"We earn too much for any help"

[Zootrebilis]

Good morning!

Expecting to be flamed for posting this but I need to get it off my chest. I've noticed people moaning that they don't get any "financial help" when they're part of a high income household. I've listed two examples but have many more:

1. A facebook group I'm part of: A lady posted moaning her and her husband don't receive tax credits and was there a way if getting any! She said he's on a very high wage and she works part time but he spends too much and she can't see where his money goes! So basically she wants tax credits because her husband likes spending. Another poster replied moaning her husband earns over the threshold for child benefit as well!

1. Someone I know who is actually a nice person: her husband earns 50k per year minimum (I know because she told us at the time) and she works part time. She was saying it's ridiculous that they don't receive tax credits as they could really do with it.

I just don't get it!!! Surely if they wanted more combined income they should work full time instead of part time (a choice in person 2s case as they have free childcare 3 days per week). I know childcare is expensive. I was a single parent until recently. I had to rely on tax credits for a bit to top up my wages which I hated. They were such uncertain times but I'm so so grateful that kind of help was there when I was alone and poor (my son was conceived by rape). I've worked hard to earn a management role in a sector I love where I get to help people. I earn 22k, partner on minimum wage and we have 2 kids between us. I wouldn't expect financial help in my situation so I don't know why others do! I'm 28 so I'm not of a different generation to them or anything.

Sorry just wanted to get it off my chest!!!

You may get vast riches for things such as working in certain areas of banking, for having a trust fund and a rich family for many generations or for being a footballer, reality TV star etc but you don't actually deserve tonnes of money

It's not really a question of deserving, it's what someone is willing to pay you. If you have the skills to be a professional footballer, TV personality or investment banker employers will be very glad to have you at very high pay. It's a question of supply and demand. If there were 100,000 world class football players in the UK wages would be far lower, as supply would exceed demand. So would you regulate the wages of professional footballers or tax away anything they made over a set limit?

I'm an RN in a fairly senior management role and I make about $100,000 per year. I was shocked when I found out here on MN how little nurses make in the UK. It's because the NHS is effectively a monopoly employment, so they set the prevailing wage. Here in the US, demand for nurses exceeds the supply and employers compete to employ us. Higher wages bring more students into nursing programs, motivate part time nurses to do more hours, etc. It got so bad a few years ago that local hospitals were offering signing bonuses and advertising their openings on the radio.

Do I deserve to make as much as I do? I think it's the wrong question.

I notice that people who moan about being above the threshold for "help" are not offering to give up their/OH's high paying job/jobs to go and both work part time on a till in Tesco so they can access all those lovely lovely sky high benefits and tax credits.

Funny that.

Some people are such incredibly greedy entitled arseholes.

Doesn't matter how much they have, it's never enough.

@BettyBitchface, I don't think people are complaining about not getting 'help' (Well maybe some are) but I think that they're complaining about the unfair system. Household 1 earning £87,000 entitled to 'help', household 1 earning £50,000 not entitled to 'help'. I don't think either household should be entitled imo. It's needs an overhaul.

Id really love the people with a good income live off benefits.and they must know(or would easily be able) to work out the difference and see how poor they would be and yet they still are so cruel and horrid to those on benefits.is it more that they don't want anyone get money when they aren't working.seeing them as lazy? but most would give anything to work and get what those people earn.and its a way of life that can be so sad to lead.it really makes me angry and disgusting at the attitudes of some towards low income or families on benefits.

It’s not just the living off a small wage. It’s the lack of choices and opportunities it brings that I think gets forgotten by the ‘ they are raking it in’ brigade.
It’s up there with;
Just move
Just get a job
Just get a school hours job

yet they still are so cruel and horrid to those on benefits.

I think it's a small percentage of people who don't claim benefits who think people on benefits are in some way lesser than them. The same way there's a small percentage of people who do claim benefits who are quite nasty about 'rich' people.

I wouldn't waste my time mixing with people with views like that. They both blame others for any issues in their life.

I can honestly see it from both sides. I have a brother who has been on benefits for the past 3 years, he really struggles. He spends most days at the job centre, really wants to work, is willing to do anything and his benefits only just cover him being able to live. On the other hand I have a sister who has been on benefits for the past 20 years. She does not struggle! In fact she recently went on a 2 week holiday to Mexico, while there she said the weather had been 'rubbish' on the first week and had spoilt the holiday so decided to stay for another week to make up for it! I couldn't afford to go to Mexico on holiday, let alone be able to afford to stay for an extra week at the drop of a hat.

This subject always divides people. Part of the problem is defining those who are well off; it is always based on salary but it omits those who have fixed assets (usually property).

Two scenarios - a couple earning just over CB threshold, large mortgage, two children who will be going to university on minimum loan (so parental contribution required or no university), no parental financial help or help with childcare - on the face of it a really good income, but having paid for childcare when needed and also a big mortgage not much left at the end of the month, no foreign holidays etc.

Couple 2, own two properties (one outright, currently empty, one larger than their family requires one modest one five bed detached, in the Southern property bubble, worth circa £1m between the two), three children between them, very small mortgage due to parental help and inheritances, man working f/t woman working p/t (MLM!) by choice and receiving maintenance for two of the children, entitled to CTC and WTC and manage to run 2 cars and can manage 3-4 foreign trips per year. Children will receive full university loans.

Who is wealthier? Morally the second couple shouldn't claim TC but do because they are entitled!

@usernamealreadytaken, well put. That's the problem exactly.

A family that earns enough not to be entitled to Tax Credits/Universal Credit is always better off than a family in identical circumstances that arent entitled. The benefits taper away gradually as income increases to ensure this is the case.
Its not just benefits in terms of cash, its other things. I.e. prescriptions. Or training opportunities. If you get JSA - these things are free. If you're on minimum wage - tough luck.

@FishCanFly, and free school meals for kids. 2 children at school is £25 per week just for lunches.

genius1308 yes. the trap is that one partner's eligibility for help is affected by the other's income. So if both don't work - both get benefits. One works, the other loses theirs and combined income becomes even less. So no wonder why people rather not work or try to cheat the system claiming they're single. Its not that people in white-collar jobs can't budget, taking up a min-wage job isn't worth the hassle.