AIBU to feel annoyed about discounted attractions for benefit claimants?

[Sheldonsheher]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15721199/Benefit-claiming-families-UK-attractions-working-Brits.html

I know I’ll get slated as the origin is the daily fail but, but this kind of annoys me too! I mean as a single parent I don’t want to pay £60 to go to the zoo either.

Not hate. Not lies. Merlin Entertainment don’t get charity subsidy. Can you give an example of who does?

@SmallHoneLiving I have already posted about the grant funding in this thread do feel free to read the whole thing. Chester Zoo is not a merlin attraction and is a registered charity and Merlin don't offer UC discounts.

More lies to spread division.

Of course they should. But I suspect that many of the people bemoaning the use of UC top ups for workers, also bleat at the damage Labour do to business when they try and increase NMW.

Regardless, a 50p/hour increase to NMW isn't the difference between living independently for most people. My rent is £1400pcm. Full time NMW is a take home of £1703.52 a month (37.5 hours), That would give me £303.52 to pay all my other bills, food etc. without doing anything else.

It seems highly unlikely most businesses would ever be in a position to pay people enough to live on when housing costs are so high for many people.

And they don't offer discounts to UC claimants. London Zoo offers discounts and gets charity funding.

What charity funding? Private concerns are not charities nor eligible for funding from them. I can see why charities might pay for a day out for certain groups of dc, but not just because parents don’t want to work and prefer benefits surely?

London Zoo, which is what I assume that poster meant, is a charity.

I think it’s a joke that a family of 4 can have a day out for £4 yet others have to pay £111 for the same thing!! How is that fair? We’re talking about luxury things here not basic needs. A trip to the zoo is a luxury so if someone can’t afford it then they don’t go.

@MeetMeOnTheCorner Chester Zoo and London Zoo are both charities

So kids from disadvantaged backgrounds shouldn’t get to have fun days out because if your kids can’t get in for free then no one’s child can. Should the people on uc just stay at home hidden away in doors so that only the people with money can enjoy nice days out.

Yes, YABU.
It is wrong to be jealous or envious of anything that may benefit the children from these families and give them a better quality or experience of life. That has been my opinion since I was a child.

Oh it’s to “level the playing field” don’t you know 🙄

@Coconutter24 as a "working poor" who doesn't qualify for benefits I really can't bring it in myself to begrudge another poor person for getting something nice for a change.

They are not the reason for inequality in this country.

Charity funding received perhaps, but nowhere near the full ticket price shortfall. The charity commission does not allow that. So the venues are subsidising £1 tickets considerably from those paying full price.

I take it you realise there aren't actually enough jobs in the country to go round every able-bodied adult??

They are charities to reduce their taxes, not from altruism. The state subsidises charities through tax relief.

it is absolutely relevant.
If you earn enough to qualify working less than FT then you have to max your hours first before expecting taxpayers to subsidise you.

Life is not fair. You are more fortunate than those on benefits, presumably, or else you'd have chucked your job in and joined them except that it's not that simple, which a lot of people on this thread probably don't realise

Maybe count your blessings instead of whining that it's not faaaaair? Because those on benefits really don't have a better life than you.

I'm more surprised by the people who spend their entire life on "piss poor wages" and need UC top ups for their entire working life (not just a temporary help). Like did you not pay attention at school?

Like how can a grown adult never cross £30k p.a. in their entire working life. My son is was always academic he's slap bang in the middle of his 20s and earns around this much. Most of his uni mates earn a lot more are are on £50k - £70k. One of his best mates works in a hedge fund and regularly clears £100k. Cambridge economics graduates.

Even the less academic people he went to school with thrived. One dropped out just before a levels. Didn't bother doing the exams just worked worked worked, moved abroad, moved back and set up his own business. Some have done apprenticeships and now earn around £100k in a corporate role. She did big4 left and is now a SM elsewhere. Another girl become a pilot without even uni and earns a £65k plus. And these were the kids who weren't as academic.

You always hear how well it pays to do a trade or to do something practical over uni. Builders, bricklayers, plumbers. There was a thread about how well off the women in hairdressing are.

So barring major health issues for you or for DC you need to care for. This just baffles me. I also don't think anyone is entitled to live off the income of another.

there are not enough jobs because ever increasing taxation kills businesses, SMEs in particular. Taxation ever increases to pay for growing benefits bill. Rinse and repeat.

Reducing taxation would generate growth and jobs.

But it's still irrelevant as a lot of jobs, especially at a lower pay scale, are filled by immigrants whom we have to attract here if we want these jobs done. And there are still about 1m unfilled vacancies

Any evidence to suggest full price tickets have increased in order to subsidise these? Still waiting for any evidence at all to say that.

Rather than just what is actually happening which is that additional people are able to visit as having 100 extra people visit for £1 isn't reducing the number of full price paying customers at all. It's not like sharing a cake between half full payers and half £1 payers. There is enough zoo for everyone.

It is actually. Are you more aggrieved that cares/companions also get free admission? They might be millionaires.

It’s amazing how many people feel bad at the thought of children from a family that are on benefits missing out on a luxury day out yet the same people aren’t the slightest bit bothered that a child from a family not receiving benefits doesn’t get a day out (because tickets prices are so expensive not everyone can afford them)

Doesn’t sound very level to me

Venues have to balance the books. If for example NI payments increase they are legally obliged to meet the shortfall. Ticket prices go up. Just not the £1 ones.

I don't think I've seen anyone say that - might've missed it though.

Is your suggestion that no one receives any perks in life, on the basis that some aren't eligible. There are a multitude of discount schemes throughout the UK. Do we stop blue light cards because not everyone can work for the NHS for example?

Surely better to help some, than none.