Benefit Britain - the irony

[Mhoys]

Years ago there was no Housing Benefit as far as I remember - talking about growing up in the 1960s. Or even Child Tax Benefits, etc etc. Now it seems so many people get these, even people working in reasonably good jobs. The Government is meant to be anti-benefits but expenditure on all this must be significant. Some of this may be due to a small rise in living standards since then. But also have wages become so low relative to living costs, that the state is effectively subsidising private enterprise? There is nothing necessarily wrong with this I guess, but isn't the government "in denial" when few ordinary people could afford a family or rent or buy a home in the South at least , so the taxpayer/State has to stump up? I have some thoughts but am also genuinely puzzled ...

No tax credits at all for those without kids. There was one which was £50 a week and my rent then was £47.95. ppl talk about the booming 90s. Well it wasnt booming everywhere. This was why there was a fair amount of long term unemployment in my area back then and this was the reason why.

I agree. I was unemployed at the time the minimum wage came in. Before that there were plenty of jobs advertised in the job centre for £1-£1.50 an hour. I even had one for the princely sum of £1.90 an hour myself in the late 90s. It was in the a Midlands town that didn't recover from the pit closures and the early 90s recession. The dole would try and steer you to jobs where you'd be working full time for £80 a week and it would cost you more than you'd get from the dole on bus fares.

The minimum wage at least forced employers to pay something closer to what a human could live on and provided an immediate and sizeable uplift in pay for many. Those who are saying it drove down wages are talking out of their hats, or were living in fairly salubrious locations where work was plentiful.

YY Dylan. People who need to check their privilege.

billsykesdog where did i say the OP was doing the benefit bashing?? I just have been around musnet and the internet in general for long enough to know how these threads go. I was just pointing out that housing 'benefits' are not a new thing. I made no comment at all on anything else the OP had said.

Tax credits clearly give recpitents more money.
It allows employers to pay less wages.
Fine if you qualify. No arguments.
What if you are young, old or childfree?
What then?

Too right. As someone said on another thread. One half of Mumsnet doesn't understand how the other half have to live.

You see it all the time when people merrily dash off 'get a cleaner' , 'move to a bigger house' or 'buy a car' without even stopping by think these things are utterly beyond the reach of a lot of people.

user there are three of us on here who have explained to you quite clearly that the low wages came first.

There is no such place as LTB Avenue either.

The minimum wage was a godsend when it came in. But gradually it seems to have been eroded, whether through failure to keep pace with inflation or because of the massive increase in housing costs.

Aren't the government supposed to be rolling out the new Living Wage? That might give people more security than relying on top up benefits.

Universal income is being debated.
Hansard > hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2016-09-14/debates/16091439000003/UniversalBasicIncome
Research paper > researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CDP-2016-0167

The minimum wage was a godsend when it came in. But gradually it seems to have been eroded

Average pay rises have failed to keep pace with inflation since 2008. It isn't a phenomenon specific to the low paid, but they are most vulnerable as they have less slack than anyone else.

I shudder to think how low wages would have sunk in the last few years if there hadn't been a floor to them.

likedylan I have said this a million times. Actually it's 4/5ths of Mumsnet who don't understand how the other 1/5th live. When they glibly say "get a cleaner" they don't realise we are the cleaners. They have no idea what it's like to earn so little (while working a full time job each) that you are entitled to tax credits. That two full time incomes plus tax credits is still less than one of them earns.

That one child turning 18 means you lose £200 a month in tax credits, but your housing, food and utilities costs don't go down.

That your adult children get work, but they can't afford to move out because if they want to make something of themselves they need to do an apprenticeship which pays £3.30 an hour. How many of you can actually imagine earning £3.30 an hour?? For a 40 hour week, this equals £132 a week. With a bedsit at £350+ a month, how is any young adult supposed to manage?

My son wants to work. He just left school after A-Levels. Went to the job centre for help to find jobs. Oh no, he has to apply for benefits. But he doesn't want benefits, he wants help to find work. Nope, apply for UC then they will help. Except he applies for UC, which won't pay out for 6 weeks. But hey, that's ok, he lives at home. Right so he's an adult.....except we have to support him. From what? Our child tax credits that we don't get for him as he's an adult?!

People need to wake up and realise what is happening.

I'm a civil servant working full time and yet my income is so low that I qualify for tax credits...so even the Government do not pay their workers a fair and decent wage

KitKats ive actually seen some parents on here telling the childless/childfree that they should sofa surf to find work.

Luckily not everyone is that devoid of empathy. As a childfree person i bloody sympathize with the fact that many parents usually women are left without any Child Support from the father that has buggered off.

Helena, it's not just lone parents though. My husband works full time and I get the equivalent of a part time wage in taxable benefits as I am disabled. I worked for 23 years, paying full NIC to be entitled to this.

We are still expected to support our "adult" son until he finds employment. Even though he is 19 and looking for work. He has four interviews this week. What are we supposed to do if he doesn't get any of them? Starve him? Put him on the doorstep with his sleeping bag and a picnic?

I think the problem with being a lone parent is you only gave so many hours in a day, I'm constantly facing housing issues that if it was just me I could solve instantly, rent a room somewhere, buy a small flat, get a second job. When you have children there are only so many hours in the day, you have to live near schools, they need some space.

I'm old (well, oldish, another ten years to pension), and now childfree having brought up five kids as a lone parent. I still have to pay rent, council tax, food, water, electric etc just as I did when they lived at home (and two are at Uni so may well return at some point). I have a university degree (first class), but bringing up children as a lone parent meant not working a full time job (no family childcare and couldn't afford any for all five). I worked part time in a school in a job I was underqualified for.

And now I have no relevent experience to get a 'proper' job, so am stuck in MW job which (around here, very rural, HUGE unemployment) I am extremely lucky to have. So not everyone working low paid jobs are working their way up to something better, some of us are stuck there, unable to claim any benefits (not enough hours contracted, although usually work more). I am gradually sliding further and further down the scales, I rent (cheaply because I've lived here for ages), but if my landlord kicks me out because he wants the house back...that's it. I'm on the streets.

Zap, I don't accept that, you have options if you make the most of them now. Stay where you are for another 5 years and I agree you are buggered but if I was you I'd be making major changes quickly.

Pissed, erm, you not accepting Zaphod's story is not really relevant. It's a fact to Zaphod. I live rurally, there really are very few jobs and access to jobs in towns and cities is cripplingly expensive.

I do believe her, I just think to say she's stuck isn't actually the case, she will be if she stays

Pissed - there are various reasons why I don't/can't make changes to my life. I know what you mean, but moving/increasing hours etc are just not possible.

Single women without good earning power are completely buggered, really.

I'm not having a go just trying to think of ways to help. I'm honestly at the stage where I know I will be in a static caravan or something in my old age unless I can raise the funds for one of these part rent part buy retirement places but then you know you're pissing the kids inheritance away.
If you have a first class honours you have potential, you've just got to be a bit selfish and look after you.

Thanks, Pissed, I never took it as you 'having a go', honestly. I see your 'static caravan' and raise you 'room in a shared house' (we're a bit like the Mumsnet equvalent of the Monty Python Yorkshiremen...).

I know I could never cope with that, hence I'm working 24/7 now to improve our situation but not supporting and looking after my kids

Totally outing, what I said wasn't an apology or a non apology. It was my opinion and I stand by it. These threads always involve the op leaving and loads of posters talking about how terrible it is that we can't discuss. Can we just be clear, I did read the op and thought the same as a number of other posters. That the op was an attack on tax credits. Talk of tax payers stumping up and paying for benefits others those that can't earn enough. The op also failed to recognise that there has been some help for families in post war Britian. This was completely ignored by the op. Tax credits are the most misunderstood government initiative, particularly by those who are not entitled to them and leaves those who are reliant on them defensive about claiming them. Have a read of this blog which completely resonates with me although I'm not a carer, to give some insight to the sort of thing I mean.

mumvausterity.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/do-poor-no-longer-deserve-holiday.html

I can't really do anymore to explain why I responded in the way I did to the post. I am not apologising but I accept that the op may well have meant something different. However I have come back, she has not. If people want to keep copying and pasting my small contribution to this debate and wondering what I meant by it, well crack on.

I didn't realise that single low earners didn't receive top ups / tax credits?

Is there not another type?

clearly naïve!