementioned friend, or her, now adult, children so I fail to see that anyone had 'benefited' from supporting an able-bodied person to NOT work for that lengthy period of time. She is as smart as a whip and could have had fantastic success in a career of her choosing, but her mostly informed choices (albeit initially as a teenager she chose to opt for fun and parties as most would rather than being at school!) were of the 'I don't need to work because I will receive a roof over my head, money each week, and be able to spend my time as I choose'. All a moot point NOW as I'm describing events that took place more than 20 years ago.

There seems to be no discussion around on the matter without it ending in a 'basher' accusation...and so the cycle continues. People do lack opportunities and life-chances, have illnesses, terrible early years circumstances, substance addictions, but shrugging the shoulders and saying 'oh well' is not an answer. I agree with LittleMissSarcastic that they are the minority but, as evidenced by other posters on this thread (by their personal experience/opinion I grant you!) they do exist.

...and many working adults struggle with the cost (and availability and location) of childcare, the cost of transportation, availability of jobs (including jobs that are suitable, for which they are qualified, and for hours that they can feasibly work)...me for one!

OP asked a Q. did they not want replies? Got to go grab some of the limited Scottish daylight. Speak later.

AntsMarching

Report the person you know who doesn't work but lives on benefits. It's not your responsibility to provide evidence. Report it anonymously and it's then up to DWP to do the investigating.