To wonder what’s the point when I’m left with this after bills?

[ReLOa]

In a stressful job and single parent to nursery age child. I have 570 left after all bills and childcare and petrol, excluding food. What is the actual point in this?! We can’t do much at weekends and holidays are out of the question. I’m supposedly in a highly paid job (earn 70k) and I feel like giving up. Just been paid and looking ahead at the month I’ve already had to turn down some things like an adventure park day with friends as it was 28 pounds entry and a 35 mile round trip. I feel like I’m failing yet not sure what more I can possibly do?!

No one gets help with housing costs if they have a mortgage no matter how much they earn.

And whilst life might not be fair, if the tax and benefit system is so blatantly unfair to the people like OP who is actually funding it, then it has to change.

We don't get with our mortgage either and we are on UC. Many are in the same situation.

You were on here telling her she should be avoiding luxuries like bubble bath. Nothing to do with childcare in this instance - you’d still be better off as you’d have it paid for you - as UC would do the lifting.

What doesn’t help but does highlight the issue in this country is when people are goading op for being a higher earner - how dare she. All the while saying how much they have when topped up by the tax payer. Some may say that’s bragging or being deliberately obtuse. Maybe both.

It is a huge problem and is forcing women out of the workplace and out of home ownership.

This.

No, but highly paid jobs like OP's usually require living in an area with more expensive housing.

And that's what we haven't taken into account.

This would be even more unfair to OP if we did take it into account, but we don't even need to since it's so obviously wrong even without it - so we won't open that up to all the justifications.

If you're struggling to pay for things, then luxuries do have to take a back seat.

Again. Way to miss the point. A “rich” higher earners should in no way be part of a tax and welfare system where she has less income after deductions than those she is funding. That isn’t sustainable. However, it’s great fodder for those who want to highlight the issues facing the welfare system. Not so great for those who will really need it when the cutbacks are made. It can’t go on.

The point is that someone on £70k who is paying £17.3k of tax shouldn't be struggling more than someone on the benefit top ups her tax is funding.

This. Who then let’s not forget come on to goad her for being rich and tell her she should cut her cloth.

I pay tax also. I work full time.

Where did I say she was rich? Show me the post.

I don't disagree by the way, but it's not my personal fault. And it's not going to change overnight, so in the meantime OP may have to make cutbacks. I don't really see what the issue is to suggest that.

@Beezknees

Are you actively seeking better paid employment? Are you upskilling ? Are you willing to move for a better paid job?

Or are you comfortable earning what you are earning and getting subsided?

Is there any incentive at all for you to progress without it being to your detriment?

If the subsidies dropped would that mean you would have no choice ?

One of many posters coming on to tell op to cut back. The majority of the thread calling op privileged and rich. You telling her to cut back on bubble bath of all things - adds to this narrative.

It is the same on every higher earner thread. People falling over themselves to tell the ops they are rich whilst gleefully sharing their top ups on behalf of the net contributors. It’s wrong. I don’t know why so many of you delight in showing up to these threads to kick people like the op and tell them to cut back. It isn’t helpful or relevant. High earners have a choice to make in this situation; temporarily give up work or don’t. We have a tax system where work doesn’t pay for higher earning women and it’s wrong.

Yes, I started a new career last year after being made redundant (essentially started from scratch). Just this month negotiated a £2k pay rise, not much but it's a start.

Moving for a better paid job wouldn't really be applicable to me, I'm an unskilled worker so not much chance of getting a better paid job elsewhere. There are opportunities in my current company for promotions.

My DS is 16, about to leave school and I've been reducing my UC claim as he's got older as it will stop when he's 18 anyway. I'd manage without it, but would have to make cutbacks.

We do actually need low paid workers by the way, they do some of the most essential jobs in the country, if every one of them decided to get a better job we'd be pretty fucked.

Right, so you can't show me where I called OP rich and privileged, because I didn't. So you're inventing things now to fit your narrative.

And you also get benefit top ups.

How much is your net contribution: tax minus benefits?

OP's is £17.3k

What's your point? Do we judge people's worth by how much tax they pay? I'm not a net contributer, most people actually aren't.

I certainly don't feel guilty that my full time job does not pay enough to live on if that's what you're trying to do.

I am not. Read your posts.

I've read them. Please quote where I said rich and privileged.

If 'you're always better off working' because they only deduct 60p from UC for every £1 earned, surely everybody would be able to claim UC?

My point is that you're being subsidised by the OP.

So it's wrong that you have more disposable income than her.

That's such a simple concept, but it appears that some UC recipients are completely comfortable with it.