Fed up of my cousins comments about benefits and UC

[glassor2]

I’m a single mum of two kids, ages 13 and 5. My older son has a relationship with his dad, but my younger son’s dad moved away a couple of years ago and doesn’t see him often-usually once or twice a year. He doesn’t provide any financial support, and since he moves around for work (he used to live in Canada and now lives in Australia), it has been challenging to get child maintenance to chase him.

I work 3-4 days a week (sometimes more if there’s overtime available) and receive a top up from UC. My mum occasionally helps with child care, but she also has a full time job. It can be difficult handling everything on my own, but I manage.

Anyway, I have a family member I'm quite close to, and she often makes comments, not aimed at me, but towards people who claim UC. For example, she mentioned that it's unfair for her to pay almost £300 a month in tax while others can work part time and avoid paying anything (I don’t earn enough to pay tax) and that she has to pay more to subsidise the people that don't. She even told the entire family that she pays almost £400 a month, including national insurance, which made things awkward and nobody knew what to say.

From what I know, she doesn't earn a huge wage, so I can see why it would be frustrating for her to have to pay that much. It's a lot of money. However, it's not our fault, and if she's upset, her anger should be directed at the government, not at those who are rightfully claiming.

Everyone’s situation is different, and some people need help. I never chose to be a single parent, and I can't control the fact that my ex chose to leave and decided not to support his child financially. I'm doing my best, just like many others on UC are.

I don't think she's intentionally trying to upset me, but she is.

AIBU? How do I tackle this?

Ask Nigel.

Utterly ridiculous comment. There isn't enough social housing. Aside from that many tenants prefer private rentals. Private landlords are meeting a demand and they aren't charities.

I am a high tax payer and have been grumbling a bit lately. Too much perhaps.

But you seem exactly the sort of person who needs UC.
You don't have a partner. You have small children. I assume you will work full time later. I am not seeing entitlement.

Anyway ignore your cousin.

"Nigel" is a fucking rent-a-gob layabout who wouldn't know hard work if it bit him on his pampered backside. He hasn't got a plan beyond sound bites and whining.

That is disgraceful and totally unacceptable. Think it's a good example of how the welfare system as it stands can produce such perverse and obviously outrageous dynamics like this!

@LakieLady and that’s a big part of the issue - the amount of private renting needed , especially in the southern half of the country where buying is way more difficult due to size of mortgages needed- I had this conversation back in my original midlands home town ( ex mining town) and was explaining to a friend who couldn’t understand why we hadn’t bought that even an average 3 bed semi in our area was £550k and even if we moved somewhere not quite as nice location wise but similar area we would be looking at £400k minimum. She bought a 3 bed semi beautifully done up a couple of years ago for £195k . Housing subsidy is such a huge part of the issue which is why we need more good quality social housing - even at £900 a month rents in expensive areas most tenants would be quids in, and subsidy’s via UC would drop hugely .

There isn’t, but in an ideal world there would be enough social housing that private landlords wouldn’t be needed (and then if someone chose to privately rent that would be on them to pay the rent).

But then I completely disagree with the concept of housing being an investment.

It’s not a ridiculous comment, just a different viewpoint. What a shame you have to resort to insults.

You're comparing 2 separate things. Private landlords aren't charities. The rent for a property is whatever it is. I'm not going to reduce it because some one can't afford it.

You still have to pay rent in social housing.

This 👆

But also:

1. Why are rent and childcare so unaffordable? This is the reason so many people - mostly single mothers - quite literally cannot afford to work, properly work. I've known women actually pay to work because they don't want to risk being left behind in their careers. There's something very, very wrong with that system.
2. Men definitely should not be able to avoid their responsibilities so easily. Wasn't the CMS set up to fix this? It doesn't work.
3. This one won't be popular but let's be honest, there are an awful lot of women who should also be more circumspect about whom they choose to reproduce with. I know that sometimes 'shit happens' despite best intentions, and I don't know the OP's exact circumstances but two children by two different absent fathers doesn't look good. We all know women who've knowingly reproduced with feckless twats who've never had any intention of doing right by the woman or child. Be more careful about who you allow to stick their dick into you, for Pingu's sake.

So what are you suggesting? Nationalising private housing stock? Because private landlords are needed.

Yes, but the rents are usually cheaper as they don’t need to worry about making a profit.

Yes, why not? It’s that or a vast programme of building social housing.

This one won't be popular but let's be honest, there are an awful lot of women who should also be more circumspect about whom they choose to reproduce with.

I agree.

While I have sympathy with you, OP, it does absolutely infuriate me that these men aren't forced to pay for their children. They shouldn't be able to dodge it by changing countries. Ironically, I believe that if you were in Australia as well, his wages would automatically be garnished to pay his obligations. I don't know why the government is not far, far tougher on defaulting fathers.

I have a toddler and work full time, and have to pay child care. Many do.

I don't know why other people have to be so rude and make other people feel small. Yes it's annoying to pay tax and to feel like other people make the choice (sorry OP but whatever you say it is a choice, as you could use UC to help pay your childcare costs whilst you work) to stay at home and earn less so the taxpayer picks up the cost. But it is also annoying to hear people that pay barely any tax like her whinging on. No matter what circumstances you are in everyone feels screwed over. That's human nature. You could be a billionaire and be annoyed at the level of taxation. Or on benefits and annoyed at the low level of them. You could be a massive NHS user and cost the state a fortune, or you could have no kids and no medical needs and cost very little. Unless someone is going to do a cost benefit analysis of every individual then how is she to know who costs the state more money?

We all need to just be kinder to other people and not moan in front of them about how hard our lives are because of other people. Life can be miserable enough without other people making us feel worse.

@TaupeLemur an excellent post.

So basically you're suggesting Communism. Well that's worked out so well everywhere it's been tried.

I went back to work full time when my son was 2 months old. I am a net contributor by a considerable margin.

Exactly, it's noticeable that when people lose their jobs they don't celebrate that they can now claim benefits. Surely if life is so good on benefits they would be ecstatic.

It's not communism that's the problem, it's personality cults.

You're entirely missing the point. No one has said that landlord are charities.

The point being made was that when housing element is paid to a benefit claimant (i.e., someone viewed as being lower down the social order) they're a scrounger because "that's taxpayers money" however when a landlord (typically viewed as being higher up the ladder) receives that exact same housing element money in payment of rent, it's perceived to be absolutely fine even though it's still taxpayers money.

Ditto funded childcare. Benefit claimants are viewed negatively for getting "taxpayers hard-earned money" and being "subsidised by the state" (entirely disregarding that many benefit claimants also work) while people benefiting from funded childcare aren't viewed that way despite that funding also being taxpayer's money and a state subsidisation.

Attitudes towards claimants appear to be heavily influenced by their perceived social class and position in society.

No , it's Communism which is the problem.

Also see the recent thread by a poster whose DD got sanctioned.