Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to wonder why people are entitled when it comes to benefits and general life?

430 replies

toomuchentitlement · 30/06/2015 14:50

It is becoming increasingly obvious, from threads here and conversations with people IRL, that quite a lot of people are so entitled. Obviously, everyone is anxious about the budget coming out on the 8th and what the proposed cuts will be, and so most of the talk has been revolving around benefits and the Tories (the party and those who voted for them). It is beyond frustrating how much entitlement there is in this country!

Firstly, there are people who have lots of children and then complain that the government doesn’t give them enough to feed their children. Well – the government (i.e. the taxpayer) had no part in having these children so should you not be grateful for whatever amount they do give you? I firmly believe that when you have children, they are your responsibility. This is where people say ‘Should it only be the rich that have children?’. No , just those who can afford children – if you can only afford one then stop at one. If you cannot afford any , without ANY state help, then do not have any. If you choose to have more children than you can afford to have, then you accept that you and your children will suffer as a result of your selfish decision. Yes, I totally understand that sometimes you can have children that you can afford and then life changes course; these are not the circumstances that I’m talking about. I’m talking about people who are struggling with the children they have (or don’t have) and then decide to have more. Someone will talk about contraception failing – which is rare- and even then you have choices; abortion, adoption, keep your children and struggle.

Second key area I have noticed is about housing. So many people argue that they shouldn’t have to move house ( to find a job or to be in a cheaper area) because they have family around or they grew up in a certain area. Absolutely you don’t have to move – if you can afford to stay where you are without state help! If you are relying on the state to help you and complaining about lack of jobs, then you will have to move somewhere cheaper. Plenty of people move. Family will still be family wherever you are.

Finally (well there’s a lot more but I realised I’ve typed a lot) , is regarding work. There quite a few people who absolutely believe that we shouldn’t have to work more than part-time because its not family friendly. On some threads, I have noticed people make snide comments about ‘ what a shame they live to work and not work to live’ and insinuate that these are bad people. They will bitch about these people and tear down people in highly-paid jobs but then turn around and demand more from them (in tax). My point being ; if you do not approve of full time work or highly paid jobs, why then do you want to take so much from these people who earnt the money doing what you don’t approve of?

This was mainly to vent because it is getting ridiculous and I didn’t want to shout at my friends and family (the ones who also behave this way). Apologies for any typos in the very long post !

OP posts:
wafflyversatile · 30/06/2015 15:49

Well said holly

Backforthis · 30/06/2015 15:50

It's how all economies work. You can play around with cut but you need enough young, working people to keep an economy healthy.

www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/1997-05-01/japans-aging-economics

ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:50

What was the DLA criteria then because the PIP criteria is pretty lax.

I've recently been for reassessment and whilst I didn't get the mobility element (because I don't need it yet) I did get the care element. There are numerous websites that tell you how the points are weighted.

All I did was fill the form in and send off my medical reports - they couldn't argue with them.

Backforthis · 30/06/2015 15:50

Cuts

toomuchentitlement · 30/06/2015 15:50

Well, this thread is not about disabled people so please start another thread if you wish to talk about them.

And its because I feed for these children that I wish adults would take more responsibility and top having children they cannot afford ; For those that fall on hard times, I think they should be helped for a year to help get back on their feet.

Shove Okay....

Morethan I’m not just talking about the unemployed – I’m talking about people who do not work enough (enough = earn enough , through 1+ jobs, to support themselves and the children they choose to have). Parents are responsible for their children so I will not allow you to guilt me about that – take that to the parents who had children thiking someone else would pay for them. Again, I totally understand that circumstances change and I sympathise with these people. These are not the people I’m frustrated with and I have already said what I think should be done.

OP posts:
Penfolds5 · 30/06/2015 15:51

You're barking up the wrong tree, OP. We all are.

In reality, the people who cream off many, many more millions from others than all those on benefits, are the top bankers (and the whole banking system), landed gentry, and suchlike. In contrast, what's spent on benefits (and generally given to people who were born in less fortunate circumstances) is peanuts.

morage · 30/06/2015 15:51

And in the recent past, many severely disabled people simply lived in state institutional care. There often was no mythical family caring for them, because the burdens are huge. The support schemes that allow severely disabled people to do anything more at home than go to the toilet, eat and drink, are being slashed.

ghostyslovesheep · 30/06/2015 15:52

Come on now you know you are only allowed to discuss the popular cuts - you know to the people demonised by shit like benefit street and the tiny tiny percentage of people on benefits with more than two kids - which are used to justify the wider cuts and encourage us all to tut and be judge

Don't mention people with disabilities, children and the working poor

ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:52

It is galling when you get a new colleague who boasts they have no intention of working more than they need to because tax credits pay the rest and then they're ineffectual when at work.

wafflyversatile · 30/06/2015 15:52

And what happens if they are not 'back on their feet' after a year?

Jessica2point0 · 30/06/2015 15:54

OP, but by penalising parents after they've made the decision to have children, the government is pushing children who already exist in to poverty. It's like saying "let's cut state pension to make people save for their own retirement". It may work, it may not. But in the mean time you have a lot of people living in poverty.

ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:54

If we want to discuss the really expensive benefits then let's talk about pensioners. They cost more than the other groups put together but are always always protected. Why? Not all pensioners are poor little old grannies who don't have tuppence ha'penny to rub together. Why do they escape the cuts and means testing?

andyourlittledogtoo · 30/06/2015 15:54

dances - very good post!

morage · 30/06/2015 15:54

ChuffinAda - I know many people on DLA now do not get PIP. And it is not just about medical reports, it is about the impact your condition has on you. Unless you have something straightforward like paraplegia, for most people, a condition affects different people in different ways. Certainly people with autism are supposed to find it much harder to get PIP than DLA.

ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:55

Institutions are coming back though by stealth. Supported living accommodation anyone?

Sandpipernest · 30/06/2015 15:55

But the Working Time Directive says nobody should regularly work more than 48 hours a week, because working longer than that has a negative impact on your health. Your health is much more important.

Most of the higher rate tax payers subsidising those working far less than those hours, didn't get that memo.

ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:56

As I said I have a fluctuating condition and they ask how it affects you the majority of the time. So if the majority of the time you can make a simple meal but need prompting you get the relevant marks. Majority time being 4 days or more a week.

ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:57

I'd argue

shovetheholly · 30/06/2015 15:57

I don't see paying higher rate tax as subsidising other people. I see it as paying our dues to society. Frankly, I think we should probably pay more - it would be well worth it to end inequality.

toomuchentitlement · 30/06/2015 15:58

ghostly Depending on the benefits you receive, you would be those not earning enough i suppose

Pen I have to disagree. I assume you are talking about tax cuts? This is different and actually supports the second post I made. this is allowing people to keep more of their own money as opposed to taking it from the, to give to others. I do believe in paying tax btw but don't believe these people are bad because they want to keep their money. Not when compared to people who want to take others' money (in the simplest of terms obviously)

Right, back to work - will respond when I can

OP posts:
ChuffinAda · 30/06/2015 15:58

I, and a couple of my colleagues with different disabilities, feel that in a way having a leg removed is far less disabling than living with a chronic pain condition or a mild learning disability. But it's hard to explain that one to some elements

BishopBrennansArse · 30/06/2015 15:58

People bring up disability not to derail but because disabled people ARE being disproportionately affected by the cuts.

Chuffin I'm genuinely pleased you've not been. We have, many people we know have. You are the exception rather than the rule and I'm not just talking about benefits I'm talking about cuts to education and social care.

It's all a bit 'I'm alright Jack' really isn't it?

ghostyslovesheep · 30/06/2015 15:58

If I increased my hours (can't due to pay freeze) my ctc would also increase to cover child care!

Here's the thing though - in 6-8 year I'll have no childcare costs, ctc will drop and eventually cease and I will still be working and paying tax ...

ghostyslovesheep · 30/06/2015 15:59

As I have done for the past 28 years btw

morethanpotatoprints · 30/06/2015 16:00

OP, I think you are very guilty whether you will allow yourself to feel like this or not {grin]
I think it's disgusting to start a thread where you bash people who receive benefits and decide the deserving and the undeserving.
Oh and by the way, you are talking about me, as I don't work and have had tax credits since they first began in the 90's.
I didn't feel entitled to them but took them like many others did and like most people took their cb.
You need a lesson in history, then come back and vilify those who are entitled to benefit, it isn't their fault.
Finally, DC is the person who has described tax credits as benefits, they were fine until then. Nobody batted a bloody eye lid, the same as cb.
Are you old enough to have received cb/ do you receive it now?