To have zero sympathy for this woman

[wasonthelist]

The tearful woman on BBC Question Time claims to have been a Tory voter. She's reaping what she sows.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hame-you-hardworking-mums-tearful-6643284

grazia exactly.

I understand giving people some time to build the business , but it can't go on forever. I own my own business, if it wasn't making money I wouldnt expect to keep at it while claiming benefits.

It's seem strange that you can say you are working X amount of hours a week but have nothing to show for it and claim benefits. Surely at some point you have to make a decision on wether the business is viable or not.

Grazia The reason the Tories are rightfully in power is because those of we women who work full time got fed up of subsidising through high taxes women with large families of 4 ilke this woman has to work part time

If she got a full time normal job she wouldn't be fleecing full time single working mothers like I am.

She'd also be taking a job away from someone without dependants who wants to work full time. There aren't enough jobs to go round (at 40+ hrs a week.) Surely in this employment climate the last people to be expected to work full time should be those with caring commitments, disabilities that make it harder to work, etc.

In addition, someone else would have to look after her children and be paid for it - more expensive than supporting her directly.

What is the point?

And why are you so bitter about it? You chose differently from her. And if you're paying high taxes, aren't you better off than her?

I think the Tories despise family/friendships/anything human like love that doesn't make them money. They don't want people looking after their own children, even if it is significantly cheaper, becaue they want to break family connections and make it easier to use us as units of labour for their own ends.

(FWIW I do think the tax credit loophole with non-profitable businessess is questionable... although tbh single people without dependants should still be able to earn less than min. wage in SE - because their tax credit rate is lower than JSA.)

elementofsurprise the rules wrt TC's and self employment already changed as of April this year. And UC has it's own rules which are even sterner.

She is speaking out here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34548733
I am glad she's woken up - and realised that she needs to dig deeper into the rhetoric that politicians spout.

No one has asked the question, what did she expect the Tories to do for her?

Let's hope that she's helped to spark the debate which should have been had before the election, but the Tories managed to massage away.

I've waited and thought hard before joining this thread.... I sympathise with how upset she is. Life won't be easy for her. However, I'm in a household that is comfortable, doesn't need or receive any benefits, and is better off under Tory due to the tax threshold. I still didn't vote tory. I saw cuts to benefits as unpalatable because they affect human beings regardless of my situation. I think this woman wasn't thinking that way when she voted Tory. You tend to reap only what you have sown . In the meantime until this pig fuckers is voted back out, I'll keep donating to the food bank and giving my spare change to the homeless people I see while working because none of us has a safety net now in my eyes. We are all just a crisis away from crying about how we'll cope. And you reap what you sow.

I'm not bitter. I just voted to ensure these changes happen as did so many millions.

The issue of self employment is interesting. It was a well known Romanian scam in London to get a "job" being self employed selling the magazine but of course not making much money from it which then meant you got a raft of additional benefits.

No one has asked the question, what did she expect the Tories to do for her?

I think only she can answer that one.

And I wish she would!

Notasinglefuck you are right. There is virtually no safety net now and that's worrying. A crisis, illness or job loss is all it takes for everything to come crashing down. Some of the folk that are not bothered about the cuts happening to others would do well to remember that. Are you really so wealthy you would be able to manage if the worse should happen?

Grazia, i wanted the changes to happen too. Not because of bitterness like people think but the Tories were the only ones willing to bring an end to the abuse of the benefit system.

I don't care how many children people have, how many hours they work etc as long as they fund those choices themselves. The state should never be paying for those choices.

I do think they believe in hard working people to a point but the majority on tax credits either don't work or work part time. It's likely only a very small percentage work full time as the earning level is very low. They have raised the tax allowance and are raising NMW so people can earn more and keep more of what they earn. Whilst tax credits exist of course people will take advantage of them.

Blaming politicians for poor life choices is seen as the easy option.

MrsIts, there is still a safety net. JSA for those who lose jobs, ESA for sickness and PIP should a person fall disabled. That's what should be in place in a true welfare state.

It's the benefits that discourage people self supporting they are tackling, most claimants are physcial capable of work but chose not too or to just do enough to claim.

The safety net sucks for disabled people now. My old mum and step dad are in financial trouble now due to cuts. Step dad worked until his kidneys failed ( ignored advice to take time off work he couldn't afford to rest ) after an infection. He's had a transplant but now takes nearly 20 tablets a day and is tired and quite frail and has a suppressed immune system. He's been moved onto jsa, fit for work. Nobody will hire a 60 year old with recurring colds and infections, frequent time off for hospital appointments, and handfuls of medication 3 times a day. They've sold their home and now live in a small rented flat to try and get by. They don't feel as if they have a safety net. Mum looks after dd while I work so I can give her money without offending her. What did they do to deserve it? He got ill. They aren't the only people struggling right now and it will get worse.

Well I don't see my working part time as a poor life choice I'm afraid. It's a means to an end and I could type out a lengthy post as to why I do but it will fall on deaf ears and be seen as an excuse.

For sure we'd be better off and not have to rely on Tax Credits top ups if I could find full time work. But there isn't an abundance of jobs around as it is which doesn't help so what am I supposed to do. And surely working some hours is better than none at all?

And sorry I certainly don't feel bloody lazy working part time either. Far from it.

Yes Mrs I grew up in an ex shipbuilding town which is fucking desolate now. I too wonder where these jobs people are avoiding are.....They must be well hidden

Whether people should be part-time or not rather depends on your expectations of wages, really. In the past it was expected that one wage would support a family - a lawyer's wage would support a family with reasonable luxury, a nurse or policeman's wage would do it comfortably and if you were a bin man or something you'd need to watch the pennies.

Now, things have shifted. Employers aren't expected to pay workers enough to support a family any more. Here we are with the govt pushing women to work - the vast majority of families have 2 earners, often both full-time. Those who are part-time or SAHP frequently only do that because childcare costs are too high. Why do you think the govt are pushing that - that's right, it's because it's easier than pushing big corporations to pay proper wages.

It's all wrong that people on min wage need tax credits to survive. Companies must pay living wages - proper ones. The govt needs to force them to do it, but they won't because they're mostly funded by big business anyway.

needmorespace I hope they capitalise on it too. If the boot were on the other foot, Cameron and Osborne would think all their Christmases had come at once. They would be on the phone to this woman like a shot; they'd be mentioning her by name at every radio/tv interview (no matter what the subject) and parading her at the next party conference.

We cannot let this opportunity slip because we're angry about some goady fuckers on the internet nearly six months ago.

"I don't care how many children people have, how many hours they work etc as long as they fund those choices themselves. The state should never be paying for those choices."

Yet the state subsidises business to the tune of £98 billion a year in subsidies, tax waivers and incentives. The state is about to start subsidising land owning farmers even more than it does right now, the state gives tax breaks to private schools who claim to be charities. Facebook which can give massive bonuses worth £200,000 or so to each employee can then turn round and pay no tax, as do many other corporations, Osboune's own business paid no Corp tax yet directors walk away with millions. Yet corporations and the wealthy benefit MORE from the society we live in than anyone else and don't contribute accordingly. The cost of the changes to inheritance tax are worth over £1 billion alone.

Your personal responsibility rehtoric fails when this is brought into the case, devisive arguments and poor blaming are all you right wingers have.It’s the essence of Conservatism, this idea that almost everyone in life gets what they deserve, and as long as there’s some kind of mechanism for scooping up and transforming the occasional and rule-proving exception, then all is well.

You put it down to personal responsibility and choice, I'm so sorry that I chose not to be born to millionaires like Osbourne, Cameron and most of the front bench, how stupid of me.

The issue of self employment is interesting. It was a well known Romanian scam in London to get a "job" being self employed selling the magazine but of course not making much money from it which then meant you got a raft of additional benefits

Are you talking about the big issue?

cannot let this opportunity slip because we're angry about some goady fuckers on the internet nearly six months ago.

They won't capitalise on this. Because, as pp said, this woman may not lose anything. Also her circumstances won't promote much sympathy. She owns a business that makes nothing's and so live on benefits. Which is in all probability is a bit of a scam. If labour capitalise on this without really checking her out, they will end up looking even worse.

Yes they need to check her out. But even if her circumstances aren't quite what they seemed, my point is still the same: if some tory voters are already beginning to ask questions of this government then that should be welcomed, not sneered at. We can't afford to nurse grudges.

We don't know whether this woman voted Tory because she thought they would sort out people claiming benefits without realising that the Tories would put her in that category. What seems missing to me is she wasn't talking about a lack of support for getting a new business established, which should be one area where effort is concentrated if you don't want people on benefits. The Tories are supposed to be the party of business, aren't they?

Yes, don't think there is necessarily that much to capitalise on there

Many of the people affected do indeed work full time. Use the calculators if you do not believe it. My friend works full time, she is a single mum and will loose £1600. Another works 30 hours but calculated if she went to 40 she would lose far more. That is a disincentive.

I think definitely some mums are resentful that they 'have to work' whilst others stay home or work few hours and get topped up.

For me, I was a SAHM for 16 years (now am p/t). Loved every minute. Husband middle earner. Yet friends partners on low wages got tax credits, uni grants, etc to top up to the same as we as a family earned. I could look at this in two ways 1) it's not fair they have as much, what is the point earning more. (And therefore lets take it away so we feel better off). Or 2) how great that people are helped to live decently and lifted up to a decent level of income. This is the way I feel. I would rather everyone gets about the same so that all children etc have a decent life and chance. Why would making people earning less loose money and suffer a bit more improve my life/others lives?

I am not calling for everyone to receive the same by the way or communism. But there is an area of low middle income which seems most people are topped up to and to give a reasonable lifestyle.

I think the damage for Tories is already done. The image will stay in people's minds. On top of that all the damage they are doing to the NhS etc. Won't be long till they hit pensioners. Hopefully this will be the death of the Tory party.

The father of Tax Credits was introduced by Ted Heath's Conservative government and they have existed in various guises ever since. They enabled employers to keep wages "competitive".

Now Cameron's Conservative government thinks this is a bad thing. They think that the State should not be making up people's wages.

Nothing wrong with a change of heart or mind or policy.

What a decent government would do (i.e. one that gives a damn about all the people they govern), is to ensure an alternative is already in place before they stop the benefits.

Cameron's government haven't done this. They have callously yanked the rug from under people's feet and left them to struggle, while contemptiously labelling them as workshy, lazy scroungers.

A friend who works in a supermarket has a colleugue with no DC who is on 28 and a half hours a week. Shes been on 28 and a half hours a week for 4 years. Shes begged them to up them just an hour and a half a week so she can get tax credits but they wont. Apart from the runup to Christmas when it benefits them. Shes willing to do full time but they wont give her the hours. You have to work 30 hours minimum to get tax credits with no DC.

And yes she has tried looking for other work but the only thing available are part time jobs which clash and overlap with this supermarket job she already has.

I know that we'd be stupid to expect high standards of our politicians ... But really, does anyone on here think that it is OK for a politician to tell such a blatant lie about a central plank of their strategy?

I'll concede that sometimes election promises turn out to be unachievable - it's going to take a lot longer than 100 days to repeal the Human Rights Act. But promising one thing, then promptly doing the opposite, is quite different.

It would be just about excuseable if the decision hadn't already been taken - but I think it is now plain that when Cameron said no tax credits, he was telling outrageous porkies.

People in both sides of the political debate should be concerned about that. What else did he lie about? The referendum?