in thinking that the Government cannot possibly ensure people are better off working than on benefits unless they increase wages massively?

[TheJollyPirate]

TBH I cannot see how the Govt are going th achieve their aim to make sure "nobody is better off financially on benefits than in work".

I work part-time as I have a son with a disability. I take home £849 and get Tax credit of £190 plus Child benefit of course - Working Tax credit adds another £50 - all in all just over £1100. I am just over the limit for housing benefit and all other help although if DLA is approved for my son that may change a bit.

One of my families gets housing benefit of £700 a month plus tax credit, plus income support, plus child benefit. On paper at least they out-strip me and unless wages drastically improve (oh - was that a recession I just saw over there) then nothing much CAN change. The Govt are talking big but cannot deliver no matter what they say.

I will stay worse off financially than the family I work with who will remain unemployed because wages are NEVER going to amount to enough for them to get work and maintain their home. Not their fault and I am more fortunate in other ways but financially - nah - they are doing a bit better than me (but probably only just).

I am watching the Govt but not holding my breath on this one.

Or do you know different?

If so - explain because I am being a bit thick about it.

Jux - That would not get the ones who have no intention of ever working off the benefits so you'd still need cuts

It's the lazy ones who ruin the system for those that need it. What happened to pride & self respect. If you can work then get a job & if not do something to help others, the local area. I'm always surprised at the amount of things people out of work say they need & have - cars, mobiles, tv systems, games consoles etc How can they pay for this from one hand & put out the other out for state handouts?

I need a car, and a mobile.

I also do loads of voluntary work and have an interview lined up to help at teh CAB

Why do we need in fact 2 cars? becuase dh's training base is an hour away (no train station here, or bus that goes there); I need a second as DS3's SNU is 10km away and also not on a bus route; he gets transport but I still ahve to get there for otehr things and if he is sick. I probably will also have to trnasfer also ASD ds1 in the opposite direction about 6 miles from sep 2011.

We have games consoles a plenty, all bought before dh was amde redundant but how would an observer know that?

We have a big TV (no Sky, no interest and couldn't afford it if we wanted it): FIL gave it to us when he upgraded his. I hate it, it's far too big.

We need a mobile for the same reasons everyone else does: if school calls to say the boys are ill, it costs £9 a month and is hardly ever used.

Of course, we are not on JSA; just low income- Dh works and works hard, just stakes a while to get fully qualified in his industry (basically, he is training to do teh design and intsllation, and in the emantime retails the equipment via an internet shop). But people judging on what we own need to be aware that when DH lost his job we didn't have verything we ever bought tkaen off us and start with nothing again: the dsi's etc are all ours and rightly so.

When I was unemployed, I wanted to set up a business making soft furnishings. I got some commissions locally but was very aware that I was committing a crime by taking work while receiving JSA and there wasn't enough to live on for me to come off JSA.

There needs to be an agreed route for people that maybe gives a six month period during which people trying to start up would not be labelled as cheats or risk getting a criminal record

"There needs to be an agreed route for people that maybe gives a six month period during which people trying to start up would not be labelled as cheats or risk getting a criminal record"

Definitely, I know that when my back is doing better I'll need work, and my best bet is self employed. However, how I go from income support to self employed is another matter.

The other major issue is temporary or seasonal employment.

A lot of times, you hear people prattle on about how immigrants do these jobs because Brits won't.

The reality is, many immigrants come here on their own. They leave their families behind and have no childcare issues and can live packed like sardines in some hovel rented by a rogue landlord for next to nothing.

To do this with a family is incredibly insecure.

If you do take on temp work, you lose all benefit. Immediately. Then you wait ages for working tax and child tax credits to be sorted out. Meanwhile, full whack rent and ocuncil tax are due.

Then your contract ends. So you have to re-apply for benefit.

And wait.

Meanwhile, everything gets cocked up - housing benefits, tax credits, etc.

As a result, people can't do these jobs without great risk.

agree expat.

expat Oh yes, been there done that.

when I first went onto the IS 2yrs ago things were sorted out really quicly.

But it's taken 2 months this time around to get everything being paid properly, I did get some payments in the first month, but they were all screwed up. Nightmare

'What if you were getting 700 quid a week on benefits, and then got a job paying 350 quid a week. You'd be an idiot to take it, wouldn't you?

But what if you got your wages of 350 quid a week, and you continued to get benefits of 350 quid a week? You'd still be raking in the 700 quid a week, so you wouldn't be losing out.

The State, on the other hand, would be saving 350 quid a week'

This is brilliantly said. This is what I mean. I am nothing against top ups for low incomes. (as I myself am on minimum wage and without tax credits wouldnt be able to fund child care.)I think that if you have children in school, you are not a carer, disabled/sn yourself or your kids are not then you should be in employment at least part time (or looking) in order to keep your benefits this should be from school age and not from 7. Cases could be looked at individually if it was a special scenario.

It could even be from 3 as you get 15 hours entitlement+ childcare tax credits. If they made incentives like this then more people would work, and it would benefit both the children of the families, the parents and society. I understand at the moment it is difficult due to recession but it hasnt always been a recession and this has been going on for years and years.

Expat - I live in a seasonal holiday town with most seasonal jobs. 60% of the nursery I work in is Polish Kids. How come the Poles dont let kids stop them from working? Many of them are single mums as well. They do it cause they have to and fair play to them I say.

sorry that was meant to say 40%

'Expat - I live in a seasonal holiday town with most seasonal jobs. 60% of the nursery I work in is Polish Kids. How come the Poles dont let kids stop them from working? Many of them are single mums as well. They do it cause they have to and fair play to them I say.'

Why don't you ask how they do it? How they sort childcare.

Do you realise they are fully entitled to benefits, too, after they've been here for 12 months?

I'm not on benefits myself.

Expat - They can work 16 hours without it affecting their entitlement the same as the low income British single mums. Most do a few more hours than that though and take the cut in HB etc and make it up themselves. They still get a lot of benefits as they are on their own to pay towards rent etc.

That is mostly what my nursery is made up of as it is in an area of social deprivation. They get childcare through tax credits and then can earn on top of that. This keeps them in the job market, their skills up to date etc, help with their self esteem and make it a whole lot easier to get a job when their kid is at school. There are people on benefits that I know that say they wont do this are ones saying they dont want to put their kids in childcare. Well Im sorry suck it up, a lot of people dont want to but they have to. Unless you are in a position to afford it then you dont have the choice imo.

I dont understand why others dont do it. I know I definitely would if I was a single mum and there were no other special circumstances.

ahhh now ou see that's the thing "special circumstances" - how the hell do ou define those?

Still want to know how you'd support your children with no benefits as a single parent doing a paper round or a cleaning job.......

Well said sunshine.

It's a weird idea of 'entitlement' isn't it, that makes some people think they should be supported through benefits to sit at home, just because they don't want to work, or don't want their children to go to nursery. Especially when you realise that it's other parents, putting their own children in childcare and going out to work and paying tax which enables the former group to do nothing!

but you don't get all of nursery for free. you still have to pay 20%......and you have to find a job that's actually in nurser hours........

especially as by your own admission you and your DP/DH can't really afford to top up the 20% you get so work opposite shifts to avoid that cost.......

"but you don't get all of nursery for free. you still have to pay 20%......and you have to find a job that's actually in nurser hours......."

That's not necessarily true. The CHILDCARE ELEMENT OF WORKING TAX CREDIT will only cover up to 80%, but sometimes the total of that and all CHILD TAX CREDITS / WORKING TAX CREDITS will cover all childcare costs.

'Only 80%'!! I would have given my right arm for any financial assistance when I was using childcare! I think we need to take the bigger perspective sometimes. The UK has made massive strides towards making it more affordable for parents to work. Longer maternity leave, plus a certain amount of free hours when your child is 3, massively cuts down the amount of time when you need to use pre-school childcare for a start. In the days when most women returned to work after about 3 months, and there were no free places, it would often mean 4 and a half years of paying the full rate of childcare, from when you returned to work until your child was in school.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a good thing that the Govt has made childcare more affordable, but I still don't get why so many people begrudge paying out for it.

and I wish I had loads of disposable income ever month, and could do everything I wanted, and eat afford to eat at McDonald's 3-4 times a week, holiday twice a year, and go out for meals regularly.

And it's nice to know that for all the bitching you do about all the people you know on you estate (you never did tell me how you know the inner lifes of so many people) that you would never consider moving

Choc - that's assuming that you don't need the actual tax credits to pay your rent/bills/buy food

oh I wouldn't (and won't) begrudge paying out for it (if I can find it) - but it's not easy when you're childcare bill is more than you earn......

How can your childcare bill be more than you earn, with the top ups you get on a low income?

It certainly used to be the case, in the pre- WTC and CTC days (my childcare bill was more than I earned for several years) but how is it possible now?

ok - let me correct that statement, childcare bill, plus rent, plus bills, plus food more than you earn.

I'm guessing that you weren't a single parent when paying out more in childcare than you earned.........