Are other full-time working families finding there is nothing left?

[fatface001]

Alarm went off at 5:30 this morning, then an hour stood on a packed train into London for the commute. We are a normal family: one child and two full-time jobs. I’ve always enjoyed working and have always worked hard, and I don’t mind that at all — but I do expect that full-time work should still mean there’s something left at the end of the month for a normal life.

But that really doesn’t feel like the case anymore.

There’s nothing left at the end of the month. Everything has been stripped back, all non-essentials have gone, and even basic things around the house are being put off or done ourselves because there isn’t spare money for trades. It’s just constant cutting back.

What’s hard is that we’re both working really long hours and doing everything we’re “supposed” to do, but it still feels like we’re going backwards rather than getting ahead.

When I hear talk about “those with the broadest shoulders” contributing more, I honestly don’t recognise it anymore in real life. It doesn’t feel like anyone in our position has anything left to give — it feels like the pressure is entirely on ordinary working households just to stand still.

I’m not looking for luxuries — just the sense that working still gives you a bit of breathing room. Right now it doesn’t feel like that at all.

Is anyone else feeling the same?

How do you know they haven't contributed?!
You do realise that the majority of people on UC work, so therefore are paying tax and NI.

Anyone yes ANYONE is one sad circumstance off benefits. The people you are angry at didnt chose to be there. Most were contributing and working and then something bad happened to them.

@Ted27 I am so sorry for your diagnosis. That’s awful. Thoughts with you.

Respectfully if you aren’t claiming anything the post wasn’t about those in your situation.

Point was those who have hundreds and thousands in equity and claim means tested benefits are having their cake and eating it too. Not right.

Definitely not easy to downsize but should be option for those who have hundreds of thousands in equity to either (a) not claim means tested benefits (after all unlike capital, savings limit is just £16k) or (b) claim but offset against charge on property payable back to tax payer at some stage.

Not right someone can give up work, be deemed ‘most vulnerable’, get full state support yet if they had over £16k cash savings rather than hundreds of thousands in equity they’d get nothing. Many families also have to sell homes for care, which also not right. A balance needed as working renters or those still paying a mortgage have nothing left to squeeze.

All seems unimportant though given your diagnosis and circumstances and just my view as know a few owned outright home owners using sickness and means tested benefits like a hammock.

Anyone terminally ill of working age should be eligible for non means tested PIP or ADP. Also contribution based ESA potentially. Rightly so, just in case it helps can ask Dr for a DS1500 form.

@RedRock41 I agree with you on this - the same by the way is true of private pension funds not drawn down on or touched at all if aged between 55 and 67 ( when you can in reality draw down 25% tax free - and more if you are happy to pay the tax. You can if you are under the £16k limit for savings/capital still claim UC and it’s ignored - even if you had£300k in the fund.

@RedRock41

I am not yet terminally ill. I am not in fact ill enough yet to get PIP
I cannot get ESA becsuse when I left my job in 2023 to become a full time foster carer I had a full NI record. So made no more contributions. So cant get ESA. Even I could it would be reduced by half because of my of pension. I'd very happily take half- as least that would keep me in beans on toast.

My point being that the belief that benefits are handed out like sweets is mistaken.

And I think you will find there are more people like me than people sitting on houses with huge equity

That's interesting. My DH has a very small cs pension and this stopped him being eligible for jobseekers allowance.
At the time, it felt unfair that he had paid tax for 40 years and could not claim £92 a week yet people who had never worked claimed much more in UC.
We accepted those were the rules, but there are so many anomolies it needs a massive overhaul.

Actually I haven’t 😀 I was in work all day and got home at 8.15 this evening. I’m just reading the through all the posts.

... And you don't see any downsides to Toni and Guy closing down?

Yep there are so many ridiculous anomalies, people with paid off houses with hundreds of thousands of equity , people with huge pension funds etc - balanced against people who may earn just slightly over the limits or who have£20k in bank but no assets as they rent etc - it needs a really good looking at -

The reason we won't stop this downward slide is all the people who insist it's right wing to be troubled by it

@Ted27 there does need to be an overhaul when someone terminally ill cannot claim anything at all.

It is not right that anyone with owned outright home can claim means tested benefits at all without having any conditions towards tax payers. If savings count, why not capital? Why not equity? What’s the difference?

Means tested claimants are the ones the politicians claim are most vulnerable but its not that simple. Personally I’d rather winter fuel allowance for example go to all those terminally ill than to those with hundreds of thousands in equity.

Not as rare as you might think. Know 3 examples of hammock/early retirement in 30s in one case and late 40s mid 50s in other two, all at tax payers expense.

We need some kind of workers insurance like they do in Germany and in other countries. From what I understand if you’re working and you lose your job you get a proportion of your salary. This makes sense.

So those who have worked at some point typically receive higher benefits than those who haven’t worked - but it’s for a limited period of time.

It also seems fairer because someone who has been earning an income will likely have greater financial commitments than someone who has been forever unemployed eg. Mortgage, higher car payment etc.

I can’t remember the figure but to me it is scandalous that a single person gets way less than 1K in this country if they don’t live with minor dependents or rent their home.

Imagine you have a mortgage and get made redundant or have to leave a toxic work environment urgently?

Apologies @Ted27 picked that up wrong. Still not great diagnosis so wishing you lots of positive energy regardless.

You're not wrong. It used to be that a couple both working FT on an average salary, in most places (maybe not London) could afford a house, or at least a mortgage on one. Where I am, usually a 3 bed semi as a starter home.

Sometimes it feels relentless, fiscal drag, shop/fuel/heating costs always rising. People soon not going to be able to pay the full allowance into a cash Isa, council tax being raised to the maximum.

Sometimes I do think what is the point of it all. Just a treadmill.

Life has always been a bit of a nightmare and I've never understood how most generations coped with knowing what their kids would have to live through but to be fair to us it all looked a lot better for a couple of decades there.

I agree that the amount you get in benefits should depend on what you’ve paid in. Those who have paid nothing in get a milk token and a kick up the arse.

A major problem.is freezing of tax thresholds. Just the sane as putting taxes up each and every year since frozen to 2031 at the earliest.

Nursery? Those years are the hardest. We're coming out the other end ready to ramp up careers again and have disposable income. Worth it now, didn't feel like it at the time.

People on benefits, jobseekers for example are given just what the law decides they need to live on.
So you’re basically saying give them even less than that so working people can keep more. People on benefits are already going hungry. Using foodbanks. Freezing in damp houses because they can’t afford heating.
Walking the streets day in day out begging for a job and proving it or they will stop your universal credit and then it’s homelessness.
What MORE do you want??? It’s a safety net that’s there in case YOU ever need it yourself and you never know what’s around the corner.

There but for the grace of God…

I had a bit of a rant on the way to work this morning, so I was quite shocked to come back to 24 pages of replies 😅 but thanks, it definitely made the commute home go quicker! Just a few thoughts,
1uts reassuring to see I’m not the only one feeling this stretched and a bit demoralised at the moment.

2.I do think the government needs to stop and think about how much they’re asking from working people right now. With the cost of living going up, it feels like more and more is being taken at the same time. I get there are reasons for it, but it doesn’t exactly feel like they’re on our side at the moment.

3.agree with the point about environmental taxes. My husband’s company has been hit really hard and it’s ended in redundancies. I understand the intention, but the impact is very real.

4.feels like if we’re all cutting back, that can’t be good for the economy overall? Less spending has to have a knock-on effect.

5.don’t think it’s entitled to want the odd small treat when you work hard. I got a voucher for a haircut for Christmas. I used to go every couple of months, now it feels like a luxury

I’m not against taxes or the idea of a fair society at all it just doesn’t feel that fair right now. Everything’s going up, more’s being taken, and it just feels a bit unsustainable

What worries me is where does this end? Couples on 6 figure salerys were comfotable not long ago. I am 50 so pron older than lots of posters and was lucky to buy a flat in the 90s and from there have done OK and i am very lucky, i have young adult xhildren (19 and 22) they have massive student debts to come, no jobs and no chance to buy. It is scary and feels a race to the bottom. I dont see any political party can make things better, i had such hope in labour as remembrr the new labout of 1997 and what that brought to the economy.

Unpopular perhaps but in my view it is not at all right someone can keep capital in housing sometimes worth £1m or more. That can’t continue. Either downsize or put a charge on the property as quid pro quo. How can taking from a poor working household be right in current climate when said home owner is richer than most renters can ever dream to be? What about the inheritance for our kids?

No. Not if this is their only roof over their head. (Of course if someone owns a second property then absolutely you have a good argument, although if they were renting that out and expected them to sell it, then that makes the tenants homeless and what happens to them?).

For some people the situation that led them to needing to access benefits could be temporary. When you take into account moving costs and stamp duty it would be totally wrong to say that someone could not claim benefits if they owned their own house. People work damned hard to pay their mortgages off BECAUSE they weight up that it's worth it because that at least they have a roof over their head if everything goes tits up with their job, and plenty of home owners have a social conscience too - another advantage is that they DON'T have to rely on the state to pay their housing costs at least, if they do lose their job etc.

Come on, just HOW did we get to the stage where we are trying to argue that we should remove the roof over the head of home owners who have paid for it themselves, maybe never having claimed benefits in their lives, if they happen to go through a period of bad luck with ill health or redundancy? It's beyond me that someone should think it reasonable that someone in an already stressful situation should put their house up for sale. Do you even know what an arduous, long drawn-out, expensive process that is?

If they have a spare room they could get a lodger to bring in some income. If they are forced to downsize, where are all these smaller homes going to come from, for both the home owner and the lodger?

@givemesteel many many people in receipt of UC also work full time.

Business can't or won't pay people a decent wage hence UC.People employed in the NHS,charities,multi nationals etc etc. Also SMEs. It is like a massive ponzi scheme. Some businesses would collapse if they had to pay a decent wage. Others have to pay their share holders etc and are propped up by the tax payer who pays for UC. Also people in receipt of UC pay tax and N.I.

House of Lords over 600 of em. £395 a day tax free! This is just the tip of the iceberg. Punching down is really not the way to go but these threads always end up the same way by bashing people in receipt of one benefit or another.Often people are misinformed re benefits and different types too. I assume they are mainly Daily Mail readers.

Well sometimes. But not always.
My friend i spoke of upthread is living quite nicely on benefits supplemented by maintenence, on the equivilent of £75k a year, all tax free of course.
And although her income is higher than two nwm workers and she doesn't work, she will get any hardship payments that may be paid because she is 'vulnerable' because she is on uc.