Sense of entitlement to the benefit system

[user1482079332]

I might be abit antagonistic here but wondered if my opinion is shared at all. I grew up on welfare, Very poor at times no food or electricity. Fast forward, Im now a single mum getting ready to go back to work. I have been offered a job full time that will mean I earn alot more in the future, it's worth the short term sacrifice of juggling it all and being skint for awhile . Prior to this I was making arrangements to go back to work part time in a very low paying job. I couldn't get over how much I would receive in benefits working only 16hours a week. There was very little financial incentive to work full time and admittedly if I didn't have this job opportunity I would more than likely stay part time and receive enough in benefits that's I'm on equivalent my previous full time job salary before I had a baby. I can't help but think this creates dependency and entitlement. I had a friend recently earn more and she complained that her benefits had been reduced as a result. I think the benefits system in this country Is a mess and there should be more incentive to work full time than part time if your fit and well.

I dont know, but I thought that Universal credit will change the rules on this?

Universal credit was supposed to ensure that every extra hour worked paid, which originally meant people should have kept at least roughly a third of each extra pound earned, but during its introduction I think they've made some changes (to save money) that resulted in there being a narrow band where all your extra earnings are lost. I read this a few years ago, don't know if it's still accurate.

But the zero hours can work in some instances. When DS was at uni he was on a zero hours contract, which meant he could come home for holidays or not work if he had exams, as he didn't have to work.

Wow disappeared to Lidl and come to a real mix bag of opinions. Just to clarify my Gripe is that if I was to work part time in a low paying job I'd be on the same salary as if I worked full time by being topped up by wtc, hb and CB. Disabilities, death ect is a different argument and thread altogether and at no point have I called anyone lazy ect there all your own thoughts. I don't think benefits should be reduced more a shift in its dispersion so that it's more financially sensible to work full time. Few people have mentioned how pointless it would be with childcare costs ect to work full time which I think is inherently wrong, I don't think the state system should make up the shortfall to allow people to stay at home working just part time. Also I vote greens.

the solution surely is to increase wages and not to decrease benefits!

So, is someone seriously suggesting that single parents are supported and paid for by the state? They choose unwisely with regard to men, have a child or two and then come on here complaining they need to be supported

There is so much, wrong with this it is so hard to know where to start. So I'll just pick up on the 'choose unwisely' issue. For now.

Seriously? Who on earth do you think you are to judge every last single parent? What is it about your life that makes you so much better than the rest of us?

Do have a read of some of the plethora of literature available on single parenthood, abusive relationships, domestic violence, affairs, relationship breakdown etc. etc. etc. etc. Then, when you actually have some evidence, stats, that kind of things, do come back and have a proper conversation about what it is to be a single parent.

My starter for 10: widows.

I mean seriously, all those widows should have picked healthier men, shouldn't they?!

I totally agree needs

I suppose that I should have been a mind reader before getting with my DD father who later came out as gay because of course that is all on me.

Yay! More fuckers who want to cut my money, whilst I look forward to yet another winter wondering which rooms to heat, and whether I can afford it.

But , aj you can't compare your single university student son. With no mortgage or children. To that of a 30 something bloke with children and a partner to keep, plus mortgage rent and bills ect ect.
Another case of mine are alright, Jack.
You are aware aren't you that the unemployed are forced to do zero hour contract jobs of their money is stopped. Its not a choice.
David Cameron sat in front of Jeremy Paxman 2 years ago and even admitted himself that. He couldn't like on ZHC, but. Yet its okay for the general public to live on one.
A lot of people don't like Jeremy Paxman. I do though. He grills them and asks them questions that you're screaming at the telly

I think there is a big difference between those who really need support and those who just think they should have it for an easier life. Unfortunately drawing that line is difficult.

I work with a lot of people on benefits.
Some are in real need and, quite honestly, deserve more money and support than they get
Some are pulled down by the system into a cycle of dis-empowerment and depression and would have had a better future without benefits as they'd have had more self-esteem and drive
Some are just selfish chancers and would find ways to abuse any system to steal more for themselves
Some are mixtures of more than one of those
But if we start trying to differentiate between them who makes that decision? How can any system define people into deserving and undeserving, particularly based on forms or short interviews?

Things do need to change so we can get more of those benefits to the right people but I really do not know how

I think some people just read the title and not my post, all that's been heard is a criticism of benefits and it's got peoples heckles up. It's a real shame that any discussion of benefit system and your reduced to a nasty party supporter and want to attack the poor

1. Higher minimum wage
2. Proper employment rights for everyone working, no matter how many hours you work or how long you've worked there. Crack right down on this zero hour contract "self-employed" gig economy bullshit.

The benefits system is screwed up just now. Because our employment market is totally screwed up.

Goady thread appears the same week as the election. Coincidence? I think not.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2941906-The-horror-of-Universal-Credit?pg=1

I don't understand how anyone can live on benefits if they are just "lazy"?

I've had to give up my teaching career due to disabilities. I cannot get one benefit. Not one. This is because my DH works full time and we aren't entitled to anything but we can't afford to live on £300 a week. We're having to use food banks now, are more and more in debt every day and I can't leave my room because I can't afford a wheelchair and have been told I'll have to self fund.

I really don't get it.

We also have no hot water/heating because we can't afford oil.

Hillingdon

You posted

So, is someone seriously suggesting that single parents are supported and paid for by the state? They choose unwisely with regard to men, have a child or two and then come on here complaining they need to be supported

Perhaps go and have a read about the case of Natalie Hemming.

Do you think she would have been better to leave the man who eventually killed her? I do....and had she come on here complaining that she needed to be supported I would absolutely have told her where and how to get that support.

Still in your little bubble she did the right thing...stayed with her well earning but abusive husband until he beat her to death. Still at least she wasn't a burden on the state eh? None of your taxes had to support her in life.

Inthebenefittrap you seem opposite end of scale receive nothing yet if your a single part time mum you'd be quids in. This is entirely my point, the distribution of welfare is unfair and not fit for purpose.

*single parent not part sorry, my post wasn't an attack on the entire benefit system but my own very specific circumstances.

Yes, if I was single I would get ESA and full Housing Benefit as well as a council tax reduction. It's absolutely ridiculous - I and my son are being punished because I'm disabled.

Awlook
I realise that....it's why I said 'zero hours can work in some instances'.

I'm still shocked that £1,600 a month after housing costs isn't considered a lot of money.

I don't think zero hours are a new invention. Arent they the same as casual or temping?

My DS likes zero hours, casual/temping as it allows him to work the hours he can whilst at university and we have one of the highest employment rates for a long time so surely if you want a full time job you apply for a full time/part time role?

I ha

Don't worry op if theresa may gets in I'm pretty sure all single parents will be back to living in utter poverty and I sense that will give you some sick satisfaction.

"So, is someone seriously suggesting that single parents are supported and paid for by the state? They choose unwisely with regard to men, have a child or two and then come on here complaining they need to be supported"

Your ignorance is staggering. I was married happily for more than 20 years before the violence started. Thats longer than anyone I know in my generation. My aoologies for choosing unwisely.

ffs.

Working tax credits and child tax credits are the biggest scam out there: if they didn't exist, big employers (Yes, like you, Tesco) would have to pay their employees enough to live on, as otherwise, people wouldn't work for them. It's bloody appalling tax payers (including the very people who receive them) are subsidising big business in this way.

Then there's the job creation scheme which is the processing and paying of tax credits on top. How about not taking the tax off people in the first place, instead of taking it away and then giving some back via this process?

All they do is let multinationals make bigger profits at the expense of the taxpayer, and allows the exploitation of people in unskilled jobs (mainly but not solely) and make people feel as though they are on "benefits".

Or working full time if you've bothered to read my post user