Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

To think that people living on welfare shouldn't be running off every five minutes for a new tattoo or piercing?

999 replies

allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 17:02

I'm probably going to get shot down for this, but I just had a little disagreement with a woman I know. She posted a photo on Facebook of a rather large tattoo on her forearm that she'd just had done. Last month she had skin divers put in her chest and hand. The month before she had another shit tattoo.
This individual is single and has two children. She hasn't worked a day in the last decade, but is living off the state. Am I being a bitch by thinking she should spend the money she receives on feeding the children and keeping a roof over their heads? I noted that she feeds her boys Pot Noodle for dinner but makes sure she's got her fags too. It just annoys me.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:12

But she has got a fat arse and she is lazy. When did it become criminal to state the facts?

OP posts:
Sparklydress · 09/03/2017 23:12

I thought you weren't interested in what I was saying? Confused.
Read back, you are replying to me as if I were the poster.

Much as I don't agree with the op, the responses on this thread are just as bad. The jokes weren't funny either.

allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:13

It's ok Sparkly
I agree with you.

OP posts:
PortiaCastis · 09/03/2017 23:14

Those descriptors are not necessary OP

Dontactlikeyouknowme · 09/03/2017 23:15

Did you start this thread then,Sparkly?

Booshbeesh · 09/03/2017 23:22

Totally agree if she can afford to smoke then she shud be able to afford the swimming lessons. But chances are she can afford them but just doesnt take the kiddies maybe because she isnt a confieent swimmer heself or doesnt like.pools or kids arent swimmers who knows.

However, the tattoo - i assume u seen all her incomings and outgoings all recipts and invoices and can count for every penny? Im guessing there is no chance at al that a woman on benefits with two small children could.possibly SAVE for the tatoo?? Or possibly KNOW a tattoo artist who has done it cheap for her????...

allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:28

But were that the case, that she'd saved for a tattoo, or used her birthday money or something, that would be absolutely her business. But she hadn't. She uses the only tattoo parlour in our small town. Every month she's down there, getting maimed by the tattoo 'artist'. She paid £165 for the latest one, whilst moaning constantly on Facebook or whenever you see her that she can't afford to do x and y. Always got fags, new piercings, nails done; but can't afford to feed the kids properly or do anything with them.

OP posts:
PageNowFoundFileUnderSpartacus · 09/03/2017 23:29

I agree with you that she's a shit mother. IME she'd be a shit mother on benefits or in work, because she appears to be inherently selfish.

Where I disagree is the suggestion that what people spend their money on should be subject to judgement, so long as it's spent legally. I don't agree that just because I pay tax - and have been a higher rate tax payer in the past - that other people's benefits are somehow "mine" to approve or disapprove of what they do with them. I happen to believe that people who qualify for benefits should have a decent standard of living, as should those in work, rather than poverty level subsistence. I don't believe that everyone on benefits is a saint or that there is no benefit fraud - of course there is, there are people who will scam every system. But I strongly believe that the current targeting and demonisation of benefit claimants is an ideological position not a financial one, and so I won't start down the slippery slope of condemning one easy target benefit recipient whose behaviour is reprehensible just because they happen to be behaving reprehensibly on benefits because where does that end? Who draws up the list of what is and isn't acceptable for claimants to buy? I'll condemn their behaviour as reprehensible regardless of where their money is coming from - to me the latter is irrelevant. It's the behaviour in putting herself before her kids that's shit - not the fact it's being done while on benefits.

As I said earlier - if you think she's claiming fraudulently, report her to DWP. If you think her children are at risk, report her to SS.

Redpoll · 09/03/2017 23:29

The thread above proves the point that now is no time like the better that the Tory government needs to ride this wave on the overwhelming opinion of the majority population to start having more control on what people do with state money.

People need to be controlled on every aspect of what they do if not conforming to the social expectations of the hard working classes.

The shameful thing is the government could do so much to give us the confidence that being a good citizen which contributes to this country is worth while.

DixieNormas · 09/03/2017 23:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:32

And also, for the record, she is very open about being on benefits and not working. She gets a bit of maintenance from the father of her second son, but that's the same principle to me. That's money paid for the upkeep and expenses of raising the child. It's not for fucking tattoos.
She was offered a job last summer. I remember it very clearly - barwork in a pub in town. Her mum was going to take care of the boys on Friday and Saturday evenings while she worked. She lasted 2 weeks and then got her p45 for being off sick more than she was at work. She claimed that she couldn't walk to and from work because it was too far. It probably was a bit of a trek, but Jesus Christ! Help yourself a bit.

OP posts:
Dontactlikeyouknowme · 09/03/2017 23:34

They dont wany to see it Dixie. It suits their agenda not to.

PortiaCastis · 09/03/2017 23:34

Yeah right

Dontactlikeyouknowme · 09/03/2017 23:36

I'm sure I can hear a dripping tap.

Sparklydress · 09/03/2017 23:36

Redpoll I agree, they are also doing the same with the self employed, implying that the majority are involved in tax fraud. A whole thread with lots of posters claiming that there is fraud, very different reaction unfortunately.

Catlady1976 · 09/03/2017 23:38

Re the welfare figures on the tax statements I have done some digging. I had heard before that pensions were more than other welfare benefits so the figures quoted don't add up.
This is because the welfare figure included social services spending and public sector pensions among other things I bet.
Great job Tories

Catlady1976 · 09/03/2017 23:39

So she didn't want to do a long walk home late at night. Op I don't blame her.

ClopySow · 09/03/2017 23:41

People need to be controlled on every aspect of what they do if not conforming to the social expectations of the hard working classes

Holy shit.

PortiaCastis · 09/03/2017 23:41

Yep great job tories by increasing my NI you'll bankrupt me and I'll be back on the scrounge

DixieNormas · 09/03/2017 23:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:44

Re the welfare figures on the tax statements I have done some digging. I had heard before that pensions were more than other welfare benefits so the figures quoted don't add up.
This is because the welfare figure included social services spending and public sector pensions among other things I bet.
Great job Tories

I also looked in to this when my tax statement came through. Welfare didn't include pensions.

OP posts:
allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:45

Sorry, my mistake. I see what you were saying now. It excluded state pensions. X

OP posts:
CrossCountryRunner · 09/03/2017 23:47

Do you have a job OP or do you live off your husband?

allfurcoatandnoknickers1 · 09/03/2017 23:47

So she worked Friday and Saturday evenings but was sacked after 2 weeks because she was sick more than she worked. So she did one shift then ?

I don't know exactly, but she got a job and we were all like 'Well done, Xxxxx. That's great!'
She started the job, moaned a lot on Facebook about it, quit.
Her twin told me she received her p45 through the post because her attendance was less than 50 %

OP posts:
AutumnBlossom · 09/03/2017 23:48

Interesting post OP...

One thing that does annoy me is you have 'child' benefit, 'child' tax credit, 'child element' of working tax credit, plus with ESA there's a specific amount per child.

I can guarantee you that some poor children rarely see any of it, they might get fed, have a roof over their heads, but they'll be sent to school in a uniform almost threadbare, shoes that have holes in and are crippling the poor children's feet. It's almost guaranteed if there's a trip the parent will not pay.

I read the post about oh the 3rd child rule was unfair, some one deciding to reopen an old thread. My thoughts were firstly after you have baby two, it's pretty much in your mind if it's time to get permanent contraception or whether you want another, so surely you would keep baby stuff, unless stained to hell or broke beyond repair.

It seems like a fair % of those lucky enough to receive tax credits, have their own plans for the money, it doesn't always involve DC's which infuriates me so much. Although they generally fall into the ball pit of going OTFT for birthdays and Christmas. A room full, 5 foot high with presents.

I recall having an interesting conversation once with a parent who was annoyed some uniform allowance was being cut. It cost so much they really relied on said allowance. I joked but you've got a massive TV & the full Sky package right. I was ready to apologise for the lack of taste in my joke, this person though went mental. All the electronics were from Brighthouse, yes they had the full package, but they only go out once a week so they class it as entertainment.

I'm like woah the cost of a months full Sky package is pretty much what this allowance is. If you cut down movies, sport, HD, just 1, you'd have enough saved to buy the yearly school blazer. Again she went off the deep end how her husband likes sports and her kids like movies. No one in the house worked. I'm thinking firstly Brighthouse, why not a hand me down or second hand TV/Blu-Ray thing/Kitchen Appliance. You'd save a fortune, plus once paid for you don't need to worry about meeting payments.

We have a mantra you save to buy, so we put as much as we can away for emergencies, where possible we buy second hand. Moving onto Sky, that is a luxury, not an essential. If you can't afford your kids uniform something has to give. But she kept on that high horse. I didn't even know the woman, we had a mutual friend in common, luckily said friend spoke up and agreed with me. Yes the cuts are crappy, but she lived in a nice house on a new estate, got everything new from Brighthouse, not sure how with them not working, as I thought you had to be working.

How pissed off are the hard working neighbours going to be, who slave to pay their mortgage and bills, she had a better house than most of the estate and lived to the last penny. I doubt neighbours would be at all impressed that she lived such a lifestyle for free, whilst they bust a gut to do the best for their kids.

I've even got family members who consider Sky a cheap babysitter.

As long as I've got a radio I'm happy.

It just infuriates me that the benefits that are child based, seldom reach the child. You couldn't make it up, the woman about the uniform grant, happily admitted to using food banks as often as entitled, as they provide lots of household staples, saving them money. Free school meals meant a sandwich for tea was fine, which I guess it is.

You can see why benefit recipients get a bad name.

Benefits can be spent on whatever the person wants, but I think it does take the piss slightly, when people work hard for what they have, then see others not working having the time of their lives.

It makes it hard for genuine people as there's such a stigma. People are genuinely apprehensive of applying in case they get compared to the cousin who hasn't lifted a finger in their life, you've worked till it really wasn't sustainable, that really is crushing.

So I'm sure there's many who say you don't know if they've an invisible illness, you don't know why they claim. You can't judge, one day that could be you. You are right, one day it could be me, but my priorities will always be on having enough to fall back on if something breaks, over a tattoo, or whatever else people deem frivolous.

Swipe left for the next trending thread