to truly believe that there are too many people making living on benefits a lifestyle choice?

[preparestobeflamed]

While I really do feel for people, who through no fault of their own, find themselves on benefits, struggling to bring up their children on a pittance, am I the only one who truly believes that for a large number of people, living on benefits is a lifestyle choice??

It may just be the people I know, but I have one friend who refuses to work - no children or partner, another friend who from leaving school decided she was going to have children, has had 2 children by unknown fathers so far, and all at the tax payers expense and is now planning her 3rd, to some unsuspecting man she hopes to meet on a night out, and another friend who is due her 4th baby anyday, by a man who pays her no child support whatsoever, even though he is a high earner working full time and who lives in the next town with his mum and dad. She believes he will move in one day, i think not and when he does stay with her, she makes it public knowledge that she is continuing to claim she is an unemployed single parent to continue getting all the benefits, even when he has stayed for months and all those mentioned have the opinion that they are entitled to live off of benefits for as long as they live.

They just feel so entitled it's untrue!!!!

I am beginning to believe that people who do not pay tax should not be entitled to vote, since why should these people who do not contribute a penny to the system, and possibly may never contribute a penny to the system, be able to have a say as to how the money the country generates is spent????

I also am of the belief that anybody who does not have dependents, is not elderly, sick or disabled should not receive any benefit unless it is contribution based benefit.

Am I really BU??

Am I the only one who gets so angry at these lazy people, who live off of their children for as long as they can, and in some cases, are swayed to have children because they do not want to work??

LuluMaman

The person you know who is scraping by on benefits and is a sole carer to her father is NOT who I was referring to in my OP.

I have said all along that I am totally happy to know people in that situation are being supported by the govt, and if bone idle dossers were weeded out, maybe people in the situation the person you describe is in would be able to get more help.

I am talking about bone idle dossers, who have no intention of working, ever!!!

So, in your ideal world preparestobeflamed, as long as people don't die, then we're a successful society? This is erroneous, as Greensleeves points out.

If you believe the workhouses saved people and were generally a good thing because they were an attempt at welfare, then I think you may actually be insane.

Live up to your name- prepare to be flamed and do some research. To quote another poster on another thread- "The plural of anecdotes is not data".

"How many people reading this thread only managed to move out of their parents home because the council offered them a place because they had a child?? It happens, and for some people, who see no other way to get a place of their own ..............."

Surely this is an argument to address the chronic affordable housing shortage in this country? Or examine the level of the minimum wage? No, apparently it is an argument to cut benefits for all but the ones you deem to be deserving of a paltry sum each week

why are people bone idle dossers? i will warrant some just cannot be bothered

i would reckon an awful lot have seen their parents out of work , are not in decent schools, not in decent housing, the idea of college or uni is as much a reality as going to the moon.. the apathy must be really hard to fight against, not that it's an excuse, but you have to ask why this is an issue

i have never met anyone who wants to have children just to avoid work, you should consider mixing with different people if it offends you so much

Benefits are there for people that need them,
me and my DH paid taxes for many years, things happen and our lives change not always for the better.
me and the kids live on benefits, we have lots of holidays and other things that other people perhaps don't have.
i still pay taxes thou we are on benefits, if anyone would like to life our lifestyle for a while do shout up.
it isnt always easy to see what someone elses life is like, tis in fact a different view from the high horse.

tethersend

I deem many people to be deserving of support. I deem the elderly, sick, disabled, and children to be deserving of support. I also deem people who have fallen on hard times and who genuinely want to work to be deserving of support. In fact, I'd like to see them have much more than a paltry sum each week, but at the same time, I do not want to see bone idle parasites who have no intentions of ever working to be supported in the same manner as people who wont work.

Can't work = being supported
Wont work = get a job and support yourself

oh i am so glad to be deserving of support

I'm going to ask this question again.

What do you propose then? If someone "refuses" to work. Lets say they're a family with 4 children ranging from 9 down to 3 years old. What is your suggestion?

Sorry meant to say : I do not want to see bone idle parasites who have no intentions of ever working to be supported in the same manner as people who cant work.

so what happens to the children of the undeserving poor, when there is no money for nappies, milk, food or warmth?

I know a fair few people on benefits (been there myself) and everyone is on them cos some wanker of a male buggered off or they are disabled and no-one will give them a chance. Or life handed them the shitty stick and they lost their job or were unable to work due to family issues.

preparedtobeflamed, you seem to be developing a god-complex. It is not up to you to 'deem' anyone worthy or unworthy of support.

By the same logic, I don't like your views- should I then 'deem' you unworthy of healthcare?! And your children?

whoisasking

I do not claim to have all the answers, neither does anyone else apparently. I believe that people with young children should have the option to be a SAHM, imo they are doing a valuable job looking after their children, but I also believe that 2 parent families should also enjoy that option. At the moment, tax credits are hugely in favour of single parents, which imo is unfair.
Of course parents of young children should have the option, if they so wish, to stay at home to raise their own children, but unfortunately many parents cannot afford this option. If one parent wishes to stay at home to raise their children, then that should be accessible to all families, but this is not financially feasible for alot of families who are not single parents.

For single parents who refuse to work, perhaps the solution is in prevention rather than cure??

The state is hugely in favour of single parents who live in rented accommodation when they want to go back to work, as opposed to parents in a 2 parent family who have a mortgage. How can that be fair?

LuluMaman

Shouldn't parents be responsible for their children? Rather than having children only to expect to be supported by the govt form the outset??

TheDMshouldberivened

Those are not the people I am referring to, and I thought I had made that clear repeatedly during this thread

tethersend

I do not claim to be God, but I am entitled to my opinion.

"I deem many people to be deserving of support."

How do you define "deserving of support"? Does that just mean whoever preparestobeflamed deems worthy?

We have a Government to work that out for us - it's not your job.

And I'm so glad you don't begrudge the person scraping by on benefits while caring for a disabled father. Don't you think they deserve a bit more than to be "scraping by" while doing the job the rest of us are therefore spared?

Do you understand what society is for??

The fact that we place so much social value on wealth is such hypocrisy. It's what keeps those people at the bottom claiming benefits, because they have no prospects/ambition/opportunities to achieve anything else. And that suits the wealthy just fine because if everyone had the tools to go out and earn millions, there'd be less to go around the handful at the top at the moment.

This Daily Mail mentality drives me crazy. We marginalise these people so much and then we get angry when they don't play by our "rules". It's immoral, frankly.

preparestobeflamed- yes, you are indeed entitled to your opinion; but you put it on AIBU; and my opinion is that you are wrong, and that to 'deem' anyone worthy/unworthy of support is indicative of a god-complex. I did not say you claimed to be God- that would be as ludicrous as your views.

"I am entitled to my opinion" is a very weak argument indeed.

But you keep side stepping the question.

We're now on a tangent about the perceived unfairness of single parents getting more benefits than married couples. Furthermore, it appears that you're getting confused, and are now having a pop at the Tax credit scheme which exists to HELP people go back to work.

I think what's really happening here is that you don't want anyone to have anything. That's fine,that's your opinion and you're entiteled to it. It makes me want to vomit in my wastepaper bin, but hey, that's just me.

Prepare - Im not quite sure what you mean by single parents REFUSING to work, once children reach 11 years of age, single parents get job seeking allowance and have to show they are activity ie looking for work otherwise benefits are stopped. By 2011 the age will be dropped to 7 years old.

A few months ago my husband overheard a couple of people talking in a supermarket queue.

One of the women asked the other one how her son was getting along. Apparently she said "yeah he's doing great - he's claiming on the sick".

Yes I think there are definitely people out there for who it's a lifestyle choice and I don't think the OP is being unreasonable.

dollius

If you were to read what I had said in the first place, it would answer your question 'Don't you think they deserve a bit more than to be scraping by while doing the job the rest of us are therefore spared?'

I have already said on this page alone

'I deem many people to be deserving of support. I deem the elderly, sick, disabled, and children to be deserving of support. I also deem people who have fallen on hard times and who genuinely want to work to be deserving of support. In fact, I'd like to see them have much more than a paltry sum each week, but at the same time, I do not want to see bone idle parasites who have no intentions of ever working to be supported in the same manner as people who wont work.

dollius- excellent post.

"The fact that we place so much social value on wealth is such hypocrisy. It's what keeps those people at the bottom claiming benefits, because they have no prospects/ambition/opportunities to achieve anything else. And that suits the wealthy just fine because if everyone had the tools to go out and earn millions, there'd be less to go around the handful at the top at the moment."

And why not hold up examples of the few people that have 'clambered out of the gutter' by working hard, just to keep everyone trying- ignoring the fact that for everyone to do this is impossible. Meritocracy at its finest.

whoisasking

I have repeatedly said that I am quite happy to know my taxes are going towards people who cannot work, so your judgement that I do not want anyone to get anything is totally wrong.

Please read what I have already written.

Oh, and can you explain what you mean by this:

"For single parents who refuse to work, perhaps the solution is in prevention rather than cure??"

I presume we're now into the realms of sterilisation of the under classes? Brilliant. Keep going prepares The goose step is not too far away.

Oh God, preparestobeflamed, don't keep repeating it.