to expect to have more disposable income than single mums claiming benefits

[newnails]

i no longer know why me and dh bother, he works full time and i work part time so that i can juggle the child care.

i know of 3 single mums who stay near me who seem to have more money than i can dream of, out every weekend, always shopping and 2 of them manage to run cars.

i know the benefit system is needed by some people but it seems to be a complete joke these days, the wasters in this country are leading the life of reilly while the rest of us are left to slog our guts out to pay for there existence.

no doubt i will get flamed for this post but i have been out xmas shopping today trying to work to a budget then i stand next to these people at the school gates and hear about all the grants they are entitled to so they can buy xmas presents, one of them has even cut back the last 2 months and managed to save £800, it would take me bloody months to save that up.

ok rant over, deep down i am glad i am not one of these people and i do actually work for what i have but it still pisses me of.

confused now - you don't get unemployment benefit if you have young children

Yea I have a mortgage Colditz - a mortgage that we took out 18yrs ago - when both dh and I were working f/t - we chose not to rent because we could afford a mortgage, just. Now, 18yrs later, we've two kids, me in p/t work (dd2 is only 4) and we're struggling big time, especially with the constant rises in interest rates.

Not having a mortgage is nothing to be envious about!

Oh and by the way when I say we have a nice house....I don't mean we live in a 5 bed detatched, swimming pool, double detatched garage, acre of garden...we live in an ex-council house in a terrace which I regard as 'nice'.

Just in case anyone is going to slate me for moaning about being skint and having a 'nice' house.

I rather feel you have missed mine. Single parents don't receive jobseekers allowence, the benefit given to those deemed capable of working. They receive Income support, the benefit given to those deemed poor.

So are only those deemed capable of working by the DWP to be sent to work in 'the building?' Or all those who are not in paid employment, leaving those with childcare to find and fund in a 'difficult' situation?

Doesn't anyone else have to pay bills, then? Only people with mortgages?

Of course everyone has bills, Colditz.

Our mortgage is over half of what dh brings home. It wasn't when we first took it out but with the rises in rates its gone up each year.

With what is left each month we cover our bills. This then leaves us with virtually nothing.

So all the above = skint.

OK?

As I said colditz, those who claim 'unemployment benefefit' by whatever name it is called.

If someone is capable of working and doesn't work and claims benefit, then yes, they should go into the 'building'.

MALO, my previous post was not actually aimed for you, although I certainly see your point that you feel skint. It's not nice feeling skint, and as I said in a previous posting, feeling poorer than you deserve to be certainly brings it's own special brand of misery and resentment.

No, I didnt say that colditz! A lot of people have to pay their bills. Some people don't. Read the posts!

Are you includintg those who claim income support? And what would you propose to do with the children, knowing as you must that income support would not be enough to fund childcare?

"If someone is capable of working and doesn't work and claims benefit, then yes, they should go into the 'building'."

[shudder] look in a few history books and you will come across other people who have had a similar attitude

So for those of you that feel single parents are receiving too much money, and that you should have more than them, how do you feel this could be acheived?

OK Colditz - thanks.

However I don't 'feel' skint - we are, without doubt, skint!!!!!

And until such time as dd2 goes to infants I have no option but to remain skint and then I plan to get back to work and not do the odd hour here and there at work as I'm currently doing and then, maybe, we'll have more money coming in and we'll be less skint!

Please don't get me wrong on all this - I fully appreciate how hard it is for those who are single parents and have no option other than to claim what they can in order to live and support their families.

But please don't forget life ain't much better for the likes of us who struggle with what we bring home and in some cases it is harder for us with the threat of homes being repossessed due to falling behind with mortgages which is reality for a lot of people these days.

Well wedont receive benefits either bat non means tested DLA, malo (as I suspect you are watching this)- we dont have a mortgage, DO run a car (try 3 kids, one on the way and 2 of those disabled without one living in a village LOL!) and dont have any debts (except student loan not yet payable). I dont begrudge those on benefits their money, neither do I imagine those working like us are well off- I know its not so. But it is possible to simply accept that just because one definition fits your life (ie working poor or whatever) you cannot truly understand the needs / relaities of life in the other sector.

Oh and Malo if yur home is at threat I would like to offer our sympathies- we lost opur home several yeas ago now, and it was a very ahrd time indeed (was when DH was ill and I was on maternoty leave). Life doesn't end there though; things can improve and there is life afterwards, although it certainly doesnt feel that way at the time I know!

Message withdrawn

Malo, genuine question here. If those who were deemed capable of working were made to work how would that help you?

What I mean is, are you annoyed at the percieved injustice, or do you feel that there would be some benefit to your mortgage repayments if Mr X was made to go out and get a job.

My DH and I have been on benefits and struggled. He is now self employed. I know for a fact that we are better off now than for that period on benefits.

We cant afford to buy a house and we are better of renting.

I think whats happening in society is that those who had money and put it into property are now feeling he pinch and are seeing others apparantly doing well for themselves on benefits, because they never had and never will have any wealth.

It seems really unfair. And it is. But if you were genuinely 'skint' as you say, you would be entitled to those benefits too.

colditz , I believe anyone who is receiving unemployment benefits on the basis of not finding work , should be made to spend the same amount of time in the 'building' as those in the paid employment (not singling you out, it's just you who have responded to my post).

Will have to look it up, but isn't Income Support the euphemism for payments to people who haven't actually paid enough into the system by virtue of National Insurance Contributions paid whilst working?

Sixlostmonkeys, it is maybe because we have lost some of the lessons of the past that the services, health etc are in such dire straits today.

You cannot continue to take out massive ammounts and not replenish them.

I was working poor. I know how it feels, you could probably find reams of posts under my name seething with resentment that we didn't seem to have any better a standard of living than those who didn't work at all.

BUT I have now lived on the other side and the grass is not greener. I know that what seems to be "A better standard of living" is often an inability to budget, misplaced pride, anxiety at your kids feeling 'different' ... it's one thing to shop in charity shops because it's fabulous vlue and you are saving money, it's quite another to shop in them because you don't have any more money - you're not saving, it's use them or go into debt ... and a lot choose the debt!

The answer to the working poor being poor is not to make the non working poor even poorer. It may make some people feel better with their own life (and I don't include any of the posters here in that, because that would be rude), but ultimately would result in child malnutrition etc.

no it fucking is not, noname, how offensive!

I see no problem with coming down hard on people who are capable of working but choose not to. The bottom line is, society needs people to work. We need doctors for when we are ill, builders to build homes for us, farmers to grow crops, factory workers to manufacture goods, shop keepers to sell goods. That's the way of the world. There are things we like about our jobs and things we don't.If we're determined, hard working, and to an extent lucky, we'll secure a job which is stimulating and enjoyable for a significant chunk of the time. But I, and I'm sure countless others, have done jobs which are hard, stressful, boring at one time or another.Why should any person who is capable of work feel that they can opt out? I wouldn't have a problem with people choosing not to work if they can build their own home, grow their own food, do their own dentistry and mix their own medicines so they never need another 'free' prescription in their life. But I've yet to come across anyone who does all this.Life is about making a contribution, not just taking.

So what is the difference between Job Seekers Allowance and Income Support for the unemployed?