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

She was working when she became pregnant. Sounds like the dad couldn't afford to have kids as he's scarpered and OP is making informed decisions to do the best she can by her children to make up for HIS bad choices. HIS bad choices, not hers.

@Peppapigforlife thank you!! Look how easy it is for everyone to come and shame me, the mum who's trying to make things work even though I didn't start out this way. Nothing about the dad who's just walked away from his kids and isn't paying a penny

@Cheeseonpost

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

How do you know she has no savings for an emergency? You're allowed up to 6k in savings before they reduce your benefits.

Three years isn't uncommitted, or do you have to be married now to be committed? What about a woman who meets someone at 42, who wants to committ and only has a few years left to get pregnant by him? Is that allowed?

What's wrong with having a child in your early 20's? Are 20 year olds capable of love now? What about all the early years workers in their twenties? Should we leave our kids with them or is that a bad decision?

I know a lot of people who have had kids in their early twenties and they're doing great. I also know people who have had kids much later on who haven't been able to succeed or have success.
How do you know she won't go up the ladder at her work when she finishes her maternity leave and be able to save for a deposit and get a mortgage? She's literally only had two years out of work with her SMP topped up and has a whole lifetime of work, saving, paying a pension etc etc ahead of her. Her kids will be at school in a few years and her prospects will be even better and she will have the energy that many women in their 30's and 40's on here complain that they don't have.

@Waxonwaxoff0

I'd rather be friends with people who don't work than some people on this thread. Bet a lot of them are nicer people.

I don't think I've ever met a single person in my life that has sunk low enough to tell a person with incurable cancer that they haven't planned well.

We all do what we have to in order to get by. its galling watching the able members of society recieve money for nothing, when I work a job I hate & anything that is not spent is being saved for pension.
Right to buy needs to be ended & the system needs a boot in the arse to help people work.

stressincontinence
Not sure how to quote but the question about why people are annoyed at individuals rather than the system. I think most people who are annoyed at individuals are also annoyed at the system.But the reason they are annoyed at individuals is because they see some people on benefits who are able to work (or work more than they do) but are choosing not to because they are getting more on benefits than they'd earn. (I think the OP potentially falls into this group but I may have misread). The fact these people are choosing to get more on benefits is seen as an immoral choice on the belief that if people can work, they should. if everyone on lower income decided not to work and claim benefits instead, then arguably the system wouldn't be able to support it - so people choosing to get more on benefits rather than work on low income is perceived as a "fuck you" to people who are working all the hours on low income and getting less in return.
@stressincontinence hmm interesting point. Is it seen as morally wrong if someone who has kids will work the minimum so they can get the most in benefits in order to have a higher amount of money coming in? Should they work more hours to end up getting less money just because it's seen as 'morally right?'

Well yes 🤦‍♀️ they should work more hours for less money if they want to do what is morally right!

However I can understand why they don't because if i was in that situation I wouldn't work more hours either (because if I'm honest I don't always care about being morally right)

@Cheeseonpost

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Well I’m glad you made the right choices, obviously you are far more intelligent than those who didn’t. I really hope your not involve in an accident and are left unable to work, and I hope your husband doesn’t decide to leave you out of the blue.

We can all make sensible choices but sadly life doesn’t always go the way we planned, we can’t prepare for every situation.

You are implying that people chose to be in a situation where they have to rely on UC to survive? That’s not usually the case.

Nothing about the dad who's just walked away from his kids and isn't paying a penny

Well. I normally don't say things like this because sometimes the OP is being deliberately vague because he has died. It's not because the man gets a free pass.

I'd rather be friends with people who don't work than some people on this thread. Bet a lot of them are nicer people.

its easy to see how the tories get vote in isnt it?

Everyone is full of hate these days, hidden just below the surface, or behind anonymity. the attitudes you see toward the poor is astonishing.

Fundamentally, however, what the OP says is right, at baseline - it's the system that's fucked.

We will all have our niggles and internal biases (god knows I have mine, I'm far from from perfect), but we should stop punching down and round on the proper tax-avoiding billionaire criminals that are gaming macroeconomics and causing this nonsense in the first place.

And I’m glad mumsnet has pulled your post as your attitude is disgusting.

Benefit bashers fall into one of two categories:

1. They are part of the wealthy elite who are deliberately trying to distract the masses from the actual issue i.e., the obscene level of personal wealth a select few hoard and hide for themselves.

2. They are part of the masses who are gullible enough to swallow their masters lies and focus their anger where their told like good little puppets.

[quote Florenz]@MrsSchrute "If this ever happened, which I pray it never will, then thousands and thousands of people would simply die destitute. Children would go into care as their parents wouldn't be able to afford to care for them, crime would skyrocket, and ultimately it would cost the government massively more than the current, unfit for purpose, system."

I don't think this would happen. People aren't stupid and would adapt. People would be far more circumspect about having children, and pay more into pensions etc. Families would help each other more instead of looking at it as being "the governments job" to help out their family member. And as a result people would be far more keen to get themselves back on an even keel if it was their family that was providing for them while not working rather than "society" in general.[/quote]
Umm this is literally the case in America and there are thousands of homeless families in shelters and disabled people living on the streets. A huge amount of people rely on food stamps to survive, queue for food banks on a multiple weekly basis and spend their days begging.

Thank you @MNHQ for pulling that posters disgusting posts and banning them.

No excuses for the complete bile they were spilling

@lalafam

The benefit system should be in place for people who have genuine reasons to not work. Not people who made poor decisions and ended up single with multiple children and useless fathers. Me and DH waited years until we had children. Worked our arses off to get a house, jobs that worked around children. Then and only then did we stop contraception. I know people who work multiple jobs just to keep a roof over their heads and I know people who just pop kids out and use them as a reason to not work. Shameful

And if your husband was to walk out on you . Refuse to pay towards the children what then? Would you lose your home? Would you have to cut work hours? I'm sure there have been many woman in mn that think it will never happen to them.

Another example if I had 3 children. Been in a domestic violence relationship I manage to leave. This means I end up in a refuge. Had to give up my job. So that puts Me on to full benefits. Does this mean I deserve a bashing for not making good choices?

@AllThingsServeTheBeam me neither. Everyone in my life is decent, thank fuck. One of my family members works with abused women, many on benefits after escaping domestic violence. She is a much superior person to a lot of people on this thread. Being a good person is about how you treat others, not how well you've done financially.

I think most people who get annoyed are also struggling to pay bills. When we had DD my husband was in first year of teaching on around £1300 a month after tax working 50-60 hours a week. So I had no choice but to go back to work when she was 4 months old.

So yes it's not easy to see that you get £1000 a month more.

When you're working you don't get an extra £300/month when you have a second child.

We got nothing free & had around same as you for 4 of us plus running cars to get to work. Mortgage £1000 so slightly less.

That's why people get annoyed when someone not working gets same or even more.

It was really hard getting babies and toddlers up & out early to travel 45 mins to work. Plus leaving them wasn't easy as I really wanted to spend more time with them.

The only Mums I know of who haven't had to work are either on benefits or have well paid partner.

That said it's not the fault of the children & I don't want any child living in poverty.

@BulletTrain

Honestly? It's because wages are low. £2k on benefits is £24k a year which is pretty much the average salary for your age group. Half the working people will earn less than you and have commuting/childcare costs.

This is why. OP is acting like it's so confusing. Many working people don't get 24k (PRE-tax) but agree that anger is misplaced.

Some people do make being on benefits a lifestyle choice & you have generations of families who have never worked.

Frustration is also at people having babies in unstable situations then having to be on benefits as single parents (e.g. having a baby with a man who one has known for 6 months in a volatile relationship - not suggesting this is OP's situation - but see story after story on here then shock that men aren't paying for kids following casual / non-committed relationships. Shock horror!)

And if your husband was to walk out on you . Refuse to pay towards the children what then? Would you lose your home? Would you have to cut work hours?

@lalafam believes she made better choices than this. Her husband would never leave her. And if he did, he would always ensure he supported her and the children properly because she made good choices and that sort of thing only happens to people who make bad choices.

The numbers who have had to take shite like that back…..

Yes this

I know my dd struggles to get her daughter out of the house and to nursery then on to work

Nursery is expensive

They'd like another dc but are waiting till she is in school because childcare is so expensive

@AchillesPoirot

I lost money in my first job after I graduated. It would’ve been better short term to stay on benefits.

Not in the long term but initially I lost around 4K a year.

That’s what’s wrong - it is better to stay on benefits than go to work.

Yes me too. I had to leave my one bedroom flat and go into a house share because I couldn’t claim housing benefit anymore. It’s a strange system. I expect people to be able to get support for decent living arrangements if they can’t work but I also believe that working should be more beneficial for those who can work. How do we balance it?

@Sugarplumfairy65 they have been deleted thankfully. I am so sorry that you had to read those comments.

I’m disabled. Disabled to the extent of wheelchair user out, stairlift, wet room, various adaptions at home. Also have a stoma so lots of extra showering and washing. No heating going on this year.
Heated blanket and extra layers. My feet can get a bit chilly as I can’t manage socks.
Nothing to do with being feckless. But bloody hell it’s the system that’s screwed.
I still have people (including on here) who reckon I’m faking it. Bloody joke.

I don't judge people on benefits. I can only assume that negative opinions are coming from a place of privilege with little understanding of what life is like for most people. Maybe they have savings, family support, education, good health etc. I don't know. Anyway even without a tale of hardship - if there's money you're entitled to, why wouldn't you claim it to improve your circumstances? I'd rather take the money than the moral high ground. Having said that - I claim DLA for my son and don't feel particularly comfortable sharing that. Maybe people would think he doesn't look disabled enough, I don't know.