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.

ISNT, nobody is forcing 16 year olds into sex work or even remotely suggesting it. If that happens, I will protest, ok?

I have 3 children - I don't get that much CTC.

And me and I suspect the rest of the civilized world

the first one is incorporating childcare so you will get the second one but the housing benefit, council benefits and child benefits are all practically the same?

ISNT - there are lawa saying that 16 year olds cant even watch 18 rated movies I doubt they will be forced from school in to working for a sex web cam site. Your argument is a bit ridiculous.

"Hilarious, I don't hate women, I hate that kind of woman who might encourage a young boy to think that was the norm and expect a similar service from my daughter or allow my son to behave in an equally appalling manner, neither party were embarrassed despite everyone in the toilets who saw their display expressing their disgust."

What about the yuong boy who is in receipt of the blow job? He's blameless is he? No suggestion that it might be pressure from men that is leading girls with low self esteem and one too many drinks inside them to behave in this way?

It was mamatomany who suggested that girls younger than 16 might find gainful employment working on sex lines.

This thread is really depressing.

Personally I think that people should have to take up work (this is actually the case at the moment, in theory you are not supposed to be allowed to turn down work that is "suitable"). However I do not think that sex work of any type should be advertised in govt approved places ie job centres. It "normalises" it and I think that is wrong. It also throws up this problem, if the law is changed that people have to take jobs.

Lets not be naive, I'm sure it happens, in fact we know it happens, so yet again it's down to parents to make sure your daughter and son is capable of so much more and has that self respect, intelligence and work ethic to ensure it never happens to them.

ISNT Can you read or do you just read or do you just see what suits your blinkered argument.

"allow my son to behave in an equally appalling manner, neither party were embarrassed despite everyone in the toilets who saw their display expressing their disgust."

Makes it clear both were a bloody disgrace to their parents

As for under 16's they are at school, nobody leaves before 18 now as I understand it, my point was actually that plenty of under 16's

Hit return too quickly.

My point was that plenty of 16 year olds aren't little girls playing with their skipping ropes these days they are out in town at 3am pissed out their heads and behaving in a way that would horrify most right minded people.

Agreed mamatomany

"I'd scrub toilets before I'd work on a sex chat line but some of the dozzy cow/wanna be wags you see around town at night aged 16 and younger I'd imagine that sort of thing would be right up their street and they wouldn't break their nails."

This reads to me that you are saying that you think that sex line work is a suitable occupation for girls under 16.

I find your comments abhorrant BTW.

No comment on the fact that if you worked and make £150 a week then your benefits would be practically the same? Didnt think there would be funny that isnt it? Why work and rush around when you would only make the same if you were working 20 - 25 hours?

I don't think it's a suitable role for anyone aged 16 to 60 but when the little slappers are giving it away in pub toilets you find yourself a lot less sympathetic, if anything more respect for the ones charging, at least they have a business brain in their heads.

Yes I can clearly see that you hold the men equally accountable for this type of behaviour, mamatomany [rolls eyes]

What lovely sentiments you are bringing to the thread.

but you are then assuming that the person can actually afford to pay the 20% of the childcare, pay for transport to work, and all the other costs that come into play once you start working.

I don't know what figures exactly you used, but when I do my details (3 children) assuming that I'd worked last year, and will earn 7500 this year it tells me that it's going to give me less housing benefit and council tax credit than that.

Good well I'm glad we've cleared that up

sunshine your a right litte mary poppins arent you!

I would like to say your opinions have really FUCKED me off! I dont swear that often but you have aactually really upset me.
You really have no idea do you!?!

Its NOT a lifestyle choice for most of the people posting on this thread. You say your not making it personal but Im sorry you are.

I think you should be thorougly disgusted with yourself and some of the things you have said to people on this thread. You have made extreemly degreading comments towards people reci3eving benefits and I wish i could shake some bloody sense into you.

Whoopdefuckingdo... you work all hours god sends. Have a pat on the back... your just waiting for people to say "oh sunshine, your so wonderful"
Well your lifstyle isnt going to be suitable for everyone.

I dont normally get this angry about threads but you are the most insulting person I have come across on here.

Interesting thread with its twists and turns but it seems to have focussed , in the main on the benefits system. A few raised the issue of raising the min wage but then considered it wouldnt be possible as unfair on small companies etc. Well, what I would like to see from government is really thinking out of the box. Why cant they come up with a system that forces the Tescosof this world to be forced to pay a higher min wage as they CAN afford it. Companies over a certain size should be compelled to provided childcare. Govt needs to get tougher with these companies and instead of sayingoh we cant do this because it would penalise x. Make a system that exempts the x` and makes those who can afford it to pay up.
Also agree with the posters who talk about the Swedish system - the gov should try to learn from them. After all they are following the Swedish model for schools.

oh and I would like to add that if you chose to work on sex line to make ends meet then thats your choice but Im not going to stoop so low that I get men off over the phone. Its degrading and skanky and I would rather have my children see me not working than know the filth that would have come out of my mouth doing that..... its shameful... not somehting I woudl be bragging about either!

Would be impossible to implement surely? You can have one minimum wage for employees of large companies and one for the ones that work for smaller companies. I like the idea of larger companies having to provide childcare though and think that that would be doable

Regarding the chatlines issue.

Some of them are text-only. As in only text messages and pictures of girls are sent.

The funny thing is, the men will think they are talking to Candy (18yr, 34DD up for it) when in fact it's a hairy, fat nerdy man in a dressing gown.

Texts are done on laptop, cut and pasted while nerdy man watches the tele.

True story

In other words, chatlines aren't so much degrading as laughable.

I know Mingg - but govt should be thinking of ways to do it rather than the prevailing attitude of that would be diffficult so we wont do anything. Its just frustrating that the focus of this thread will be reflected by govt cutting benefits etc whilst not looking at how some companies could easily pay their staff more.
I found the tories dissing of the increase in NI payments for employers as a tax on jobs citing how it would unfairly affect small businesses as a reason not to do it -- when it could have been done but employers under a certain size exempted from the rise perhaps.
I am in no way claiming to have an answer here, but would simply like there to be more emphasis on making those who can afford it to bear a proportion of the pain of this time of cutbacks too.