To think bringing kids up on no money would be misersble

[Strawberryblues]

I earn 35000 or thereabouts. Its not terrible. It means I only get cb.

After bills not much left.

How do people do it?

Housing benefit is deceptive though. Regardless of what your income or rent is, the maximum is capped at lha. So for arguments sake your rent could be £200 a week, and the lha £150. So they could calculate you can afford the £150 without hb, completely ignoring the extra £50 which using their calculations you can't afford. Or you could be awarded the full £150 and again be unable to afford the extra £50. Either way it's a lot to find on a small income. Especially when you bear in mind that the extra £50 could easily be the difference between privately renting a decrepit ex council and renting next door in better condition from the council.

I really think that when all adults are working and hb is a top up, they should use the actual rent for calculations, with the maximum you get capped at the lha. So in the example above the person who can afford to pay £150 still gets the £50 top up. Naturally you'd have to be willing to move to social housing if it became available. But nobody sane would object

BirthdayKake

Thanks, well I guess I’m viewing as additional income but obviously it’s not like that as the money will be earmarked etc.

@BirthdayKake I'm in the same boat but didn't know about the childcare fee help, I'm going to have to look into that, thanks!

We bring three kids up on my partner wage (around 15k), child benefit and a very small amount of tax credits. It's not easy but doable.

It's ok Queen.

If you're entitled to Carers Allowance, you're also entitled to 70% of your childcare paid, the same as if both you and your partner worked (you have to have a partner). It's amazing. I put my youngest in with a childminder twice a week, which gives me time to breathe! and blitz the house

Also, if you have a three or four year old and claim Carers Allowance and your partner works, you will get the 30 free hours

I can also add that my three kids have great lives. They're always on the beach, in the park, we paint, we make things. We don't go on expensive holidays (but we live
Next to a beach so don't need to), we don't have expensive out of school activities or expensive clothes & toys. But they have active, healthy and happy lives.

I genuinely would love help re council tax. People are paying £80 per month - ours is £190 and on an Instalment plan! Am i missing something?!

SleepingStandingUp, child tax credit, DLA, carers allowance, Child benefit. Child Tax Credit is for three children and get the higher rate personal care element for one child. My fourth child was born after the cut off point for the child tax credit cap.

People paying £80 a month will potentially have single person discount, live in houses/flats with a smaller footprint etc. They vary in different areas too.
Ours is £230 a month.

Mine's just over £80 a month. In a reasonable sized house, no single person discount. It's just a pretty cheap area and is in Band A.

However, I still don't understand the posters who are on 15k a year or less and saying they are doing fine. Even stripping back to basics completely, it still doesn't add up to me.

I detailed earlier on this thread exactly how it adds up. I earn 13k, claim no benefits whatsoever and still have money for everything. So just re-read the thread and stop making assumptions about people.

Hundreds of thousands of people that are entitled to claim benefits don't, I'm one of them. Why does everyone assume that because you earn a low income you claim benefits? My ex-manager drives a BMW claims tax credits. I earn less and have less (no car for example), but choose to be self-sufficient. It's like a broken record on here sometimes.

Only a very small % of the population are self sufficient. The vast majority use state schools and the nhs for starters.

The vast majority of people are also paying for the state schools and NHS. It's bullshit that the rich people are supporting the poor people, its mostly the other way round.

Only a very small % of the population are self sufficient. The vast majority use state schools and the nhs for starters.

Lol! Are you claiming that using state schools and the NHS mean you’re not self sufficient, as if being self sufficient means paying for private healthcare and education? In a country where we are specifically provided with state education and healthcare?

How about food, are you only self sufficient if you catch a wild boar from your own land and kill, cook and eat it yourself? Grow your own veg from seeds you foraged, again from your own land? I’m guessing you’d say going to a supermarket means you’re not self sufficient?

What a bizarre approach!

Presumably people driving on public roads aren’t self sufficient either?

Most people are not paying enough tax/ ni to cover their own use of state schools and the nhs.

And I didn't say anything about it being solely related to wealth. Maybe for the tiny minority at the top, but not necessarily all high earners.

Eg having 3 kids on the nhs, maybe two c-sections, average health but maybe one of you has a none disabling condition, 29 years of state education in total, free 15hours childcare, maybe some nhs counselling, 2 dc wear glasses, maybe another requires additional help to access mainstream school, and so on. You could easily pay tax on £100k and still not be a net contributor.

Someone ridiculously healthy could have an easy home birth, and never need the nhs other than dental checks for them or their one dc, not use state education and so on, and be a net contributor on £20k.

Either way I don't think there's any moral high ground, it isn't just about contributing to cover ourselves, and (usually incorrectly) suggesting we are paying for lower earners. It's also about people with lower needs covering those with greater needs.

Some people up thread are getting more with disability benefits on top than I earn. As my wage is higher than their salary it's safe to say I pay more towards the nhs, and yet cost it less. But I don't see it as being that I, or anyone else are paying for someone else. Simply that we rightly contribute to a system that we are damn lucky not to need at present.

Same for benefits. If you're using any state funded resource you aren't in a position to feel superior to people using different resources.

walking we are provided with those from the public purse, they still cost to provide.

I'm not suggesting we shouldn't use them, I'm just saying that if you are doing you aren't in a position to call yourself self sufficient.

Claiming tax credits, using the nhs, state schools etc are all perfectly acceptable things to do, it's what they exist for. I just object to people cheerfully using the latter two but judging those who need the former.

I get what you’re saying hog, you’re coming from a good place from the sounds of it (saying people who are using nhs for example shouldn’t judge people getting benefits as it’s all the same in terms of relying on the state). It came across very much like you were judging anyone who uses ANY of those services though (saying you’re not self sufficient is usually an insult) instead of comparing them to show that none should be judged.

I believe it’s impossible to be ‘self sufficient’ though. Full stop. And I do think there’s a difference between using a service you’ve contributed towards by working and paying tax, and solely taking by receiving benefits and not working at all. I’m aware the latter is quite rare and most recipients of benefits work or are unable to work and should be provided for.

Do you really not see a difference in receiving money in the form of WTC (which enables employers to keep their wages low) and receiving a service that has been set up to be available to ALL? So many people are struggling who are ineligible for any help at all, while every single person in the country is eligible for NHS care and to send their child to a state school equally.

Same for benefits. If you're using any state funded resource you aren't in a position to feel superior to people using different resources.

I'm not feeling superior, I just don't want to take from the system when I don't need to. 13k is completely adequate for our needs. I don't need a BMW, or any car, I don't need to buy more stuff than I do already, I don't need to buy new - second-hand is fine. I don't feel superior to anyone. Some people need benefits, not everyone on a low income does and I'm bored of people making the assumption that we all do.

My income is £7000ish a year as a single mum working part-time

Life without money suuuucks

Namechanger I get what you’re saying. We were in a similar position to the OP when my children were small and it never once occurred to me do claim any kind of benefit other than CB - it was our choice to have children, I’ll sort it out myself! I didn’t even look into it. We just sucked it up until I could work more.

I think it sucks if you have none. If you have a bit, enough to buy all the basics, then It depends what kind of a person you are.

walking I object to an economy and employers that make tax credits necessary, but for the actual claimants I don't see any moral difference.

We can't all claim very expensive Independent school fees paid for from the public purse, even though some parents get special schools paid for this way. But that's because we don't all need it so it's absolutely right some should get that and others don't. (Although I'm ignoring the whole issue of the lack of special schools and how hard they are to access).

Same with benefits. Of all the many claimants I know, only a tiny minority are working the system and doing nicely from it. Eg 4 kids all at school and work the minimum hours between them. All healthy and nt and I personally know they've had many chances to both swop to secure ft contracts. However once dc leave education they're screwed, so doesn't bother me at all that they think they are oh so clever now. And of course the majority in that boat won't be turning down more hours just cos they can, and I pity them. I certainly don't resent either life.

name sorry if it sounded like I was suggesting you were being superior, it wasn't my intention.

It's just a personal bugbear of mine that such a small % of the population are net contributors, yet when it comes to benefits so many of the population suddenly view themselves as personally paying for it, when in reality they aren't even covering their own cost to the country.

Money was tight for us when our children were small. Childcare was expensive as no tax credits then, mortgage rates were high 15% and I was only working part time as no family help with childcare. However the kids weren't worried about expensive stuff, we did the odd day out but no holidays as we lived in Cornwall so lots of beach and moor days.

When they were older we had no childcare costs as I could drop them off and collect from school on my part time hours and our mortgage payment went down so we saved my salary towards holidays, cars, home improvements, pension and mortgage overpayments. My husbands salary paid our living costs. That meant we could then do overseas holidays and days out, brownies, ballet lessons and swimming and horse riding and music lessons. They could have coped without those things but they enjoyed them. The main thing is to live within your means.