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

You say god forbid someone should have to claim benefits but I’m a single parent working full time for less than you get for staying at home with your kids. I am eligible for no benefits other than child benefit which is on top of your figures!

you get a lot of money for not working and having kids

OP is on maternity leave and will be returning to work. Does that fact not fit your narrative?

@ShinyS1

Op, you get a lot of money for not working and having kids. Working people pay for UC, and a lot of working couples really consider the timing of their kids and whether or not they can afford it.

Your basic premise is, well I'm offered it, so why shouldn't I take it, and you're quite right, why shouldn't you.

However, to come on here, lay bare the very generous amount of money you receive due to your choices, and then ask why people get pissed off about it, shows a woeful understanding of the sacrifices and hardships working people (particularly on minimum wage) face.

@ShinyS1 again, I am working. I'm just on maternity leave. My whole point of including the figures were to show the difference of how much I can get whilst on maternity leave/if I chose not to work vs my actual salary. Why benefit bash when the system makes it easier for people to stay on benefits as opposed to working full time when they'd get less money. That was literally my point but clearly didn't go to plan as people have only focused on the figures which is 1) an estimate and 2) something I don't even receive right now

So are you not planning to take your mother’s advice and will be returning to full time work?

So are you not planning to take your mother’s advice and will be returning to full time work?

She has said so again and again!

She hasn’t said if she is planning to return full time or part time. She talks about being part time in her op to maximise the help she will get.

If I popped a baby out

Older women never seem to pop babies out, not men. Awful phrase.

Really wouldn't be having a go because anyone could end up in a position where they need help or end up as a single parent, though some pompous people seem to think they're exempt from hardship and sticky situations

Does being on maternity leave now mean you don't work? My job is waiting for me for when I'm ready to go back.....

Wow people really cannot read. I've acknowledged this throughout the thread but in the OP it literally says' 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.....
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.

Like seriously. You're jumping to all these conclusions and judgements when you haven't even read the post properly

@pollygartertidywife

Why is it that people have children they can't afford.

Why does 99% contraception NOT work for people who can claim benefits ? Me thinks the precautions are not taken with real honesty because the state pick up the cost ...

Why are 'naice ' mummy's at the high performing primary not carrying around children by multiple partners .. but 2 or 3 kids max by the same DH....

Whereas under performing primary is over run with kids that have 4 or five siblings , come to school without a coat and haven't had breakfast..

Pretty sure that efficacy of contraception is not income based.. but ' can be arsed' controls .

Inconvenient truth, for which you will get a lot of stick.

@Cheekypeach

It's amazing OP how selective you are in the posts you pick to respond to. The ones you can justify nothing is your fault.

Yep. The bare bones of it is OP is getting £2k a month from the rest of us because she chose not to use reliable contraception. And now wants us to pat her on the back and tell her she deserves it.

Very true

@sst1234 this is also for you as you seem to agree that I'm 'taking 2K from the rest of you.' 2k where?

*I really think you need to open your eyes and read properly. I'm on £1670 a month. The £2388 was an estimation of what I'd be on once I have my second baby and receive UC PLUS SMP. Without SMP I'll be on something like £1700. Only £30 more than what I'm on now with two kids. Clearly I shouldn't have put that figure there but silly me in thinking grown adults know how to read properly.

600 of the 2388 would be from statutory maternity pay. Do you understand that, yes or no. When maternity leave finishes, I'd be on £1700. Like you seriously cannot be this dumb. I've wrote it so many times*

@MorningStarling

I'm on £1670 a month.

Which is £5 more than a person earning £2000 a month would take home.

@MorningStarling and as someone pointed out, if there rent was £1200 then they'd be entitled to some help. Maybe not a lot, but it could be something

@vivainsomnia

This is exactly it. I don't understand why the system is set up in a way where you could lose more just by working But you know, you are a grown up. You can make your own decisions. No-one is forcing anyone to claim benefits instead of working.

If you opt for benefits because you are a few hundreds pounds better off I the present time, when it is an obvious fact that in the longer term everyone is better off working FT.

Interesting

@Tomanynames

Why do people not understand simple stuff. The 1200 she does not see that gos to her landlord. She did not choose the rent cost. Her benefits are paying that landlords mortgage. But its the op that gets bashed for it. If op was in social housing paying 400 a month no one would say anything. Well I suppose it will then be the free house brigade.

The zone 1 /London bashing . London is not just for the rich. Op said her support network is there . Her Job could be there as well.

The people who have mortgage you choose to do that you could have rented and got help with the rent. The benefits won't pay for your house. (Unless your a landlord)

People do understand, you are choosing to ignore feb obvious. Most people paying their own way would have a struggle to afford to live in zone 1. OP, does not pay her own way and has others pay for her to live in zone 1. She also has had two kids now that she cannot afford. These are choices.

Just gonna repost this as it seems a lot of people missed this very valid point

Peppapigforlife
I think what no one seems to realise is that OP's UC monthly payment is high, is because rents are high.
If rents were lower, she wouldn't be getting 24k a year, but the average worker would still be getting 24k and have a lot more disposable income, compared to the OP.

For example, let's say everyone's rent was £500 pm. She'd get her rent payment and around £700- £800 per month to pay for her and her two kids. After your rent was paid, you, as an average earner would have £1500 to pay for you and your two kids, and possibly a partner with £2000 a month to contribute as well. The reason OP is better off on benefits is because of the cost of renting. If renting was affordable, she would have an incentive of doubling her monthly income, to go back to work.

It's better to direct your anger to the cost of renting and those who are causing and allowing the rental costs to be so extortionate that is taking up your wages. You're not having all your money go to subsidise people on benefits, you're having all your money go to your landlord.

@SamphiretheStickerist

Some of that 'bashing' is discussion. It often gets drowned oiut by louder, more angry voices, but some really is asking for a logical debate on the viability, appropriateness and sustainability of any and all benefits.

• Some seem to be increasingly useless, impossible to access properly.
• Others seem to be misplaced, making moving off them harder than it should be - the new version of the old Benefits Gap, which was bloody murderous for some.
• Some seem to be nannying, implicated in a minority of people being able to choose to claim and remain unwaged

None of the system really works. But we can't discuss it because of the emotions involved. Some ask questions that look to others like accusations; some give reasons that to tohers look like excuses. And instead of discussing the wider picture threads like this gte bogged down in the minutia and personal to'ing and fro'ing.

And then, much like successive governments, nothing gets understood or changed.

Exactly this

You still haven’t said if you’re planning to go back full time or part time.

We receive DLA for our DC, and I receive Carers Allowance, as I am his full time carer.

No other benefits because DH earns over threshold for them. His middle class family, which are generally the more Mumsnetty types, absolutely abhor the fact that we receive these benefits, want me in work and my DC to not be disabled.

My working class family see the reality of our situation, how exhausted I am, how absolutely necessary I am to the wellbeing of DC, and think I deserve more than I'm getting.

It depends a lot on the background of people, I think.

I am not taking money away from people that deserve it more, I am taking exactly what my child and I are entitled to. And I have no shame in doing so.

@AchillesPoirot

You still haven’t said if you’re planning to go back full time or part time.

Literally in the OP

When returning back to work, I would be entitled to some benefits however because I'd be working full time,

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
But tour using the conditional tense rather than future. Why would instead of will u less because indeed, you are considering your other options.

And you are totally selective in the posts you respond to as it suits you.

Once I've finished maternity leave. I'll be going back to work full time which is what I was doing prior. I hope you can understand that
Oh, so now it suddenly has become will, conveniently!

I simply don't care if you actually are entitled to the benefits. You are. (general "you" there, not directly addressed at OP). But coupled with an, admit it, goady post, the word is incendiary.

But. As pp said: you haven't "been working for years". If I'm generous I'd say it could be a maximum of... maybe 7 or 8? Can you not see how that rubs people up? And that is why the post is goady and a lot of the reactions are as they are.

Personally? I write to politicians regularly (it is not exactly the same where i am, but low wage jobs with benefit top-ups are very well established in a lot of Europe) and ask what they are going to do to bring these jobs up to scratch. And i know that the answer is: nothing. By paying corporations, which is what benefit top-ups like UC do, to stay where they are and at least have jobs available, even if the pay is shit, employment looks to be healthy and not 1930s style mass unemployment.

I left school in the Thatcher years. I know how hard it can be. I have worked, except for a short maternity leave break since i was 18 and I'm approaching my pension. So someone saying "i've worked for years" with the implication - so I've earned it - doesn't wash that well.
As i said: goady.

I have replied several times in good faith but meh. OP doesn't want to hear reasoned balanced argument. She doesn't even really want to know why people benefit bash. She does appear, from all her posts, to want to position herself as one of the modern-day "deserving poor" which is a label i don't apply and won't accept. People in poverty, by either of the measures, should be helped.