To wonder why people seem to have a problem with my 'lazy' lifestyle?

[Bumpandkind]

My dp and I both work part time. We don't own but happily rent a nice house. We have a son 4 why goes to school everyday of the week. We don't rely on anyone for money and have just enough for rent, food and a few treats. We can't for example afford a foreign holiday but we like caravan and camping holidays in the uk.
We can't really afford much new stuff but are happy with what we've got and can afford toys for birthdays and Christmas etc.

My days off look like this:
Get up at 5 and play with ds. He is awaiting a diagnosis of high functioning ASD and everyday starts at 5 and its full on play time till he goes to school. The chances of him playing alone or watching tv are zero so it's full on for a while.

I go back to bed after dp takes him to school and surface about 10-11ish

I then potter and do house work, go for an hour or twos walk and just enjoy myself. Ds comes home and it's the usual routine that most parent have in the evening.

The same goes for dp. He works about 4 shifts a week and when off does gardening, cooking and sleeping.
People often make comments that if we worked more we could have so much more but we're happy as we are. The same goes for more children. Ds is a star but as most parent of children with ASD, life can be hectic and unpredictable and we are happy with just the one.

People constantly have to let me know how busy their lives are and it makes me feel a bit guilty that mine isn't.

My DH and I both work full time, very long hours, and we have two DC. When we're at work we miss the DC terribly and wish that we could spend more time with them. And we're happy for our taxes go towards paying for public sevices and people who need benefits. But when it goes to people who can work but choose not to, then I can't help feeling bitter.

So, I think it's an ethical principle that one should contribute to society. If one chooses not to give, then please at least don't take anything.

I say live the life that makes you happy, life is short!

You do know that engaging in more wage labour doesn't necessarily mean you're giving more though, right elle? I mean general you, not you personally, I don't know what you earn or what childcare help you get and am not asking. Just checking you're aware that some people, if they worked more, would take more in childcare tax credits from the pot than they'd contribute in higher income tax.

I don't have an issue with people doing that, btw. Just want people to reflect on the fact that it isn't as simple as work more, put more into the pot.

"I think if you have the time to work more so wouldn't necessitate topping up by the state that would be the preferable option Gwenhwyfar...I'd have thought that was fairly obvious!"

Not really to me. There are people who work full time who get benefits as well and all families get quite a lot from the state. I don't see much difference.

"What if we all had this attitude? Where would the money come from to run the country?"

If we all worked part time, there'd be no unemployed people to start with and living costs would probably go down.

Nancy91 - that's all well and good but the difference is you earn enough to do these things, despite working less hours. In your position I'd do the same.

The OP on the other hand states that they can't afford to travel or buy new things and by the sounds of it, are just about getting by with the assistance of tax credits.

I have a problem with people working less hours and expecting the state to make up for the shortfall whilst the rest of us are busting our arses working full time.

Nothing wrong with working part time if you can afford to. But OP states they don't rely on anyone else for money, however they clearly do, the government!

It is obvious to me as most people I know would rather be as self sufficient as possible. If you work.full.time and still earn little enough to need benefits that is a different kettle of fish to two healthy adults both working part time and claiming while proclaiming that there is more to life than work. Well yes, there is, but if there weren't tax credits what would happen then?

The idea that anyone thinks that is ok, and doesn't see the difference between the two scenarios above baffles me entirely.

Totally agree Witsender

Sounds great. My friend is a single mum but her child's dad has her 5pm Saturday to 5pm Sunday. She works 4 days a week. She never stops complaining about how she can't advance in her career or afford things she wants due to her part time status. But yet she categorically does not want to work full time as she likes having a day off to relax and get things done. I find that irritating - work full time since you can or stick with the day off but accept that it does have implications for income.

That dumb fisherman story is so stupid. If that fisherman had gotten sick, he would have starved. If his family had gotten sick, they would have died for lack of medicine.

What a great life: complete financial insecurity and living completely hand to mouth dependent on no changes to climate and perfect health.

As long as you're self funding, fair play to you

Self funding would mean no tax credits.

The fisherman story doesn't cover what would happen when he is too old to fish and can't even do that.

Tax credits are only necessary these days because the cost of living, especially housing, has rocketed whilst wages have not. If everyone were paid the full value they bring in to their employer (I know this is not economically viable, but supposing they were) and rents were at the level they used to be a mere couple of decades ago, we could all afford to work part time if we wanted to. It sounds as though OP and her OH are working somewhat more than one full-time person between them and raising a somewhat more than usually challenging child. I say good for them.

I used to be one of those mums who didn't stop from waking up in the morning till I went to bed around 11.30pm after working 13 hours most days... and then I had a bad accident at work (I worked in the care sector) and am now disabled, need help from my partner and daughter to do simple things like get my socks and shoes on, and most of my days are now pretty "lazy" and I hate it!

I know I get looked down upon by members of my extended family bcoz I don't work, my partner cares for me but does NOT claim any form of benefits as she works every Sunday, cooking and delivering Sunday roasts to people's homes.

Honestly, I don't care what people think of my lifestyle bcoz I know I am a great mum and always there for my almost 16 year old daughter (I've only got the one) and for my family (I cared for my dad until he passed away last year)

As long as YOU are happy with your life and living situation, then sod what anyone else thinks lol we're all different for a reason... life would be ferkin boring otherwise 😂

I think that's a perfect work balance and financially it is the same as having one parent working and one sahp. Except no one gets burn out

ginger

but you are disabled. Totally different situation.

OP and her DH are both perfectly healthy and still expect the taxpayer to part fund their lifestyle. I really wish TC weren't available in such circumstances. It is so hard to get the right support for those in need (one of my DC is severely disabled and we get very little help).

Congratulations to you for not being materialistic in this crazy world. You are happiness doesn't depend on money and that is a very good lesson for your child. The only thing that comes to mind is security if for whatever reason your partner can not work (my husband was off work for medical reasons for 6 months). Life has a way of throwing s**t at us. The other thing is the pressure of being the sole earner for a family. If your husband is truly OK with it, why not. I don't like people glorifying being busy!!!

Agree with a pp...Tax credits shouldn't be available to prop up two-parent households where both are choosing to work part time because they like the lifestyle.

Absolutely baffled at how many people have said 'do what suits you' - like the OP is a child who chooses to do the path of least resistance instead of responsible adults who should plan for the future.

Accepting money from the state, one in the couple doesn't have a pension at all and the other so little that it'll probably be negligible, probably have limited savings and don't seem to have any consideration for saving for their son to ensure he's okay, given his potential diagnosis. All of this sounds hopelessly pie in the sky and flaky but, hey, keep on spending your afternoons pottering cuz that's what you like to do...!

Perfect example of libertarian ideals related to people's personal life ('I'm going to do what I want to do... the state shouldn't interfere') yet with expectations of a social state that will look after them if their choices don't work out.

Oh windy do get in the bin.
At the end of our lives we are not going to wish we'd lined the pockets of the Toriesand their tax evading mates, we are going to be glad we spent time nurturing our relationships and enjoying the simple things that money simply can't buy.

Give it up Butthe. I t has nothing to do with lining the Tories' pockets... that sort of thinking perpetuates this kind of lack of planning that the OP is demonstrating.

My exDP's parents were like this - didn't want to put money away (life is for living and all that), didn't have a pension or life insurance. They struggled their way into old age, left a lot of debt and their kids to cover things.

It all comes down to values. I personally think as parents we have an obligation to do our best to ensure we're okay for the future, so we're not a burden on our children or the state in old age, and that we don't leave our children in a difficult financial situation. But hey why bother - if it doesn't work out the state will intervene, right?

What makes you so sure that your way is better?
There are countless people who worked for Phillip Green's company 40 hours a week for their entire working life only to be left with Nothing. Nothing. While he galavants off in his tax havens.
It's sickening, we don't get recompense for working out sorry fingers to the bone, we just get health problems.

I don't think that one example - and of course there are few - is a good reason for people to avoid pensions. And if they're so against pensions they should invest in other ways.

While the sentiment of the 'live for today, you never know what's around the corner' is true, i hate the way it's bandied around as a way for people not to think about the future and essentially just do what they want. By doing so they embrace huge risks often to their detriment.

But sadly I'm probably in the minority in my attitude.

It's not about lining the Tories parties but responsibilities. It should never have got to the point we allowed people to have children with no plans to support them as they expect others too.

So many, as you can see from the posts, think others should fund lifestyle choices. If everyone did the same we would have no tax payers.

It's nobody's business but yours how you choose to live your life and how many children you have. You sound happy and content, don't change a thing unless you want to x