Why do you benefit bash?

[greyblanket76]

My family and I are working class and always have been. My friends are too and so are the people that I tend to socialise with/meet in everyday life. I've only been on MN since last year but have seen so many comments bashing people who are on/depend on benefits and I'd really like to know why?

Is this because some people on here think everyone that's on benefits is lazy and doesn't want to work therefore claim benefits? Or is it something else?

I'll talk about my situation and will keep it as brief as possible as I already know people will come in the comments to try and shame me. I'm early 20s and a single mum (didn't start out that way but your whole life can literally change overnight and that's what happened to me). I have one DC and I'm expecting another so I've been on maternity leave back to back as I'll have 2 under 2.

I've worked full time since I was 17 right up until I went on my first maternity leave. Due to the rate of SMP, I'm entitled to benefits as SMP doesn't even cover my rent which is £1200. I'm entitled to £1670 of UC which covers my rent and all my bills. During the first 9 months of my maternity leave I was receiving around £1507 UC (due to deductions) + £638 SMP = £2145 a month.
Once I give birth to my second DC, my UC entitlement should go from £1670 to £1907. This isn't 100% accurate but due to receiving SMP, let's say the deductions would be due £1700 UC + £638 SMP = £2388 a month. That would be excluding child benefit for both children btw.

When I was working full time, I was earning £1383 a month. I do plan to go back to work after my maternity leave ends as I genuinely love my work and have my whole career in front of me. However can people see the huge jump in difference between the two amounts? Nearly a grand in total! When returning back to work, I would be entitled to some benefits however because I'd be working full time, it wouldn't be a lot. That's why it's advised that you drop hours to work part time in order to get the most help available.

I've read my post back and hope it isn't too confusing but I just wanted some people who benefit bash to understand that sometimes life on benefits seems better especially as you have kids because you get so much more help. My mum keeps telling me to consider not working for a year or two just because I need to consider the quality of life my DC and I will have. I wouldn't be able to pay for rent AND childcare so what would I do? There's a lot that comes into play when deciding if you should go back to work or just be on benefits and I hope some people got that from this post. Seeing as this is an anonymous forum, if you judge/bash people on benefits, I'd really be interested to hear why. Posting in AIBU because I'm prepared to be flamed and have learnt not to take nasty comments to heart

Working age benefits accounted for around 100BN out of government spending in 2019.

As with every blunt tool it's not ideal and there will always be some who mis use it.

BUT how many of those people who do refer to benefits and "handouts" and look down on those claiming received 80% of their wages for free on furlough ??

The welfare system is designed to prevent people from destitution. I think the issue is people in the west hold the idea of "bearing your burdens" as moral and righteous - which it 100% is, and we have equated paid work with this, which again it is, but so is being a good parent and helping in the community and many other examples are

As baz luhrmann said "don't wasn't your time on jealousy, sometimes your ahead sometimes your behind, the race is long and on the end it's only with yourself "

Because I'd rather work for less money than be on benefits (I claimed very briefly years ago and was embarrassed that I had to). I don't criticise everyone on benefits but through my work I've known people who have never ever worked, or who do the minimum amount of work they can get away with so they can still claim. It's the system that's broken but I don't know of a way to fix it

[quote Cheeseonpost]@Waxonwaxoff0

Of course people who cannot afford to support their children shouldn’t bloody have them

What a silly view, yes anyone should have children if they want, fuck making sure they can live a comfortable life[/quote]
Right. So care workers, retail workers, etc should not be allowed to have kids? I'm not the one with the silly view here. Disgusting that you think a whole section of society shouldn't have kids because they're on a shit wage and living expenses keep increasing beyond what many can afford.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

I can’t believe yours and others argument on this thread is those who have no viable way to financially support their children should just keep having them because it’s unfair for them not to

A bit of envy maybe? I would have to terminate if I got pregnant as I can't afford to have children
I would like to drop my hours (work FT 40hrs a week) as I have chronic conditions that leave me exhausted. I cope by sleeping for 90 mins after work and then cooking etc and then going to bed for the night. Can't afford to drop to less than 40hrs and pay my mortgage and bills

[quote Cheeseonpost]@Getyourarseofffthequattro

I can’t believe yours and others argument on this thread is those who have no viable way to financially support their children should just keep having them because it’s unfair for them not to[/quote]
Well actually I think wages should be increased and childcare should be government subsidised so that top up benefits aren't needed. But the government would sooner give out the benefits apparently, so that's that.

Imo, people benefit bash because they believe that the benefit system is unfairly advantageous for a huge number of benefit recipients, due to choices they have made.

A single parent who has chosen to have 2 children with a deadbeat father and doesnt want to work will be bashed, because the reliance on benefits is seen as preventable.

A couple who make a conscious choice to work as few hours as possible to ensure maximum benefits, or to enable one or the other of them to be a SAHP will be benefit bashed, because they are only afforded this choice through the efforts of people who do not have those choices.

A person who has tried to 'level up' as much as possible educationally and works in a job that is the limit of what they are capable of, but still needs help with their living costs so claims benefits, wont be bashed. The anger there is usually directed at the cost of living.

A disabled person who cannot work will not be bashed, because they didnt choose to put themselves in that situation.

An elderly person who receives pension credit will not be bashed, because they didnt choose to get old.

If you wake up tired, go to work in the dark, at a job you possibly dont enjoy, have to manage on a tight budget, sacrifice precious time with your children, feel stressed a lot, worry about money, deny yourself treats and live as frugally as possible and are just above the threshold for benefits, and then hear or read that another person who doesnt make the sacrifices you feel you are making, is in receipt of a higher income via benefits than you are, I imagine it is a bitter pill to swallow.

It all depends whether the benefit recipient is seen to be doing as much as they can to help themselves.
If they are, I doubt most people would benefit bash them.

I've yet to come across anyone who begrudges another person who is actively doing what they can to help themselves, but I've come across quite a few people who begrudge those who make choices that increase their dependence on the welfare state simply because they prefer the tax payer to support their choices.
Many of those tax payers will not have the choices they are simultaneously enabling someone on benefits to have.
You cannot seriously fail to understand why this would leave them angry, at the system, at the people they feel are at an advantage to them, at the injustice?
What is difficult to understand about their anger and frustration?

[quote Cheeseonpost]@Getyourarseofffthequattro

I can’t believe yours and others argument on this thread is those who have no viable way to financially support their children should just keep having them because it’s unfair for them not to[/quote]
I haven't actually said that at all I simply said if people only had children when they could easily afford them not many people would have children. That is true.

So just to make sure I understand your situation. Early 20’s two children-under 2 which is not what you expected and you receive benefits that equates to an annual working salary after tax, NI and pension contributions of approx £41000.
My understanding of benefits is for people who are between jobs so they don’t starve/ homeless or for those who are physically or mentally unable to work at all/ full time.
Having children does not exclude a person from working and I understand that UC and tax credits assist those on lower salaries to pay for childcare. My exdh was entitled to benefits due to a permanent disability which affected his ability to work full time and thus affected his earning potential but work he did.
The issue that i have is parents not working because like you are better off on benefits.
I work full time and have done with two dc from when they were one year old each and apart from CB have supported my family by living in an area that is cheaper for housing.
There was someone on here the other week who was just exhausted working and raising a child and managing their debt and got all offended when their question of just giving up work was argued and classed as benefit bashing.
I’d gladly give up work if I thought I could gain in benefits what it has taken two degrees and years of not seeing my children in exchange for my monthly salary gained over the last 30 years with another 13 to go before can retire.
My issues with your situation is that benefits are giving you what I have had to and continue to work my arse off to get.
Does that answer your question.

Sometimes it seems like you do everything right in your life. Work hard. Go to uni get a job. Wait to have a family until you can afford it. And it's so so hard. Mortgage payments insane, £££ going on childcare, debt from uni, limiting your family, not seeing your kids because of work.

Then you look at someone on benefits doing nothing and being given a council house and money so they can spend all their time with their kids.

I'm jealous!

Yes I consider myself lucky to have a mortgage.

I bought a flat in my 20’s and worked my arse off for it. I didn’t want to have kids before I was financially secure. So I’m sorry I did that and you didn’t 🤷‍♀️

@Runmybathforme

So you chose to have have a second child ? Is the Father paying ? I guess there are so many people who work and can't afford to have children, it's bound to result in a bit of bashing. Not that impressed myself when I have to get up for work at 5.30 every bloody day.

For years I started work at 5.30am after a 40 minute commute. Never claimed benefits in my life apart from child benefit. Then, at 50 years old cancer struck and caused irreversible disability. Lived off savings during 9 months of chemo and radiotherapy. When they ran low I had to claim contributions based esa which lasted a year and pip. Not entitled to anything else because of my husband's pensions. I do not begrudge the op her UC at all. She has children to bring up and in the long term it sounds like she'll be able to improve her situation. What does annoy me though are the dead beat parents who get to walk away without paying for their children . The self employed ones who fiddle their tax returns so their earnings are low, the company directors who pay themself in dividends so it's not counted as income, the unemployed ones who refuse to work because they'd have to contribute to their children.

@giggly

So just to make sure I understand your situation. Early 20’s two children-under 2 which is not what you expected and you receive benefits that equates to an annual working salary after tax, NI and pension contributions of approx £41000. My understanding of benefits is for people who are between jobs so they don’t starve/ homeless or for those who are physically or mentally unable to work at all/ full time. Having children does not exclude a person from working and I understand that UC and tax credits assist those on lower salaries to pay for childcare. My exdh was entitled to benefits due to a permanent disability which affected his ability to work full time and thus affected his earning potential but work he did. The issue that i have is parents not working because like you are better off on benefits. I work full time and have done with two dc from when they were one year old each and apart from CB have supported my family by living in an area that is cheaper for housing. There was someone on here the other week who was just exhausted working and raising a child and managing their debt and got all offended when their question of just giving up work was argued and classed as benefit bashing. I’d gladly give up work if I thought I could gain in benefits what it has taken two degrees and years of not seeing my children in exchange for my monthly salary gained over the last 30 years with another 13 to go before can retire. My issues with your situation is that benefits are giving you what I have had to and continue to work my arse off to get. Does that answer your question.

Actually having children under 3 does excuse you from working according to the UC guidelines.

I don't really care what adults do with their lives. Living on benefits seems bleak as fuck but each to their own.

But I judge the parents so much. The amount of shit men fathering children they can't and won't support and then shit women bringing children into these situations with these palpably crap uninspiring men is just rage inducing.

Oh he's never held down a job but you thought he'd make a "great dad"? Fuck off

The world doesn't need any more children! And it certainly doesn't need any more children born into poverty, with absent fathers who don't care enough about them to even pay for them.

[quote Cheeseonpost]@Waxonwaxoff0

If they can’t afford to nave them no.

It’s really odd you think people should give 0 thought to their financial ability to support children before popping them out.[/quote]
So presumably you could afford all your expenses alone, including childcare costs/mortgage/bills with no benefit assistance if you separated from your partner?

I don't bash people on benefits as by modern definitions I am one. Life can throw you a real curve ball, and anyone who sits there all smug with their nice house and good income saying that would never be me lacks imagination, empathy or both.

@Avarua

The world doesn't need any more children! And it certainly doesn't need any more children born into poverty, with absent fathers who don't care enough about them to even pay for them.

Ah right, so If nobody has any more children who's going to look after you when you're old? Nurse you when you're sick? Ensure the supermarket is well stocked?

@Avarua

at anyone who thinks a 20 year old guy is going to be good, solid father material. Choices.

Its nothing to do with ages. My dd's father is in his forties and has left and it was him who wanted the baby. Twelve years ago I was 21 and fell pregnant with my boyfriend at the time who was 29. We had our own flat, affordable rent and both studying for jobs we might prefer more alongside working. Plus he had wealthy parents. I was also growing a business at the time. He said he would leave me if I kept the baby. He was the issue, not me being 21. I had an abortion and always looked back with so much regret, thinking why didn't I just put him on child support, stay in my flat and claim child benefit. He kept claiming we wouldn't manage, and he wanted to improve our lives first, but really he just wanted to party, because I know even now his prospects have never improved and he has three children now. I had a job and skills I could rely on and family close by. Now I'm 32 with my DD and in no more of a better position than I was back then with the first pregnancy because it's always been impossible to save leading up to me becoming pregnant and once again, in my thirties, a man let me down. I had a lot more energy to juggle a child alongside working in my twenties too and there were more resources back then. No-one knows what life has in store, you might not find the right person and your circumstances or fertility can change later in life, so to say that someone who has a child (or children) young with someone they thought was right for them at that time is being immature or making a bad decisions, is really narrow and blunt minded.

The amount of shit men fathering children they can't and won't support

There is a vast array of societal problems caused by the fact that humans have sex for pleasure.

@autienotnaughty

The people who typically bash are the middle class who have no concept of the struggles and barriers the working class face. They look at it as they are paying for lazy people to sit on their arse. Whereas the working class understand poverty and suffering and will accept support to avoid that.

I think the opposite is true. Working class people who live among people working the system resent them a lot more than middle-class people removed from it all. £24,000 in benefits doesn't seem like that much money to a middle-class person but for a working-class person who works full-time for less than that, it builds up resentment.

It's crap that some people take advantage of the system, but the anger should be directed at the government for allowing it. Child support should also be properly enforced, so taxpayers aren't paying for (mostly) men who refuse to take responsibility for their children. We can't force women to have abortions because they can't afford children. I don't judge people on benefits because I don't know everything about their life and I can't blame them for taking what they're entitled to.

So presumably you could afford all your expenses alone, including childcare costs/mortgage/bills with no benefit assistance if you separated from your partner?

I could. So could DH. That's why I/we only had one.