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.

skeletonbones, it really isn't too difficult to understand.

You can claim jobseekers allowance and it is either contribution based, or income based.

I really can't see why so many have the problem with this concept, either you are prepared to work or you are not!

Whether you have children is a different consideration, but if anyone says they are looking for work and they have children, then surely they have taken childcare into consideration?

If people with children do not wish to work, then that is there choice, I just don't see that the people who DO choose to work should have to pay for those who don't.

But, for those who choose not to work but are happy to receive any or all of the benefits that are available, and feel it is your right, then why are you so angry and rude to the people who actually do work but question your right to have the same without working?

newnails- have not read all the thread only OP, so i may be repeating other comments, have you requested a benefit assessment to check you are receiving all your entitlements eg family tax credit.might be worth checking out

Reallytired - exactly who are you referring to as 'lazy slut[s]'?

There will always be people who take advantage or abuse benefits - those who "claim" to be single, those who work cash in hand, those who conveniently forget the fathers name so that the government dont take the CSA money etc, those who have another child to get a bigger council house etc. These kind of stories taint everybody that claims benefits.

Income support is being subject to a review that means from age 12 parents will be expected to work, will be age 7 by 2010. Therefore the government are aware of people claiming who are physically fit for work and are looking into shortening the periods benefits can be claimed for. Income support should be a stop gap after a split whilst you get back on your feet, not a lifestyle choice.

I dont begrudge benefits to those physically unable to work or short term like job seekers, the only ones that wind me up are those who quote "its not worth me working".

I would have like to have seen the new changes to IS to include those who have never paid into the system, we have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in Europe - i'm sure this would significantly drop if they had to support themselves and not expect a house and money to be handed to them.

i cant believe that dogs comment has not kicked all this of again.

I would have thought that it was a joke KK, no?

Well HappyMummyOfOne, welcome to the band of the few.

I don't think anyone begrudges benefits for those in genuine need, and it would be a sad day if we did.

Unfortunately this country has fostered, indeed encouraged a society of welfare dependants, and the needs of the genuine have been lost within the morass of the system abusers.

'All I know is this....on the other side of the coin those on benefits should not assume that those that aren't on benefits are well off - yes we have a mortgage, yes we have a car, yes we have a nice house BUT we're permanently skint, have a big overdraft and various loans and we pay our debts with what we earn. '

Let's just break out the violins then, MALO.

Wasting your anger on a very small percentage of people in the UK as a whole whilst completely ignoring the fact that this government hands out billions more in corporate welfare - including subsidising the working poor with tax money rather than compelling corporations to pay a living wage so they can boost profits to their shareholders - is beyond foolish.

And that's just scratching the surface! Who wants a subsidy? Are there any property development corporations here today? FREE MONEY! Millions of pounds here! Oh, here, have a playing field for cheap as well.

monkeytrousers: Because there is no laughing matter over having a heart attack/stroke and I'm not soft either and having lost my Dad to a heart attack two years ago TODAY I personally find your comments pathetic and yes, hurtful...so perhaps you ought to be the one to grow up.

expat, why are you bringing up a separate issue and accusing MALO of ignoring it, when the OP was clearly about something else! Seems a strange way to defend your case! I happen to feel exactly the same as you do about property development corporations. But I still believe that people who are physically and mentally able to work should get off their backsides and do so, rather than expecting other people to go out to work for them.

well, geez, inthegutter, why do you continually bring up the topic of benefits fraudsters and single people on benefits if the OP was talking about single mums particularly?

defend my case?

i wasn't aware i was in court.

or that i was a single mum on benefits, for that matter.

which i'm not.

'They don't need a pension, the benefits system doesn't allow the elderly to starve to death.'

Well, thank Gaea for that then, tired, because guess what? The working poor can't afford to save for a pension, either.

I've never seen a thread with so many bitter, sad, and tbh, not so clever folks who just seem incredibly angry that their working has not bought them the life of riley, so they take their ire out on people who for the most part have the hardest time of it.

why should they gutter?

Why should they clean toilets for the minimum wage when the government will pay them more for doing nothing? Would you in the same situation?

Ca

to make some very pissed off people feel better about their financial situation, rhu, that's why.

well, according to some people on this thread.

" including subsidising the working poor with tax money "

At least the working poor are doing their best to be responsible citizens. They don't sit on their backside all day watching day tv or surfing the web.

I have no problem with the governant subsidising the working poor. Most people who start a career start on a fairly low salary, probably not enough to support a family. A young single mother who has little or no experience will not be able to get a highly paid job. A lot of people of her age will be living at home with parents so starting on a low salary is not a problem. Unless the single mother is given help she will never stand a chance of getting out of the benefits trap.

However with a few years of experience her salary will increase. She will no longer need the subsidary. Also her childcare costs will decrease as her children get older.

It also benefits her children to have someone working in their household. It helps them realise the importance of education and hard work.

Its silly saying firms have to pay more. The jobs just will go somewhere like China.

I know some really talented working single mums. You and me benefit from them going to work.

Oh and colditz- just seen your response about who looks after my kids when I've gone off to work in the morning....well yeah it would be lovely if my partner could do it, but he also goes out to work. We've struggled to find a combination of answers, the same as any other working parents. When the kids were little I paid someone to come in and look after them and take them to day nursery when it opened. We paid a nanny for a short while. More recently I've paid a local 6th former to do the morning looking after and seeing them off on the bus. The eldest two are now old enough to sort themselves out in the morning. OK?

RT that (rude) analogy doesn't work as there is a huge middle ground of working non mortgage payers- eg us- who rent. We won't be liavle fro nursing home costs admitteedly- neither will we be able to pass on a home to our children, two of whom are upossible going to be unable to work, which is saddening. I'd much rather have the risk of paying for care personally but hey ho!

If I can't go to work when I garduate (because one of my children cannot acess childcare due to autism related behaviour) I will eb entitled to the grand amount of under £40 a week (or thereabouts) carers allowance. Its nto a choice issue- I abdly wanted to train as a teacher on graduation but cant work the practicalities due to DH's shifts and no family within 60 miles. Hope I can do it one day, but if DS3 goes to the Sn school we would like (a SALT school) i ahve to commit to being ehre at 9am and 3pm for his special needs taxi pick up. So again will be stuffed. Dh doesn't reallyarn enough atm to cover us all, and I hate being alone all day, but where's the choice issue? I went abck to work when ds1 and ds2 were 9 weeks old to pay the bills, have always contributed, then some abstard bad luck comes along and whoosh- there goes your choice!

And I know this thread is about people who CHOOSE- what I am saying is, you wouldnt know by looking at us that we dont really have a choice. We LOOK as if we have chosen our lifestyle- well atm we have, but its not one we can sustain (ie Uni garnts only available for one degree which is almost completed). And after that, who knows?

'Unless the single mother is given help she will never stand a chance of getting out of the benefits trap.'

Yes, but RT, part of that help that she needs is childcare. FREE, good childcare. And if she is low skilled, then the jobs available to her will probably ones where tehy want her to be 'flexibile' with regards to the shifts she works.

So where's the childcare for that?

She can't just leave the kids, and she may not have family to help.

So what then?

expat you're not in a court of law! You made an argument; I was simply saying that to bring up an entirely different issue and say that nonametoday was ignoring that entirely different issue was not a very good argument! And I never said you were a single parent. Or on benefits. How the hell would i know??!!

oh yeah I'd love free childcare too please. Wouldn't we all?!

That was my point, you don't know from looking at someone what their situation is so shouldn't judge.

I have had some horrid comments in the past from people who haven't a clue what's wrong with me.

Wisteria thats sad, as my boys disabilities are invisible also (1 asd, 1 possiblya sd but severe langauge difficultuies) I know how cruel poeple can be. Dh has hd (and sadly has atm) bouts of severe depression also, which are also invisible- and seems to come with a 'shirker' label atatched. A lack of understanding of genuine conditions can really cause people hurt, can't it?

'You made an argument; I was simply saying that to bring up an entirely different issue and say that nonametoday was ignoring that entirely different issue was not a very good argument! And I never said you were a single parent. Or on benefits. How the hell would i know??!! '

Um, no I didn't. Are you aware that not everyone's statement is an argument, or do you go through life assuming everything anyone says is a personal invitation to argue ad nauseum?

You've not be around very long, but there is no rule here that a thread has to stay on the OP, a point which I'd have thought you deduced from the number of times you have rabbitted on and on about single, childfree people on benefits and fraudsters.

[beats head against brick wall] and cringes at the future of the nation's children taught at the hands of people who seem to have no concept of the powers of deduction, juxtaposition, causal links, knock-on effect, etc.

And referring to the earlier comment,can you explain why you think people shouldn't clean toilets if that's a job that needs doing? Or do you think it's beneath you? I haven't actually been a toilet cleaner, but I've done some very low paid, boring repetitive and pretty unpleasant work in my time. And guess what? I did it to pay the bills. And also to put myself through college to train as a teacher. Any problem with that?