AIBU to think the govt should do more to help/support single people?

[windygallows]

Increasingly I've become more aware of how how single people really struggle in a society geared towards couples. Not only is it pretty hard to get by financially or even to afford a house as a house as a single person, but aside from a small council tax rebate there is absolutely no tax relief or support given by the government. One person paying all bills in a system which 'assumes' and sets couple-dom as the standard.

Surely the govt could intervene by, for instance, setting a different/reduced tax code for those who are single than those in domestic partnerships/couples. Being single is usually out of people's control, often down to fate, and shouldn't be penalized.

I've been single for the majority of my life and vividly recall how much better off I was in the 10 years I was with ex-DP; it was a marked difference. I've seen accomplished, but solo, friends struggle. I certainly don't want to hope and pray that my DCs meet someone just to ensure they have a good quality of life and, as a society, it sends a pretty rubbish message that being independent means that you're likely to have a reduced standard of income.

They want to encourage marriage which in return reduces the burden on the state

DF is married. Own house all paid off. Gets a great pension. Gets winter fuel allowance. Free bus travel. Plus the Govt gives him a tax allowance as well. The Govt does a great job of helping him even though he doesn't need help.

Not bad.

Your mistake there is thinking its about the individual, it's not.

Which proves the argument others were proposing therefore which others refused to see, that it is more expensive to be single!

No, it doesn't.

It's more expensive to have a more expensive lifestyle, no matter what your circumstances. All the single people I know are much better off than I am, in a one income with multiple children family, but so what? It's not about individual circumstance.

You can't force people to get married. Or to be in a couple.

The Govt is ignoring this ticking time bomb. Millions of people who will have no money in the future. When they retire, the State pension will be low and many many people will NOT have a place to call home because they could never afford to buy.

They can't afford to build up a pension because they have been struggling to pay bills.

So what's going to happen?

I bet all those single teachers, retail workers, emergency service workers and armed forces personnel love being able to go on holiday exactly when they please. Or not.

Although I understand where ur coming from i also think if ur living alone alot of other bills will be cheaper to. Gas electric water food etc. So it kind of evens out. It would be abit unfair that if because ur single you got special treatment because others have found someone to share there life with. Okay they have (maybe) got a higher income. But then they also may have children, more then one bedroom, more food more gas more electric more water etc. And how easy would it be for people to be in a relationship and lie to the government so they can have 2 houses rather then one. Sell both become a couple and reep the benefits of that also?

he Govt is ignoring this ticking time bomb. Millions of people who will have no money in the future. When they retire, the State pension will be low and many many people will NOT have a place to call home because they could never afford to buy

That's equally true of couples as well as singles. As well as ex couples. Everyone.

Gas electric water food etc

Cheaper - but not half the price.

user How strange. I'd say 80% of the single people I know are worse off than most couples I know. Almost all couples I know own their properties and most single people I know rent.

That's equally true of couples as well as singles. As well as ex couples. Everyone

Ex couples - well quite. A lot of people separate. So that's more single people.

A ticking timetomb. The UK is a low wage economy relative to the cost of living in this country.

Boosh Not automatically. The cost of heating a one-bed flat with two people in it is the same as a one-bed flat with one person in it; but the bill is split in two.

no one has it easy, no one

try being the lone earner for a SAHP, and 2 kids

my single friends have more money than me

I, in reply, ask why it's the government's business to subsidise married couples with a married couple's tax allowance?

I think you need to take a closer look at this policy before assuming the government "subsidises married couples". Governments make policies to encourage the population to behave in a way that they want them to. This policy is very clearly to encourage married couples to live in particular manner. That is that they want married couples to maintain 'traditional' roles where one is the breadwinner and the other stays at home doing childcare or domestic chores. Some couples, where both work but one works very part time and/or is very lowly paid may also benefit, but the main beneficiaries of this policy are those couples with one higher-rate taxpayer and one traditional SAHP. There is no 'married couple's tax allowance' for any married couple where both work and earn over the personal threshold.

I think the point the OP is making is that no one talks about single people. It's always hard working ordinary families.

Single people are invisible in policy.

"So for example with the single occupency room - what about the fact that you can choose to go on holiday wherever you want - no compromise with a partner. You can also go when it suits you/your work best, no negociation with a partner to find a week off that is convenient to both of you. Less chance of holiday leave being cancelled. etc."

I dont really understand this argument - if youre living in a single occupancy room, then you dont have wads of spare cash to go on holiday, especially once youve paid all the heating bills (the same regardless of occupants), the council tax (75%), the rent (not half the rent for half the house size), the car (the same cost regardless of number of passengers)...

I think a lot of couples think single = the same joint salary the couple has but they get to spend it all themselves. And surely you sometimes get to choose where you go on holiday as a couple?

I think the point the OP is making is that no one talks about single people. It's always hard working ordinary families

That's because government policies, subsidies, all that jazz, are intended for the sections in society that need assistance. They talk about families because its the children than are the interest of the government, not the adults. They also talk about the elderly, the disabled etc, all of whom are as likely to be single as anyone else.

The people who are not very much talked about are the people with the capability to look after themselves. The government isn't supposed to making everyones lives perfect for them. You're meant to shift for yourself as an able bodied adult.

User Why do married couples need assistance simply for being married?

A house is a lot to take on as a singleton. I think there could be more imagination when it comes to housing single people.
You could try a flat share?
Also people in coupledom sometimes have one income supporting several people so its actually harder than being single then.

Shatners

I addressed that point above. It's to further mysoginistic Tory values to encourage women to stay in the home.

User Why do married couples need assistance simply for being married?

They don't. But as has already been explained, they are incentivised to do so because married people are statistically less likely to need state assistance. And it's financially and socially preferable for couples to be married before they have children.
You don't think they do it for no reason, do you?

Sorry, user, I was specifically addressing your comment that "That's because government policies, subsidies, all that jazz, are intended for the sections in society that need assistance". As you've now agreed, married couples don't need assistance. It may have other benefits as far as Government are concerned.

Some married couples may need assitance. Some may not. But that isn't the point. Many monetary incentives are to subtly make the population act in ways the government deems to be in the best interests of society as a whole, it's not about personal circumstances.

If single people house share then they're not paying all the bills by themselves. How is that any different from sharing with a partner financially? Having one house or flat per person is never going to be an efficient use of housing stock, utilities or money.

I was never saving more than when I was sharing with housemates. We often cooked communally and split all bills. Moving in with my partner doubled my rent and bills because we were splitting them between less people, and then becoming a SAHM meant we were paying four times that original amount from one income.

The poor young singletons I've known in work were all the ones living in a flat or house on their own. They could have chosen to house share too but preferred the expense over the negatives of sharing. I don't see why society should subsidise that choice.

fruu's correct why should someone pay less for the exact same product just because their single say for example your single paying x amount if council tax then a partner moves in, in your logic then they should pay more because of it that dosnt seem fair

Fru Very few singles of my experience who houseshared did communal cooking because their working hours tend to vary hugely.

I've just looked at how much a room in a houseshare costs on average where I am. £500 per month for one room including bills. I've just added up my mortgage for my one-bed flat and the same bills I would pay (ie, water, electricity, council tax, broadband). Comes to £575 per month. Interesting.