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.

NoNameToday you havent answered yet, what would you do with the children of single parents while they are in 'the building?' (or the workhouse, lets get back to victorian values!) are the children there working too? or are they left at home alone.

And colditz, your language is also offensive

Message withdrawn

"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?"

Please do look it up!
I don't mean to be rude, but seriously, do a bit research before coming up with 'solutions'

"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."

Hopefully we have learnt from the past and won't ever allow anyone with such absurd ideas have any power

Message withdrawn

skeltonbones, if you have children and cannot work, you should not be claiming unemployment benefit.

That is why I said in my original post that it referred to those who are unemployed but could work.

Please read the post.

Peopl who have children and claim unemployment benefit surely must realise that if they wish to work, then they will have to arrange childcare.

The actual cost of childcare is not a consideration in putting oneself forward to be available for work, except for the person concerned.

Message withdrawn

Looking after children is definitely a contribution. I consider bringing my 3 kids up as best as we can to be lovely and capable people is hugely important. The love and support DP and I give our kids is the most important factor in this, and the jobs we both do to enable us to do the financial responsibilty part is the second most important factor.

There was some confusion from you over what income support was though NoNameToday, you seemed to be including people on income support in your workhouse idea. If you want to avoid confusion you need to clarify what you mean, and perharps have looked up what the benifits you are talking about actually are 'unemployment benifit' is too euphemistic.

But surely Jobseekers Allownace is for people seeking a job!

Not for someone who chooses to stay at home and care for their children?

There are various aspects to Income Support, not all to do with the people who choose not to work, but if you can work and don't then you are abusing the system.

skeletonbones I thought that I had made it very clear, anyone who registers for unemployment benefit, however it is paid, either Jobseekers Allowance or Income Support, SHOULD be prepared to work.

That has nothing to do with children, if you are registering as unemployed and receiving benefits on that basis then you should be prepared to work.

NoNameToday Please look up on the government site about the various different types of benefits and who they apply to, you seem totally confused and your posts are confusing too. when you can work out the difference between JSA and IS you might be in more of a position to post more clearly.

"if you are registering as unemployed and receiving benefits on that basis then you should be prepared to work."

and these people have to prove continuously that they are indeed prepared to do so, or their benefit stops

Sixlostmonkeys, I take it you think it's alright for people to not work at all and claim benefits?

I certainly have no power to prevent people abusing a system, but it doesn't stop me from wondering how the abusers of the system have the belief that they can do it with no repercussions.

But then there are people who obviously think it's all right to do so.

Message withdrawn

"if you are registering as unemployed and receiving benefits on that basis then you should be prepared to work."

and these people have to prove continuously that they are indeed prepared to do so, or their benefit stops

sorry, i should have said that this is a fact and not an opinion.

I think this discussion has now proved that many opinions are just sweeping statements based on little knowledge of facts, never mind lack of consideration of individual cases.

harman: I we fell behind with our mortgage and lost our home we would have to sell it - clear what we owe and rent somewhere.

Skeltonbones I don't think it's difficult to understand . If anyone claims unemployment benefit under whatever guise, and they are not prepared to work, I find that unacceptable, and would be happy to see some enforced commitment of their free time to entitle them to the said money.

Sixlostmonkeys, I take it you think it's alright for people to not work at all and claim benefits?

sweeping statement again?

"have the belief that they can do it with no repercussions."

There are repercussions

"some enforced commitment of their free time to entitle them to the said money."

This already happens

inthegutter: excellent post (12:49)

harman (13:00) - blimey, you are taking this to the extreme don't you think?

Be careful or else this is going to head towards a SAHM/not SAHM thread.....!

NoNametoday. Have you looked up the difference between IS and JSA yet? do you accept that they are different types of benefit? If you don't agree that there should be IS at all and all single parents of preschool children should be available to work and therefore on JSA you need to make that clear in your post,and have a proposal for what you would intend to do with the children while the mother was 'in the building'.

If you in fact meant only people on JSA who are available for work should be in your building scheme and you didn't mean to include single parents with children at home to look after, you need to make that clear too.
It ISN'T clear in your post. Which of the above did you actually mean?

1. how would you propose that claimants of Income Support simultaneously feed their children and pay for childcare?

2. In areas where childcare is insufficient, what would you propose happens to these children?

3)Income Support is £59 per week. How do you propose persuading childcare professionals to drop their fees to this level?

4. Are you saying that allowing children to starve because their parents are not in paid employment is acceptable?

Your 'answer' to the problem of widespread welfare support is like saying send food to the starving. Your ignorance on the subject is glaringly obvious to everyone reading your posts, are you 14?