Workfare scheme for loan parents of children as young as 3, as of next month.

[WaterLoadaCack]

kept that quiet didnt they

It really says something about the state of the economy doesn't it, when people have to have their wages topped up with benefits because earning a living wage is becoming nigh on impossible for a large number of people. Even when there are two wages coming in. If they can get a job in the first place that is.

This thread is full of crazies. One fantasist who's planning on putting their poor two week old into fulltime childcare while they choose to swan about with courses etc. instead of caring for their own child, which they chose to have, and then have the gall to expect the taxpayer to pay for their choices via tax credits.

Another who thinks their parents' choice to bring up six children in such poverty that they had to rely on food parcels from neighbours to not starve, thinks of said parents as heroes rather than feckless idiots who chose to have more children than they could financially support. Who gave them such a great upbringing and example of how to be a good citizen and parent that they chose to give birth to a child when aged 16 that they ad no intention of looking after themselves.

Crazy thread with crazy respondents, berating other people's 'choices' whilst making the most bizarre ones themselves. I would say "Only on MN" but unfortunately, such hypocrites are all around us.

noodle what about the sahm with a working dad of 6kids who claims tax credits. Are they feckless too? Because the only reason they are claiming ctc and wtc is to make it up to a decent wage. Which they wouldn't need if they'd stopped at child no2.

It's full of really judgmental people too.

Indeed Yorkie I really can't get how you can judge one group without judging the others for the same which is the point I (and others have been trying to make). That at some point we have probably all benefited from the tax payer at some point whether it come from income support or working tax credits.

Heiss, I just wouldn't like to have a social worker who believed that one should put a two-week-old baby into childcare. Not because you made that (to my mind, horrible) choice, but because you think other people should also make similar choices.

Maybe everyone should just put their children straight into orphanages and get back to working for the bankers as fast as they can.

two week old in childcare No, you aren't serious?
For how long?

50 hours a week as far as I remember - not that I'm judging.

As far as I'm aware no nursery will take a two week old baby. And I don't think many childminders would be keen either. This thread has gone a bit mad IMHO.

I was under the impression thatshe hasn't even started the course yet, so why she's being cocky about attending x number of case conferences, I don't know!

Heisenberg Empathy and learning from others is a critical part of being a social worker. If you lack this much empathy in real life, you are going to be pulled up on it on your placement. Maybe read back on your posts and reflect a bit.

I really understand why this is a heated debate . It's meant to be , the government have designed it to be with their propaganda and hate spreading.

People need to look at the bigger picture. Some of these mps are claiming thousands in expenses , one has claimed over 45,000 . Many of those who approve of the nhs being dismantled have shares in it , like my own mp. What's that again about declaring conflict of interest ?

The biggest scrounge and fraudsters are in the government . Laws are not passed in the house of lords , financial deals are made that benefit only themselves. Theres a gagging Bill , loss of employment rights , attempts to get rid of the human rights act ect. People really need to look at the bigger picture , get informed and get angry , at the right people. We do not exist to serve the government , it's the other way round. We have a government full of narcissists who's only goal is to get as rich as possible .

Bickering about who should and should not participate in workfare is futile. It's illegal., unenforceable , and bullshit , as dictated by the pound land court case.

If your not a big news follower , or even if you are , and you've got five minutes to kill , have a look on you tube for a guy called mark McGowan , aka the artistic taxi driver. He's an ordinary guy , and there's several groups urging him to get involved politically , and to run for prime minister. If you watch it you'll see why.

Heisenberg I think you are wasted in social work. You'd be much better suited to a role in our political system where your not right ideas will be in sync with everyone else's.

"noodle what about the sahm with a working dad of 6kids who claims tax credits. Are they feckless too? Because the only reason they are claiming ctc and wtc is to make it up to a decent wage. Which they wouldn't need if they'd stopped at child no2."

That question answers itself. Of course they are irresponsible if they continued to have chidlren they cant support. Many on MN seem to believe you can have the life you want and the state should pay for it. Personal responsibility seems to have gone out the window.

Moaning that workfare is wrong, they shouldnt be expected to do anything yet quite happy to take other tax payers money rather than go to work themselves.

If this was just a few people it wouldnt even be on the governments radar but they will know exactly how many are on IS not working and how many children that is affecting.

But workfare is wrong because people on the scheme do not receive the legal minimum wage to which they are entitled.

Getting unempoyed people to work is great, but only if they receive their rightful wage. Anything less is a disgrace.

And I'm guessing you don't claim child tax credits or child benefit do you happy?...

Absolutely hilarious that those who claim to have a problem with this are the biggest burden on the tax payer. And we aren't 'moaning' that workfare is wrong. We are saying it's a waste of time because it costs the tax payer twice as much because they still have to pay the workfare client their benefits and the workfare contractors £3,000 each. I do like the way you keep skimming over the posts where people tell you your 'facts' are wrong though. You've got chutzpah I will give you that much.

Exactly chunderella I think we should stop working tax credits child benefit and child tax credits based on this argument. After all don't have kids if you can't afford them right? :)

The thing is Happy, It is the economics of the Labour and Housing markets that are askew, not people's morals.

2 FT workers on NMW (supermarket workers, cleaners or hospital porters for e.g.) would have joint net earnings of less than £2000 pcm.

In the SE one FT nursery place could easily cost £1000 PCM, so one of them being a SAHP in the pre-school years is fairly cost-neutral and they are going to need financial help EITHER WAY.

Housing costs will be a similar challenge, particularly in expensive regions or cities (South-East England or Edinburgh for e.g.). We either enforce a higher NMW (a living wage) or we provide people with an income top-up. The only third option is starvation or homelessness for essential workers.

It is not true that everyone has the ability or opportunities to progress much past NMW. So what are we saying as a society? That the low paid are not entitled to have children? Because those of us that are luckier say so?

We have arrived at this situation of Tax Credits and Housing Benefit because we don't insist that people are paid at a level of basic decency.

How about directing some of that bile at the big employers whose immoral pay policies make in-work benefits necessary?

Scrap the work placements then along with tax credits. Win win, no business gets anything and the person doesnt get thrown money at simply for having sex at the right time of the month. Somehow I expect that wouldnt go down well either as the sense of entitlement of many is astounding.

Yes the workfare scheme has costs but its the clear message being sent that the state will no longer tolerate people able to work not doing so. That its no longer a lifestyle choice and that people should think very wisely before having children as to how they will provide for them bith in their current circumstances and should the future change.

Fideline, of course employers should be bought to question if doing something illegal. They would be very daft to be paying under NMW though. NMW was campaigned for and some jobs simply dont warrant a high salary. Take home pay also has a lot to do with the individual. You cant moan that a NMW salary doesnt cover an adult and children if you only work 16 hours likewise 35 hours not covering two adults and children.

Why cant we plough the money that is being paid to employers under the work placement scheme to fund adult education placements?Same rules could be applied,train or lose your benefits,and people would me given more choices instead of hundreds chasing one unskilled vacancy

I'm talking about employers that ARE paying the NMW happy.

You're right happy. The sense of entitlement is simply astounding.

Oh to live in Happymummofone's world, where no one is disabled, there are fulltime jobs for everyone and people never get widowed or left by a feckless twat. What a happy place that would be.

Oh and to preempt her response (if she even bothers), yes, I advance searched you. Yes, I suppose it is a little creepy but that's what I do when someone is so militant in their strange opinions. I go and see if they did what they demand everyone else should be doing. And when they didn't, I'm amused. So many hypocrites on here.