Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Are we morally obliged to work ?

611 replies

Justthisonce12 · 17/11/2022 11:55

630,000 economically inactive people in the UK not claiming benefits. Early retiree’s I guess.

Hunt plans to tackle this and encourage work force participation to allow businesses to grow. ie cheap labour I presume ? But also preventing a brain drain.

Will be interesting to see how he plans to address this.

OP posts:
ComtesseDeSpair · 17/11/2022 13:07

Luckynumbereight · 17/11/2022 13:04

No, you are not morally obliged to work. If you can find a way to live without having to work you’ve basically won at life.

However, you are morally obliged to not be a burden on others.

Can anyone find a way to live, though, in why they don’t rely on any public services - which have to be funded - whatsoever. Most of us believe that there should be a welfare state and a social safety net. If we want it to exist then we all need to think about our moral duty to fund it. There have been several posters on this threads who have basically acknowledged they want the welfare state to exist for those who need it and in case they ever need it, but also admitted that they do not personally pay into it because they don’t need to work for their own family’s needs. Is that tenable? Society is all of us. If we want the benefits of society why shouldn’t we be prepared to put ourselves out to protect it?

Sunnysideup999 · 17/11/2022 13:07

Make childcare more affordable and available and you will have lots of SAHM feeling like they could return to work without keeling over from exhaustion.
also, make it much easier to return to work after a career break (usually to raise children).
I’d be happy to go back to work as a fully trained and experienced professional , but after 5 years out of the work force, with no contacts or references or up to date market knowledge it would be virtually impossible .

healthadvice123 · 17/11/2022 13:07

@DuchessDandelion 600000 with potentially families so the effect is on more than just those targeted and maybe changes that whole families prospect
You can't always just tax the companies and never address anything else as well
It takes looking at everything not just doing some things
Plus tax companies too much they leave for overseas its a balance

LaGioconda · 17/11/2022 13:08

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 17/11/2022 11:59

If someone can legitimately fund themselves without claiming support from the state, then why should they be forced to work?

There's a decent argument about repaying society for your education (including Higher Education), health care etc. Even if you access all those privately, chances are you are heavily reliant on work and services from people who don't.

FootfallFootball · 17/11/2022 13:09

As someone who turns 50 next birthday, I'd like better help from the National Careers Service regarding retraining, etc. Rang them recently and they were pushing me to become a TA. Because of course TAs are leaving in droves with very good reason

HumourReplacementTherapy · 17/11/2022 13:09

I dont think that was it.
It's the people who are currently claiming UC and working part time. The state is funding via a top up.
However. ....
It's not that easy. Lots of people can't increase their hours/the full time jobs aren't there and employers don't offer enough flexibility to allow someone could take 2 part time jobs.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 17/11/2022 13:10

MidnightMeltdown · 17/11/2022 12:36

I think the only issue is that some people retiring early will have underestimated the cost, won't have a big enough pension, and may find themselves destitute in old age.

Even if you own your own home, repairs and upkeep are expensive, and you also need to estimate the cost of inflation over the years.

Yep, and we have a generation in their 30s who maybe won't ever be able to own their own home anyway. Who is going to pay their rent when they are retired, because I'm pretty sure their pension isn't going to cover it? There is an absolute shit storm coming in 20 years or so. People WILL end up destitute in old age.

The major, major mistake is not putting a cap on mortgage and rent limits from the end of the 1990s, combined with not building enough new houses, plus allowing too many buy to let mortgages and making houses become an investment vehicle. The most fundamental need in life is to first and foremost have shelter. Everyone needs that. It doesn't matter how much you put people's wages up, if the cost of housing keeps going up and up and up then so will the demand for wages to cover the cost of housing. If you can make housing affordable rather than spending far too big a proportion of your income on it, so that there isn't enough to cover energy or food costs (which they tell us we don't have any control over due to global issues), then people would have more disposable income to put into things like hospitality, or risking starting a new business etc. Or being more likely to be able to afford to work in low-paid but fulfilling jobs like TA, carer etc.

To me, the answer is housing, housing and housing. And the rest would follow on from there.

xJ0y · 17/11/2022 13:12

Wow, cheek of him. People who aren't claiming don't need to justify themselves.
I bet a lot of these women are caring. In some capacity.

VitaminX · 17/11/2022 13:12

It's not possible to be 'self-sufficient' in a modern welfare state. Even if you don't need specific benefits for the basic costs of surviving, you're still using infrastructure, healthcare, emergency services, the education system, etc. Everyone receives benefits. That's the whole idea behind taxation.

However, no, I do not believe we are morally obliged to work because there are many, many ways to contribute to society that add value beyond paying tax. And of course there are also lots of taxes that you pay besides income tax.

I think it's extremely complicated to settle the true balance between what each individual contributes to and takes from society.

IncompleteSenten · 17/11/2022 13:13

If it's morals were talking about, is it really morally right to take a job you don't need instead of leaving it for someone who can't financially support themselves without working?

vera99 · 17/11/2022 13:13

These buggers get to spaff £30 billion up the wall in Truss's notorious mini-budget (and the rest not forgetting £150 bn Brexit and counting) and are happy when the plebs fight amongst themselves discussing the morality or otherwise of whether folk who are able to maintain themselves should work or not.

Got it. Punch down and around but never up. Classic Tory divide and rule.

Ffsmakeitstop · 17/11/2022 13:13

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 17/11/2022 11:59

If someone can legitimately fund themselves without claiming support from the state, then why should they be forced to work?

Absolutely spot on. If I could afford to retire without being a drain on society I would.

NowWhatBipolar · 17/11/2022 13:14

I’m economically inactive and don’t claim benefits.

As soon as I can access adequate mental health treatment and care, and fund retraining, and get affordable childcare, I will be able to get back into the workforce.

At the moment I’m not fit to work and wasting my best years waiting for mental health help that doesn’t seem to be coming. I’ve been in this situation for 7 years so I won’t hold my breath for change.

healthadvice123 · 17/11/2022 13:15

@CurlyhairedAssassin that is so true and nobody sees it
So many were happy to make the huge profits in their houses going up but not seeing the bigger picture
Its successive goverment who have failed at this yet no one seems to recognise this
House prices and rent take a huge percentage of peoples wages , often if a couple one persons wage can be on rent
Any person on an average salary in london now cannot afford to live there, and other uk cities and places like cornwall etc
I live in a small town in sw where houses rent seems cheap compared to many parts but still 6 x peoples salary or rent one half if a couples entire wage
If we sort housing it would be a huge step in the right direction but its been allowed to go on too long

TheLostNights · 17/11/2022 13:16

I hate working. Find it mind numbingly boring, as well as physically draining. I am constantly tired. If I didn't have to work for money I would give up tomorrow. Life shouldn't be just about paying bills and then dying.

Newlifestartingatlast · 17/11/2022 13:17

EndlessRain · 17/11/2022 12:01

Well, some people need to work to support the system. And those who can't work. That's the way even the most basic societies work.

Preumsably though, people who have retired have done a fair bit of work and are (again presumably) supporting themselves in their choices. Also working to support a scoiety doesn't necessarily mean paid work.

It's a tough one.

I’m one of those early retirees you’re referring to as “supporting themselves”
. I retired at 55 . I was already signed off sick for 5 months before I left. I was in a very bad place mentally due to work related stress (business reorganisation and bullying bosses). I was also doing a job that should have been 30% time travel away form home, In last 2 years I was away from home for over 50% of my nights including weekends - mostly abroad in Europe or long haul destinations. I was jet lagged, sleep deprived and to cap it all had the most horrendous menopause symptoms including interstitial cystitis that wasn’t being treated effectively, and bowel incontinence- none of which work well on long haul flights and being in hotels.

I am very fortunate that I earned enough to have acquired sufficient pension to retire at such an early age and help myself to get to a better, healthier place.

but in referring to people like me as “self sufficient”, you are missing a big point. I’m not just “self sufficient”: people like me, who are fortunate enough to retire voluntarily early, are also paying still paying tax on their pension income, to continue to support the “system”. I will continue to pay tax when my state pension kicks in finally- some of that will be at higher rates by then (quite rightly)

So whilst I’m economically inactive on paper, I most certainly am still contributing to society’s financial needs. I also do a lot of volunteering to help society in other ways- again in common with a lot of people who can retire early.

I was contacted recently by an old ex boss asking if I wanted some short term contract work (skills I have are in demand). I seriously contemplated it for about 2 weeks as I liked working for him, and would have got a lot of money for something that I liked doing. Big as I started to really think of reality of what I’d be doing I remembered just how ill and depressed I had become . So, here i am still economically inactive.

I now use my brain in a completely different way. I could make money from it- but what I’d get wouldn’t come anywhere close to my labour time. So I do it purely for pleasure and without any pressure of having to do it.

second point: I supported my ex for 20 years as a carer and wife due to his severe and enduring mental illness. I was sole breadwinner for 20 years, effectively sole parent and the best thing he had to a CPN. At no time did we get any benefits from the state, as I earnt too much, and for those benefits he may have got he didn’t want to go through the process of applying and interviews (he had paranoia so not exactly conducive for going through interviews about his mental health). He couldn’t work- safeguarding issues meant he’d been fired a few times, exited under other reasons even more time - he was unemployable . There are thousands of families like ours where 1 person is “economically inactive” but in reality have illnesses etc that make it impossible to hold down a job but do not want to go through horrible process of applying for disability benefits. They’re on the list of “economically inactive”. In reality if they got into the “system” they’d be net “takers” not contributors”.

In all, it’s a very misleading, headline grabbing statistic. Click bait really.

If the government is batshit crazy enough to try to do something about it as a “single” entity they’re even more dumb than I thought. There are multiple complex and personal reasons people are economically inactive -a lot could be resolved with funding for NHS, mental health services, better labour regulations, menopausal support , better social care for elderly , available /cheaper child care, etc- but government isn’t going to spend money on even what we currently have, let alone resolving the route causes.

FirstnameSuesecondnamePerb · 17/11/2022 13:18

Well he can just fuck off generally.

SouperNoodle · 17/11/2022 13:18

I'm a SAHM so also in that category. I do plan to go back to work when youngest starts school next year though

Justthisonce12 · 17/11/2022 13:18

FirstnameSuesecondnamePerb · 17/11/2022 13:18

Well he can just fuck off generally.

I mean, yeah ☺️

OP posts:
Newlifestartingatlast · 17/11/2022 13:20

Ffsmakeitstop · 17/11/2022 13:13

Absolutely spot on. If I could afford to retire without being a drain on society I would.

If you can retire early, you normally were high wages . You will still pay tax on pensionable income , so not just “funding yourself” , you’ll be continuing to support the “system” by net tax contribution.
any of same people will become higher rate tax payers when their state pension finally kicks in too. Hardly just funding themselves.
they’ll probably pay more tax than likes of Rees Mogg

Haffiana · 17/11/2022 13:21

Amazing. They kicked out all those tax-paying forriners who were here stealing our jobs and - o dear, too many jobs unfilled now, and no tax income from them anymore.

You tolerated this, so your children will be next.

ForTheLoveOfSleep · 17/11/2022 13:22

I would think he's talking about families in reciept of UC where, at least, one adult doesn't work full time.

For example, a family of 4 (two adults and two children between 4 and 10) where one adult works 30 hours per week (NMW) will recieve around £270 per week UC. going up to 39 hours reduces the UC claim to around £240. It may seem a small amount but it adds up.

The means-tested benefits bill should drastically fall with the NMW increase next year anyway.

luckylavender · 17/11/2022 13:23

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 17/11/2022 11:59

If someone can legitimately fund themselves without claiming support from the state, then why should they be forced to work?

Because if everyone did that the country would grind to a halt. No money for public services.

mimi0708 · 17/11/2022 13:25

vera99 · 17/11/2022 13:13

These buggers get to spaff £30 billion up the wall in Truss's notorious mini-budget (and the rest not forgetting £150 bn Brexit and counting) and are happy when the plebs fight amongst themselves discussing the morality or otherwise of whether folk who are able to maintain themselves should work or not.

Got it. Punch down and around but never up. Classic Tory divide and rule.

This!! Why don't the Tories take responsibility for the shit they have done. Why would I work more in shit conditions for shit pay when the government is happy to throw money to their friends and incapable of taking responsibility for what they have done. Jeremy Hunt is the master of gaslighting it makes me so mad.

SofiaSoFar · 17/11/2022 13:26

ForTheLoveOfSleep · 17/11/2022 13:22

I would think he's talking about families in reciept of UC where, at least, one adult doesn't work full time.

For example, a family of 4 (two adults and two children between 4 and 10) where one adult works 30 hours per week (NMW) will recieve around £270 per week UC. going up to 39 hours reduces the UC claim to around £240. It may seem a small amount but it adds up.

The means-tested benefits bill should drastically fall with the NMW increase next year anyway.

It shouldn't be an option to just not work enough hours and then rely on the taxpayer to make up the shortfall.

Hopefully this is what he's addressing.