to think some people actually wish we didn't live in a welfare state?

[milkgoddessmakesthefinestmilk]

all this talk, about whether it is right for parents to choose not to return to work, and why do people keep having children when they are on a low income.
and all the other million threads on MN about people on benefits etc.

makes me wonder, do you actually wish we didn't live in a welfare state?

i certainaly don't, no NHS people dying because they counldn't afford treatment.
people that are disabled, sick and unable to get a job, struggling to eat, living rough etc

be a pretty unpleasant country then you know.

totally agree janni. It makes no sense whatsoever. Whole system needs an overhaul.

Just because there is a choice, it doesnt mean the system has to be so blatantly unfair though. As wealth, well being or whatever is relative, it's about having greater differentials isnt it? Studying hard and getting qualifications and training, and maybe commuting to a job where the pressures are greater, the tasks you need to achieve are more demanding than stacking shelves, should mean getting relative rewards shouldnt it?
I have no problem with a welfare system which acts as a safety net for those in need - I doubt any sane person would have a problem with it. But someone who is on benefits and is capable of work, should be able to get a job and be significantly better off by doing so. Not just a couple of quid a week, but a big enough difference to make a quantifiable difference to their quality of life. There needs to be a financial incentive to work, otherwise, sadly, the reality is that some people will always choose not to.

Just because there is a choice, it doesnt mean the system has to be so blatantly unfair though. As wealth, well being or whatever is relative, it's about having greater differentials isnt it? Studying hard and getting qualifications and training, and maybe commuting to a job where the pressures are greater, the tasks you need to achieve are more demanding than stacking shelves, should mean getting relative rewards shouldnt it?
I have no problem with a welfare system which acts as a safety net for those in need - I doubt any sane person would have a problem with it. But someone who is on benefits and is capable of work, should be able to get a job and be significantly better off by doing so. Not just a couple of quid a week, but a big enough difference to make a quantifiable difference to their quality of life. There needs to be a financial incentive to work, otherwise, sadly, the reality is that some people will always choose not to.

oops!

Jammi the minimum CTC if you have a baby under 1 year is actually £1090.

If you are only on the minimum CTC then DHs income must be higher than the £1000 that u would get if he wasnt there so you would actually be losing that income before you gained in tax credits IYKWIM.

£1000-£1000+£1000=£1000

DH would of course still have his wages for himself if he was to move out, but then he would have to use that to pay for somwhere else to live plus all the bills and council tax there plus maintenence payments for the DC to you of course

It's also logical that when there is a family split, the standard of living once you are expecting to live as two separate households, is going to go down. I'm absolutely not having a go at lone parents, people who decide to split etc and I'm well aware that some people find themselves in horrendous situations, and that's exactly where the welfare state is important, as that safety net. But sometimes people can be unrealistic. Some one at work split from her husband last year, and drove us mad, moaning about how they were having to sell their 3 bed house, she was going to have to move into a 2 bed house with their 2 boys, and her husband was going to rent a flat. Well..... Duh!!! Of course if you are going to be running two homes they are likely to be smaller than one!! But she seriously seemed to think that someone (society ?? ) should wave a magic wand and keep her in the lifestyle to which she was accustomed!! If I split with my DH, there's no way I'd expect to be able to live in the same kind of house we live in now. That ain't rocket science.

Tenacious - yes, there are huge rewards in education, and in having an interesting job, that are nothing to do with earning power.
BUT that doesnt mean that people shouldnt be paid fairly for what they do. If you have spent years training for a specialist (and necessary) role in society, then of course you should be rewarded for it.
And in many ways this argument is more important for lower status jobs. I have an interesting career; therefore there are lots of positives about it apart from the money. If, however, I was going to do a dull, repetitive job like stacking shelves, it's likely that the financial reward would be the only benefit. That's the only reason a lot of these jobs get done. So if there isnt a big enough gap between being on benefits and being in that kind of job, is it surprising that some people would rather take the benefits?

I dont think anybody would like to see the welfare system abolished - just reformed. It has gone from being a safety net to a lifestyle choice and thats where it is wrong.

We have one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy - I wonder how many of those babies would have been conceived if the mothers knew that they had to support them themselves with no benefits? Add into that the children who are conceived in "throwaway" relationships etc and no wonder we have a benefit system that is abused.

JSA allowance is also abused, people live on it for years with no intention of getting a job.

At lease IS and IB are slowly being reformed, I still think not working until a child reaches age 7 should not be an option - having a child does not render a person incapable of working to support themselves - but its better than the option of age 16.

If our benefit system was not so generous then we wouldnt get people saying its not worth me working. Those who earn a middle wage get penalised for working hard as there is little help and they can be worse off than somebody who doesnt work after outgoings. How can that be fair?

If we got strict and put benefits back to helping those physically uncapable of working or those who claim carers allowance and got strict with the time limits on JSA there would be more money in the pot to help everybody. Perhaps then more people could get help with childcare costs, WTC etc instead of just a set few.

I see so many posts of people struggling and having little difference in money after working hard all week than somebody who is on benefits.

No, I am not saying that shelf stackers should necessarily be paid more than professionals. And I am certainly not saying that I am qualified to set wages for various different jobs! I'm not an economist (though I have an understanding of the basics as would most people, ie supply and demand). I was making a general point that work needs to pay significantly more than being on benefits. Otherwise there will always be some people who choose not to work. That's a fact of life.

What HappyMummy said! She explained it very well!

Jammi do you think the state should have paid your DPs legal bills then?

where are my keys excellent post.

totally agree with the
"Its things like getting a drs appointment so you can get a prescription for paracetamol for free even though you can buy it really cheaply otc and you won't actually die without it. Some people allways collect their repeat prescriptions because they are entitled to them and they just stockpile them at home. Often elderly people have a fortune in fybogel and gavison at home. My grandmother got tamazapan every month for years after she had stopped taking it and threw them all away."

as a pharmacist, the medications ive seen returned when a patient has died, is truely shocking! im talking thousands of pounds worth of meds.
alot of times, esp with the older generation they are scared to tell the dr they do not want to take a certain medication anymore, so the get their script filled then don't actually take/use them.
they also think the dr will find out if they don't get there script dispensed.
as if the dr is really going to have the time to chase all his/her patients up with the PPA!

also some drs prescribe an outrageous amount of products like e45 cream oilatum etc to one patient, then those products get used by the whole family, yes extended family like aunts etc too!.

TG I have no truck with the obscene profits of some big businesses either - I find it disgusting - , but I don't understand the connection you make with my post?

Was having an interesting discussion about this subject last week with my sisters one married with kids one not and my bil, we worked out that out of all I was the most state subsidised. This was despite the fact that I claim no benefits aside from Child benefit and a tiny amount of tax credits.

My sister and her husband claim a large amount of tax credits/ child benefit as they have 7 children. But as Bil is self-employed he is not paid by the stae and he employs people in a very poor area of South Wales so they are in balance contributing more. You have to remember that the money they receive is spent in the local economy and therefore goes to private companies providing goods and services - contributing to local employment. My unmarried sister with no children is employed by a political organisation completely reliant on private contributions, paper sales etc. to function so she contributes much and takes very little from the state as a healthy single woman.

My dh is paid by the state and so the cost of his employment is (as a snrish Civil Servant) is far more than any one on benefits receives - then we are of course using using nhs services (I am pregnant), claiming funding for a nursery place, soon to be sending children to school etc. etc. The average working family gets much more out of the state than we put in - the single unmarried tax payer gets much less back than they contribute. This is how our society functions. The state is the countries biggest employer - I will probably work in the public sector again when my children are older.

It would be very foolish to wish away our state support.

Depends on private/public sector, yeah TG. I completely agree that anyone who does any job should have remuneration that is significantly above benefit levels.