To be slightly annoyed by the phase 'work hard and get on'

[LittleTurtle]

on the budget speech.

Apparently in reference to SAHM.

The newspapers were slating PM's use of this phrase all today. That SAHM would be excluded from receiving child care support because they do not want to work hard and get on.

I was mostly surprised that the chancellor used this exact same phrase at the budget speech today. I thought they would just erase it after the papers raised concerns from parents about it.

I just find it insulting that people generally think SAHM don't do anything, but just lounge around at home.

owllady

people are reading waaaaay too much into this. Why would this comment imply as slight to a sahp????

and I can't stand Osbourne ......you're all seeing problems where there are none.

There is nothing for sahp who have been unfairly penalised before, GO said "this is a budget for those that want to get on" so clearly in his view sahp don't want to get on.Ergo annoyance- and lots of it!

I'm getting a bit tired now, so sorry for being rude but Kidderminster Kate and all others who have ignored all other posts in this thread explaining why the phrase is annoying, please feel free to bum right off

But you are getting on, all the SAHM comments on here are saying that you are able to cope financially by not working. If you are able to cope financially, why do you need additional benefit? If your child benefit has been cut you (as a family) are earning a significant wage. It might not seem it to you, but you honestly truly are. Some families rely on child benefit to live each month and if you can afford to go without a whole salary, the CB can't be making this sort of difference to you.

I don't understand what the "recognition" is you're seeking? Do you think working Mum's feel recognised for their contribution? Why are you looking to be validated when you all clearly feel you have are the right decision for your family. I earn around about £60 a day, my childcare costs £45. I continue to work because as a previous poster said, I recognise the long term effect a large gap will have on my future earning potential. I realise that some people don't care about working again, and that's great for you but why be expected to be financially rewarded for it?

As for the poster who said they are contributing to society by raising children who are well rounded, you must be smoking something marvellous.

"As for the poster who said they are contributing to society by raising children who are well rounded, you must be smoking something marvellous."

Soul = My new best friend.

I'm on board SoulTrain

Yawn

Excellent response Zookie, you contributed very well there. You might feel your point has been made incredibly clear, but to me it's not, and I've read the thread twice now.

I fully agree that SAHM is a great choice for some but you can't expect to continue to gain all ways: stay at home to raise your children, being financially secure, have access to a financial benefit to go to job interviews/training (whatever the hell that comment was all about), and be able to work again whenever you choose to as if you've never left? We're in a bloody recession and the employment market at any level is hugely competitive and fast paced. If you don't keep up to date with changes, you're going to have to face the consequences of taking a lower paid job or one vastly different to the one you left and that thought must have occurred to you, why the shock now?

We all know GO is a twat, did you honestly expect him to stand up there and say "and as for the SAHM's...words fail me - have the keys to bloody Disneyland?" If you're looking for validation, you're looking in the wrong places to look to our current Government.

Shuffles up to Ruby and Social, offers crisps.

I think its great they are encouraging women to work. Surely we encourage girls at school to aim high and want them to have great jobs rather than be reliant upon a man. A man that could at any point up and leave them and the woman finds herself unable to support herself.

People can make the choice to be a SAHP but should expect that choice to be funded by themselves and not the state. It is a choice regardless of if childcare costs mean you dont balance as its a choice to have that number of childrenin the first place and its not like children are cheap by any stretch of the imagination.

Why is CB being mentioned? I have never mentioned this.
My problem is the attitude of society as a whole and the continuation and increase of selfishness within it which this government seem determined to support and further.

The country does have problems and we are in a recession, thank you ,I was totally unaware.

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been mentioned. There is a website www.mothersathomematter.co.uk which explains the arguments for the state supporting one earner families which pay proportionately more in tax than dual earner families - therefore working hard, getting on and contributing. Families like mine in fact. One income families with a sahp don't need money for childcare but that doesn't mean there are not costs involved in bringing up children - and these families are now on ONE income. I think we should challenge why the government are only incentivising one model of family life - smacks of social engineering to me.

Who's selfishness is it supporting?

"These families are now on one income."

Through choice, however.

"And there are costs for bringing up children outside of childcare..."

We all encounter these costs, and child benefit helps to ease those costs apart from those earning a significant wage.

I was just watching Osborne's pre-budget interview with Jeremy Vine and he used it a few time. It irritates me on a very visceral level, especially coming from him. Has he ever had a job before the one he's got now?

Politicians speak gumph. Them having little life experience or social awareness is a different topic. It's a stupid line invented by some twatty PR team and to be expected from a Conservative mouth.

Through choice, yes. Which should be preserved for the future and which the government are eroding with these policiesMany, many mothers would LIKE to stay at home in the early years and possibly could do so if there was any help!! And not every wohm does it because she HAS to. The point is to have a level playing field so that families can choose what is best for them. The uk is almost alone in refusing to recognise the family as a unit in taxation terms and it's the wrong way entirely for them to be thinking.

But what would that system be? How could it really be made a level playing field? Seems too idealistic to me. I agree though, of course most Mums would probably prefer to stay at home if they had the means to - for me, it just seems shortsighted.

I would worry for my children to go back to a society where it's deemed the norm for women to be at home raising children, because that's what would happen in your scenario. We've already established the problems that presents to women who eventually want to return.

piles and piles of well regarded research to show, without a shred of doubt thy children are far far better off with a sahp, especially in the first 3 years. It might hurt feelings to say it, but doesn't make it any less accurate. And does make me wonder why Mothers, the vast majority of whom would much prefer to work part time at most, are being sold the line that working and outsourcing their kids is the new default setting.

jojomo I think I love you

that, not thy. Lol! The last big study done showed that almost zero Mothers want to work full time. Do we ignore what women want, and what's good for children, in order to 'get 'em back to work' as some new (anti) feminist ideal?

I wondered how long it would take for someone to roll out the "well regarded research for SAHP."

Care to link weewifey?

I wish I had the answers! What I do know is that these policies are deeply divisive (hence this thread!). We shouldn't be fighting each other but working out what is best for the children and therefore what policies and financial support should be. I have to go now I;m afraid, dh needs the computer!

Thanks Zookiemay! Sorry I have to go!