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.

NoName - you don't seem to understand what income support is. There's no requirement to look for work if you're a single mum claiming benefits. That's the point of income support - it's payment in lieu of work, not payment conditional upon looking for work.

"I think what NoName meant regarding the detriment of others was a reasonable assumption.

If people did not defraud the system our government would have more money to put elsewhere"

Even if this is what noname meant, I would like to point out the large amount of money saved on unclaimed benefits does not go elsewhere

NoName - why is it dishonest by not making your family even worse off financialy? if you will be even poorer by taking a job where you would have to get outside care for you child/ren, you would have to see them less, have less input into their lives and generaly be unable to do the things you always have why would anyone take that job?

Im sorry but no one would make their family suffer for no reward.
its not dishonest its life. dont blame single mothers blame the employers who feel it acceptable to pay minimum wages and no overtime, who refuse to offer flexible working patterns and demand on shift work.
blame teh government for not increasing the minimum wage, for not doing more to help the working poor.

but do not call honest women scroungers simply because they would rather live a life on benfits than make their children suffer in order to help you feel superior

oh dear....

"The money pot is not bottomless."

this money pot? It is a 'pot' of funds set aside to provide 'benefit' to those out of work. It does come with conditions!
Even if you take away benefit from these 'dreadful scroungers' the money will not go elsewhere..

income support is the governments way of paying mothers to care for their children.

how many SAHMv WOHM threads have their been where it has been shouted from teh rooftops that careing for a child and running a home IS BLOODY HARD WORK!

but why would we expect some of you to understand this? you are so convinced anyone claiming benefits is a sponger stealing yoru hard earned tax pennies that you are un interested in the facts of these cases. all you want is to make yourself feel better about your own lifesty;e

I will say it again, there are people claiming 'unemployment benefit' who have no intention whatsoever to take up gainful employment.

Why should those people receive monies for doing nothing?

Why is it such a difficult concept for people to accept?

If you intend to work, actively look and search for work, fine.

But, and it's a big but, if you think you should recieve monies for doing nothing and have no intention of working because you are financially better off on benefits, then please do not insult the people who do work for similar amounts and because they WORK, can not avail themselves of the benefits available to the unemployed.

'income support is the government's way of paying mothers to care for their children'? Hmmm not quite. have you read the recent threads about partnered mothers who certainly DON'T have the choice to receive IS to stay at home with their kids?

Yes, because 'partnered mothers' are fortunate enough to have a partner who can support the family.

Lone parents and their children should not have to suffer for the refusal of an absent parent to support them.

because we have a supoprt system in this country that says if you are out of work you get government assistance. yes tehre are some who abuse that systemt, but if 5% swinging the lead mean that the other 95% who NEED that help get it then its worth it.

your posts seem very much like you begrudge helpign others.

i would imagine that your Tax rates would barely cover one soldiers work in Iraq this year, or one nurse to work on an NHS ward, or maybe one police officer.

do you whinge and whine about your money being spent there? no of course not. because you are happy to have nurses and police officers.

YOUR tax £'s are a very small drop in a very large ocean.

It comes down to the cold hard fact that it is hard enough to do the work entailed in raising/supporting children when both arents are involved, and far far harder when there is only one to shoulder the load.

And couples in a steady relationship where one or both work, should not have to have a lifestyle that is less than someone who chooses not to work at all.

inthegutter - so a child of a single parent should be deprived on the benefit of having a mother to bring it up simply because her relationship with its father did not last?

if you are in a couple then it allows one of you to work whilst one stays home to care for teh child. a single parent does not have that option.

it is cheaper for teh government to pay these single parents to saty home and care for their children than it would be to provide affordable daycare.

My dad walked out on my mum a few years ago and left her with all the bills, a mortgage etc. She had to go on benefits - she had no choice and they refused to help her with her mortgage. Yet, while all this was going on, her friend who has never done a days work in her life, was moving to a council flat in a nice area, rent paid, minimum council tax, money to furnish the flat etc while my mum was struggling beyond belief - its that kind of thing that I think the OP was getting at and I can see the point. There are a lot of people out there who abuse the benefits system and take pride in doing so - and that's what people are about, not the genuine people who use it their time of need due to a change in circumstances etc

LOL stripeymama - well keep telling that to the hundreds of thousands of 'lucky' partnered mothers who will be doing a day's work tomorrow, or who are perhaps just putting their feet up after working Sunday.Keep telling that to them when they'd rather be at home with their kids than having to work because one income doesn't pay for the roof over their heads, food on the table and all the bills.

"income support is the governments way of paying mothers to care for their children"

What a strange quote, I would hope you had a child to love rather than be paid for.

I think part of the problem is that a lot of women have to work to make ends meet where their partner does not earn enough to cover all the bills. Rent is higher than ever and lots of families need two wages to survive. WTC is capped quite low as is housing benefit so a lot of families just get standard £42 tax credits.

Therefore to see that people can stay at home and have their rent paid for and money given to them until their child is 16 does seem unfair. Hopefully when the new rules come out and the limit is raised to age 7 it wont seem as unfair.

Also the comments re "I would never use childcare" or "its not worth me working a min wage job" start to grate after a while.

In an ideal world, it would be lovely if all mums could have term time school hours jobs but its a fact of life that we all cant. Mums that are part of a couple still have to use childcare etc but get no choice.

If you are physically able to work, then once your child is of school age the benefits should stop. The exception being if your child is disabled where childcare etc may be a problem.

Benefits are a stop gap and for those in need, not a lifestyle choice for those that wish to stay at home.

"And couples in a steady relationship where one or both work, should not have to have a lifestyle that is less than someone who chooses not to work at all."

considering benefit is an absolute minimum payment I'd say if any working couple find themselves in this position they are doing something seriously wrong! This situation cannot be blamed on the unemployed, it can only be blamed on the wrong choices made by the couple surely?

and mamazon too! 'If you are in a couple it allows one of you to work whilst the other stays at home to care for the children'. Hilarious! What planet are you living on? Many of us CAN'T afford to pay the bills on one income!

NoName, there is no such thing as "unemployment benefit". Are you talking about jobseeker's allowance? In which case, that doesn't apply to single mums. Single mums with at least one child under 16 get income support, not jobseeker's allowance. As I said before, on income support there's no requirement to look for work, so your point is meaningless in the context of this discussion.

tehn give up your job, leave yoru partner and sign on inthegutter/happymumofone

FFS im sick of this ignorant attitude some of you have. i have no idea of the sort of single parents you know but i have never met any that find life on benefits such a great time with no worries.

its bloody hard. i can tell you there have beenmany times i have had to put jumpers on my children all nigth because i couldn't afford to turn the gas on, when i have had to go without an evening meal as i couldnt afford to feed me AND my children.

You say your struggle to get by and then go on to say how youhave to worry about your MORTGAGE! you own a fucking house! which if you sold you would probably be tens of thousands of £s better off.
most women on benefits feel lucky to have a council home with its leaky sink or damop in teh bedrooms.

I have the misfortune of being on both sides of this argument. as a working mother and as a SMOB.
i can tell you right now i would much rather go back to the financial stability of when i was working but because i am single it is no longer an option.

until you have found yourself in a position of unemployment you CANNOT judge those that are.

HappyMummyofOne thank you for a sane and sensible post. Very well put.

nonetheless, inthegutter, surely you can't deny that a single parent is disadvantaged in terms of earning potential and childcare compared to parents who live together and who both contribute to the household financially or otherwise.

whats sane and sensible about that post?

she took something i said and tried to make a snyd remark about it.
i had my children whilst in a dual earning couple.

i left after abuse.
because my son is disabled i cannot work as i no longer have the support of family nearby.

inthegutter - if your partner does not earn enough to pay bills which means you tyoo have to go out to work then how do you expect a single parent to survive?

Why should I have to leave my partner mamazon???? My children have a right to be brought up by the two parents who decided to have them. I've seen some ridiculous posts but that takes the biscuit.And excuse me, but how do you know whether i own a house? Oh of course, you're making assumptions and judgements, but hey, thats ok, because if you're a partnered mother then you're fair game. For your information, we DON'T own a house. We pay rent.

don't let them get to you, mamazon. Typical "I'm all right jack" types. Tories probably, Daily Mail readers certainly. Probably think Linda Lee Potter "spoke a lot of sense".

sixlostmonkeys, you see my point about couples when one or both work but they are worse of than someone on benefits, but you think that's because they are bad managers! The fact that they are working for their money somehow passed you by. How presumptious of you. Do you think they should go on benefits then?

Some people have pride.