to want to remind people who say the unemployed and sahm's are lazy and

[martini84]

Should go and get a job that on average 5 people apply for every job and this rises to 45 for entry level jobs.
Not quite that simple.

Period
Its the same thing, household/joint unless adult dc living at home are included in household income.
Yes of course tax credits top up the income, nobody has ever denied this. They do not however provide an income/wage to allow a sahp otherwise our award would say this. It would be awarded x as sahp rather than income big fat zero.

Quite aside from the SAHM/ WOHM tired old debate... A system which is a DISincentive to any household to increase their earning power is crap

With Higher status, interesting jobs, people may be motivated to do them partly through altruism or because of the intellectual stimulation. Eg I have known a few lawyers, doctors and teachers who have chosen to work well beyond retirement age purely for the love of their work

Many lower status but equally necessary jobs don't carry that same element of interest, and therefore they are a means to an end- to pay the bills. People do them for the money, and need to earn significantly more than they would do if they werent working, in order to motivate them to do it

The tax credits system was always going to be unsustainable because of this

Foiled again

oops wrong thread

Periodmath

It appears people are saying you shouldn't claim if only one of you is working because its not 'morally right'

We didn't make the rules.

Janey68

I think you make some interesting points about how people are driven by economic factors.

I am not interested in working for an employer in any field unless I have to for financial reasons. I don't seek higher status as achieved this 25 years ago.
Some people don't get this though because it goes against the norm.
As long as there is food on the table and immediate bills are paid as a family we don't need much more.
Everybody is different and not motivated by needing more.

MoreThan, put it this way: if your tax credits were scrapped, would you still be able to be a SAHM?

I don't think it goes against the norm at all that some people will only be motivated to work for financial reasons, and that if they don't need the money they won't work

That's precisely why it's essential that work pays significantly more than not working.

Period

Yes, I don't really have much choice really.
Childcare is expensive and it doesn't seem morally right to ask others to subsidise it, as after tax, childcare we would be worse off and a full wage would be gone on childcare.
A bit of a no brainer really

PeriodMath
*I think if you're a healthy SAHM with healthy school-age children and you're claiming benefits then you should get a job. Otherwise you are asking the rest of the working population to fund your lifestyle choice.

If you're not claiming benefits and your partner pays tax then do as you please.*

Are you lumping child tax credits that a well paid DH gets in with that statement? (Apologies if not!)
I'm a SAHM. DH works approx 40 hours a week, brings home a good wage and I'm staying at home. I get child benefit (that's available to nearly everyone) and child tax credit that's available to partners under £32,000 in a couple earning or 26,000 in a single earner of the household.
I don't qualify for any JSA, ANY free stuff, or anything at all really. Would hate to be thought of as funding people's lifestyle choice as I've always worked fulltime up until having 2nd ds when childcare for two got just too expensive and I'd be going to work for practically nothing!

BuildMeup

I believe you are considered the same as me, I could be wrong. My dh works and pays tax, albeit a smaller amount as he is low income. I don't get jsa and shouldn't as I'm not seeking work.
Our household income is half that of the figures you quote above, but some people like to think that I am receiving thousands to sah.

Oh, and tax credits are benefits btw.
I've worked full time my entire adult life (36 now.) Worked from 17 to 30. (Stopped after 2nd child was born as would be literally going to work for nothing.)
If you earn £900 a month full time 35 hours a week, and the childcare is approx £700pm for 2 children, and your monthly train ticket is a £100.
If all you're going to work for is £100 a month, that's approx 20 something pounds a week.

BuildMeup

I think some people see and hear what they want to and are so blinkered to the facts. It is such a shame
Everybody is different and so is every household, but that doesn't seem to matter.
Apparently unless you are contributing tax personally you are looked down on, called names, and categorised as either deserving or undeserving as anything you may be awarded in TC, cb, or anything else you are a scrounger.

The problem with the system is always demonstrated on these threads.

Basically, a system which enables people to interpret what they feel is acceptable to themself, and manipulate the system to their own advantage, is fundamentally flawed precisely because people all have differing levels of what is acceptable to them.

We saw just now from a woman who, now she has 2 children, finds she will only have £100 a month left after childcare, feels its not worth her while to work and is better off being on a reduced household income and getting tax credits. If a woman has worked all the time up to her 2nd child, and intends to get back to work as soon as the childcare bill drops again, that may seem a very acceptable decision. But what about if she had £200 per month left over? What about £500? Or £700 - (there was actually a thread this week from a woman questioning whether to return to her job as she would have 'only' £700 per month left after childcare!) And what about the fact that many women just accept the financial hit because its relatively short term, and work for no financial gain?

I think there is a lot that needs to be done, including raising NMW, increasing the housing stock and making childcare tax deductible. But one advantage of the pre tax credits system is there was none of this sense of fannying about deciding whether we made 'enough' profit to work. You had a child, you took maternity leave (and a lot shorter it was then too btw) and if you needed the extra money you'd make after paying childcare bills, then you just got on and did it.

Tax credits are seen by some as a life saver simply because wages are too low. In reality, they facilitate people who don't wish to work, or only want to work a little bit.
Like I said, everyone is different, and people will justify to themself how their family use tax credits. While i think tax credits are a poor system (and thank god things are being reformed)I do have some sympathy for posters like the one who always worked, then by dc2 realises there is very little financial gain, and sees tax credits as a temporary measure. At the other end of the spectrum you have the likes of morethanpotatoprints who by her own admission intends never to work again, even though her children will all grow up and she'll have no caring responsibilities- it's an unbelievable sense of entitlement which is facilitated (at the moment!) by the rubbish system.

I stayed at home for 3 years, I didn't think I was that good at it to be honest, I think they have more fun at nursery!

I got an unskilled job as a domestic carer and will be working my way up to being a social worker by re-training, something I think more people should consider.

Not being a social worker, but re-training

If you are a sahm right now or unemployed, look at ways of becoming a skilled worker, if your not already... Because then there will be demand for you rather than tonnes of people applying for the same job.

janey

You didn't "just go on and do it" if you needed extra finances. Many people didn't have gps to help out with childcare and the industry of childminders/ providers didn't exist as it does today.
Even though I chose to be a sahm, I could not have worked during the early years our older 2 were little because the only care was a full time nursery which cost all of what I would have earned and MORE. There was no subsidised childcare or free 15 hours pre school.
If you couldn't afford to work, you didn't have any choice but to sahm. This is still true for some families now.

janey

How do you know I will be in a position of no childcare responsibilities? You Know nothing of my life, nor my family, yet you presume to know. Then you say I have an unbelievable sense of entitlement, again how do you know this?
Am I saying, as soon as UC comes in I'll go on job seekers to gain benefit? Never intending to get a job, but playing the system?
Or have I stated repeatedly I have every intention to continue being a sahm.
Two of my dc have grown up already, for your information. The TC my dh is awarded is for one child, who I will be responsible for on a daily basis until she is between 16/18.
This will enable me to not take out thousands from the pot for my dd in terms of pupil premium for education.
There again don't let that stop you from name calling, tut tutting, and looking down your nose.
You openly talk about welcoming the changes of UC, if you knew anything about it at all you would see that the hardest hit will be the disabled, those earning even less than my dh does, unemployed etc.
It will be a long time if ever the changes affect families with workers.
Why don't you read a little about it? Do you know for instance that two out of the four areas chosen to trial have been scrapped?

Why is everyone assuming that SAHM are unskilled or forced into this position? No doubt some are, but my SAHM friends are accountants, lawyers, professors, doctors, writers, small business owners, all of whom have chosen to take a couple of years out of the workforce (or bow out altogether, owing to the demands of an 80-hour working week) to raise their children. Surely the professional woman as SAHM is not just a tiny bubble limited to my circle of friends?

Morethan- you have told us plenty of times on here about your circumstances and that you have no intention of ever doing paid work, so long as you have enough money coming into the household through your husbands grafting plus tax credits.
Blimey, you even told us loftily that you have no need of the other rewards which working can bring- approbation, status etc because you 'did all that 25 years ago'
Clearly you feel superior to the majority of the ordinary working population and you have a massive sense of entitlement which I hope your children don't inherit.

And you really don't need to tell me how being a working parent was some years back- we were young parents in the time of no tax credits, no childcare subsidies, precious few nurseries, oh and housing costs which make today's seem a breeze by comparison, and certainly no rellies to use as free childminders!

The bottom line is: the system is flawed, it's been recognised to be unsustainable and that's why it's changing. We simply cannot afford to be a country where people can decide they just don't fancy working and can then be topped up to bring in the same amount as if they did work. The only surprise is that it's taken the govt so long to realise that

stopgap I was referring to the people talking about having 45 people applying for the same position as them, I thought that was quite clear in my post and obviously doesn't include lawyers and dentists.

janey.

firstly, I don't think I am better than anybody else and don't look down my nose and judge people as you clearly do.

Yes we too were young parents and went through exactly the same as you did, but on one min wage.

Working is not important to me, my family are my only priority in life. and for the foreseeable future my dds education at home is my priority.

I don't need a job for status, and other rewards you seem to think you can only achieve through paid work.

I don't agree with SAHM's of school aged children expecting other people's taxes to subsidise their choice. If they can't get a job because of unemployment that's different. But to say it's their choice not to work and other people's duty to support them. No.

vivenne if they can't get a job they could upskill, I'm pretty sick of the idea that there are 'no' jobs when companies are still having to outsource to different countries to fill jobs.

Oh no, as SAHMs we're all uneducated morons who never had a career and have nothing but their uninspired after all we don't work so how are we a role model to a child spawn to offer the world.

I am the very model of the resurgence of the 1950's housewife that is so publicly denegrated, following my DH around the World like chattel and bringing up our children.

No family or husband half the time on hand and no subsidies.

Wouldn't change it though

Agree Vivienne and filee. And good on you filee for taking on a lower status (but supremely important) job and using it as a platform to develop your skills

Of and by the way morethan- where on earth have I ever said that one can only get status and approbation through a job?! What an absurd idea . Most well rounded people get approbation from many aspects of life. Oh and family has been number one priority for every parent I know, whether they are WOHP or SAHP.