to not understand why so many poor people...

[nybom]

...are being called "poor" if they can afford:

• cigarettes/drugs
• dogs
• large amounts of takeaways/ready meals
• ready cut fruit, brands, air freshners and other superfluous crap, kids drinks/other products specifically tailored to kids
• to go out drinking
• FF babies
• to leave lights on, have electrical appliances on standby, not to use energy light bulbs, to keep the water running, to put on half a load of washing, to leave heating on at night
• to maintain artificial nails, to have hair extensions
• buy loads of beauty products
• to leave their car engine on whilst going shopping/standing in a traffic jam
• to have themed children's birthday parties with loads of props
• and most of all: have CREDIT cards so they can overdraw

i'm talking of regular habits not just occasional behaviour...

several of my friends are on benefits, so the observations are firsthand and not just assumptions.

a friend of mine (single mum on benefits) got a party bus for her DSs last birthday party (besides loads of presents), this year he's getting a wii (and loads of other presents). WTF?

why don't these people simply save more?

i on the other hand spend less than 100 pounds on a family of four (whilst buying high quality, fresh, organic products) by buying 50% of my shopping reduced/offers, at local markets and a lot of things (like toiletries) from pound shops or discounters. we buy value toilet paper (amongst other things); and i go to the hairdresser twice a year, and only to the beautycian for special occasions such as weddings. the children don't get any toys or clothes from us, as there are enough family and friends who don't know what to buy for christmas/birthday parties. so the kids basically don't cost us anything. we have one credit card and we make sure NEVER to overdraw because of the high interest rates.

i simply don't get it...

Yes, god forbid that people use their own experiences to try and challenge the ill-informed stereotypes of pinkington.

Seriously pinkington, you could resign, ask your partner to take a lower paid job, give up your home, go on benefits and life would just be brilliant so why not? Oh because, even with the odd takeaway and (shock) piece of electrical equipment, it is not preferable to your life.
Obviously I am making an assumption, but if you think back to the last time you were off work with your children, you might remember how expensive it is to entertain them. Now imagine life at home all day with children who you can't afford to take anywhere or do the things their luckier friends can do. Often they can't go outside (you may have no garden) or to the park (too many syringes). Yes, I imagine those "lucky" mums are sitting there laughing about how easy they have it.

Would someone very kindly let me know what this thread is about? From the OP, all I can gather is that she wants the poor to stop being so profligate.

I personally cannot imagine anyone being profligate on benefits, but perhaps my circle of friends and acquaintances is too narrow to comment.

If that was to me (dont tgink it was) I have no probs with comments, thats the whole point of MN

DH worked right up to redundancy, it wasn't easy though- part of the reason I think he was first in line (apart from a history of health issues a while back) was the number of times (around 20) he ahd to come home because one of the boys was prone to atacking me, we solved thast with the flexible working rules and it ahdnt happened for a year or so but then bosses dont like flexible working either sadly (not an enlightened workplace)

SN does complicate woring often- for a few weeks (and it could have lasted had I not been a bitch to LEA) we had two different statemnted kids at different schools needing simultaneous drop offs, and clashing appointments all the time. I think we made it work as best anyone could given we have no local family or anything but if you're an employer looking to make redyundancies, who do you choose?

But I think what annoys me at the moment isnt general all poor people are X Y Z opinions, anyone who thinks in such a monochromatic fashion isn't worthmy time, it's the explosion in this climtae. Poeple who've never had a days benefits are finding themselves not just on a scrapheap but then criticised for it- which is cruel, redundancy is apinful enough as it is.

If people started threads saying 'People who never haave any intention of working if they can avoid it and claim' I'd be at leastb listening but as far as I can see pretty much everyone is vulnerable and threads that make those people feel bad are very suspect.

Just imo, natch.

oh and worthwhile............well today he fixed the bolt on the bathroom door and sorted the border in the garden

there are people living in top floor tower block flats with profoundly disabled children, carrying them up and down dozens of flights of stairs for appointments, waiting for appropriate housing and even the most basic equipment

on Planet Pinkington there are probably dozens of free nurseries equipped to meet the needs of those children and free, qualified childminders to allow these exhausted (and often single as stress breaks down relationships) parents to stroll into fantastically well paid employment - but in the real world most of us wouldn't mind paying a little bit more tax if it would make a difference

If I could have sussed childcare I'd be starting my PGCE in 2 weeks.

Am hoping for next year instead. Fingers crossed.

actually did I not say that one parent of disabled children should of course be supported to stay at home - and well supported - better than they are now, read the posts I appreciate it is bloody hard parents of children with disabilities are undervalued and undersupported

Bloody hell! I can tell those of you with a stick up your arse about the military option that if you canvassed the young people who have joined the armed forces because of a lack of options and the alternative was being on benefits, that virtually NONE of them would regreat their choice.

Teamwork, a trade, life experience, sports, travel - and you don't need to sign up for that long.

Or Job Centre plus, limited horizons and a miniscule amount of cash.

Oooh, its a tricky one.

You did indeed state that Pilk

I thinnk- you've taken comments made by some (certainly me) as a general comment further down as aimed at you and it has developed thus

The system for carers is crap and causes a lot of upset. IMVHO I think carers allowance should be renamed wage, treated as such 9thereby allowing qualification for TC's- it's already taxable) and not as a benefit as such, it'#s after all only issued to those who can prove they are indeed earning it by caring for a child with assessed needs.

Won't happen of course, people like to have people to look down on. But when these debates start those who have had no choice do get upset, it's natural- well it is if you feel phrases sucha s scroungers, lazy etc are aimed at you and you know it to be different I know my Mum, a pensioner whose pension was lost in the big collapse also feels this).

i cant be bothered to read the entire thread.
can someone tell me, did the original poster get terribly wounded?

Don't have a stick up my arse. Just would prefer my children not to join.
And having taught for 12 years I have met the boys who signed up in the past 12 years as an alternative to life on the estate and whose lives did not quite match the trade/sport/travel. Sadly they report PTSD, alcoholism, bullying, disability and watching their friends die. There is, of course no guarantee that they wouldn't have suffered any of these if they stayed at home but I am not sure your canvass is accurate.

OP didn't answer many questions (and didn't know the difference between a dictionary and a thesaurus) then disappeared crying personal attack.
Then someone else made incredibly derogatory comments about "the poor" which have been deleted and we are now in familiar territory of "why should I pay for someone else to have kids".

I was in the military for 7 years and my husband is still in. Yes, stress happens, and yes, young men and women are seeing horrific things in Afghanistan, however I would love to know if genuinely every young person you know who joined the military became the broken wrecks you claim they do....because it is not what tallies with the people I see all the time that are still serving say, or my husbands colleagues say.

Or, btw, my BIL, who was told by a Judge to join the army or go to prison. He is now a hard working fmaily man who loves his challenging job.

Erm, wasn't going to post a reply to this, but...

I am a children's nurse and work with children with disabilities all the time. Surely no-one begrudges parents having just a few hours respite during the day while their child is at school? Some of these children can be really hard work with parents not even getting sleep during the night. The NHS would fail without people staying at home to care for these children. The same goes for people caring for adults with special needs.

Oh, and I'm only going back to work before my baby is at school because I'll lose my registration if I dont.

Sorry, rant over.

Pinkington - I think you have to accept that your post; "well fortunately our benefits system is paying for 2 of you to stop at home then isn't it! Presumably it doesn't take 2 of you whilst your child is at school though" was rather sarcastic and condescending in its tone - and as such it does NOT^ make it clear, or even imply that you believe that one parent of disabled children should be be supported (well) at home to care for the child.

And should you not have said that one or both parents should be supported to stay at home and care for a disabled child if that's what's needed?

I have a friend who is a single mum of one child, who was on benefits until autumn last year. She really struggled to find a job that would not pay her less (even with tax credits, I believe) than she was receiving on benefits.

And she wanted to be there for her child during his primary school years, and for the transition to secondary school - something which I am absolutely sure was good for her child, as she devoted a lot of time to supporting him through the 11+ process to get into a really good school, so he has the best possible education and has a good future. Would this have happened if she had been forced back into work when he was 6? I'm not sure it would.

thank you clemmette

BTW - I can appreciate that everyone has different wishes for their kids.

I want my dd to be happy, and would support her to do whatever she wished to do - and that will probably not include the military.

Certainly wouldn't support her being on the dole rather than joining the forces though.

And frank, the way public finances will go over the next decade, we may see the 'luxury' of that choice being removed anyway.

Angela is right; it would cost more if I didn't care for the boys, not that i'd ever consider that

It's not just childcare either- time off for meetings, etc- but something that also worriesd me is how safe I will be commuting and working when I am u 5 - 8 times a night and haven't slept deeply in years. That general level of exhaustion most of us SN parents exist under isn't condusice to being a good employee I suspect.

I do think its good that I am here with the boys anyway- ds2 gets far less attention as a sibling of two disabled children (my other point: it's not a one- sn- child- per- family scenario sadly: DH is registeered as ds1's carer, me for ds3- I can't restrain ds1 well enough any more) and at least me beinga ble to read with his class etc balances that a little. And it also does contribute to the community- maybe not financially but in very real terms.

Just scanned and wanted to say that people who pay taxes have every right to ask if those that live off them should.

and people that need to have every right to do so.

'Just scanned and wanted to say that people who pay taxes have every right to ask if those that live off them should.'

Exactly, for example, I have the right to ask why bosses of banks who were bailed out with taxpayer monies are allowed such huge pensions to live off. Or MPs, for that matter. Those are tax monies as well.