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.

I agree with you OP. All the free holiday clubs in my area are only available to children who's parents are on benefits. It really doesn't incentivise working hard doesn't?

Do you not think people who need a UC top up work hard?

UC is not just for unemployed! It is also for people who are sick/disabled, people who have caring responsibilities, or people on low incomes.

Some people on UC can not work hard because they can not work at all. Should they not be able to go to the zoo?

On here, it seems needing a top up means you are not working hard enough.
Nothing to do with the rising costs of living, rents and childcare. It is always the claimants fault.

@Foxyloxy89 My son is entitled to HAF as he has autism. I’m a teacher - I assure you I work hard. For everyone moaning on here we don’t claim the HAF activities as -being autistic - he is afraid of them. He has DLA - is that the “right” sort of benefit? I can never be sure on here.

Free holiday clubs, reduced attraction fees, gym and leisure concessions are PERKS.

Humans love perks.

a welfare system should not engender perks

That is what people who arent in receipt of UC are getting at when they say there are no incentives to remain off UC, but plenty to stay on.

Some people have no choice but to be on UC because they are too sick/disabled to work, or are caring for someone who is.

I am sure they would swap those "perks" to be well.

I'd be well happy if I was getting 30k

No I don’t think what they charge now is acceptable for a local family - a family of 4 that could go monthly or more often shouldn’t have to pay over £100. My numbers were just an example- I admit I last went a while ago.
In fact, I lived at great Portland street for a few years and never went as I thought the entrance fee was ridiculous and could see many of the animals from a few spots from outside the fence during my daily runs in the park. And I made good money at the time with no kids and dependants. I’m sure I’m not the only local who baulked at the price.
imagine how many locals would go if it was more affordable. And more volume wouldn’t mean more expenses for the zoo.
A tourist who will go once or twice in their lifetime should and could pay that much or even a little more.

They are also a way of providing for the most disadvantaged in society and hopefully help close some of the gaps. By being engaged in the gym or other activity they are hopefully a lot less likely to get caught up in county lines/gangs etc who do take advantage of vulnerable young people.

Why should people who have less be excluded from leisure activities?

do
tot you think people who work hard and spend all their money “loving” with bills and childcare and a lot of these people are stretched with the cost of living
do you think those kids might like to have a day out too?
it not about who is disabled and who isn’t it’s about fairness

So you think everyone should have the same? Are you a communist?

Well it's obvious the attractions that have been highlighted get an enormous amount of public money to keep them going, so I'd like to know if this subsidy is being paid for by inflated ticket prices or if it is being subsidised by general taxation?

If it's the former, then at least there is some agency afforded to the tax paying visitor who has accepted that their price of entry includes shelling out for others. If, as I suspect, it is being subsidised by general taxation, then it seems completely unjust that the tax payer who cannot afford to go is forced to pay for those who do not contribute to the treasury and can apparently waltz in on pocket shrapnel.

It is private companies who are offering the discounts.

How would it improve your life if these schemes were stopped?

If you look on the websites for the places offering this discount they all seem to have information on how their charitable aims allow them to offer this. It’s not taking away from anyone else!

The thank you they get is perennially frozen tax bands.

How to you plan on making the world fair for everyone then? If you’re so wrapped up in this idea of fairness what’s your plan to make it so everyone is in the same position? Does this fairness only apply to the U.K. or do you want the same level of fair for everyone?

Also look at the dates they offer it. Chester Zoo only offer the UC tickets for one week over Christmas.
In all honesty, who is going there at that time that would be paying full price?

Don’t quote facts when posters are stating they “suspect” the subsidies are coming from general taxation.

Well it's obvious the attractions that have been highlighted get an enormous amount of public money to keep them going, so I'd like to know if this subsidy is being paid for by inflated ticket prices or if it is being subsidised by general taxation?

You can literally go on the Charity Commission website and find out for yourself. It's not difficult.

Historic Royal Palaces get no public subsidy - they raise their own money.

"I can't believe a collection of thousands of wild animals on acres of London's most expensive real estate is so expensive to visit!"

FML

Well, okay, obviously they aren't being tapped directly, but these are charities in receipt of gift aid. They aren't private companies, if they were they'd be paying far more of their revenue in taxation.

If they get gift aid it’s because people have said they are happy to provide gift aid. If people want to put conditions on that they should check the charitable aims before agreeing to gift aid.

So your only suggestion would be to have no discount schemes available to anyone then. Nothing for students, OAPs, Military families etc. because it’s about fairness and if one person can’t access it, nothing for anyone.

Also why are you suggesting working hard is only for people not on benefits. Unpaid carers work exceptionally hard don’t they? I work exceptionally hard.