Friend would rather stay on Benefits

[Mavan1984]

Hi everyone

I have a friend who is in her early 40s. She has 5 kids, eldest being 17 and youngest being 4. No disabilities in the family.

Friends husband is on minimum wage and Works about 35 hours a week. Friend is SAHM and has never worked, they have always been topped up by CTC and WTC.

Friend has recently been transferred over to UC and said she is slightly worse off and she's been told that she needs to start looking for a job.

Friend told me she has no intention to get a job because she thinks she will be worse off- would this be the case? She also said she is very unlikely to get a job which will match her benefit payments.

I'm really annoyed with her attitude. She basically has no intention to work and would rather just claim. In her case what would the jobcentre do?

I love friend to bits but her laziness is really starting to get to me. Me and DH both work average salary jobs, we don't get any benefits apart from Child Benefit and there are times where I've really envied her life of leisure.

I'm not against anyone who works hard/has disabilities and claims but I really think it's unfair that people like her can choose to be a SAHM and expect to get money handed to her on a plate.

I'm not really sure why I am even posting this but I just needed to rant.

Exactly what I said earlier on today!! Weirdly no one has replied to my comment!! The OP is either a Tory Councillor or a journalist!!

Obv years ago when I was growing up it was the norm for dad to work and mum sahm so one salary

Or both parents worked if needed the money

Obv Things cheaper then or were benefits not about

When did wtc come out to top up incomes

And then uc came in a few years back is that right and all swapping over to it eventually

@Blondeshavemorefun tax credits started in 2003. Prior to that we had Working Families Tax Credits which started in 1999.
People have been being moved over to Universal Credit for years. The transfer will be complete apparently by the end of this tax year.

So basically the last 25yrs there has been help for those who didn't work /salary got topped up if on a low income

But before 1999 familles either had to work to earn money or go with out?

I think the Benefit system is good to help
Those who need it

There was definitely help before 1999. I don't know exactly what. Income support maybe. My mum definitely used to get something as she was a single mum.

Well ds1 is 29 and I recieved something to top up my wages back then while I was training and on a really low wage. Can't remember what it was called though

I wouldn’t be friends with someone like her personally

Yep I was on income support for about 6 months in 1995

She should work. If he had a decent paying job it would be one thing but they can't afford to keep having more kids and her staying at home.

My mum claimed something called family income supplement in the mid 80s after my parents divorced and she was on a fairly low income.

It said FIS started in 1970 and went on till 1988 when it was replaced by family credit so it looks like there have been top up benefits for a long time.

I completely understand why there is so much resentment when people are working hard and struggling. But this shit is so annoying now. You're targeting the wrong people.
Why isn't everyone up in arms about the shitty cost of living crisis our Gov have put us in which only feeds this resentment. Why aren't you furious that people don't get paid better salaries so that benefits are less appealing.
Why aren't you more annoyed at that waste of space royal family who will be robbing you and your husband of their hard earned taxes more than your mate.
I understand your envy. I would also feel uneasy on some level but take the blinkers off and aim it where it really should be

Interesting. Thanks @Gingerkittykat @QueenOfTheEntireFuckingUniverse and @TheFunHasGone

This, and pride doesn't pay bills, cold, hard cash does. Unless she's markedly better off and covers additional expenses of working with surplus, quite frankly, I don't blame her.
The downside is that when the kids get to 18, their income will plummet, and she will struggle to get a decent job then.

@tracktrail I think this is where some people at taking the P* though. 18? Surely you would get yourself a job by the time your children are in high school.

It has been the norm throughout history for women to work with the exception of the 1940s-1970s, a relatively brief blip in history.

All this ‘well the real issue is her husband’s wage isn’t enough to keep her at home without benefits’ is a total cop out

Yes my dgm worked in the 40s and my dm did part time in the 70s

I think she needs to look for a job.

it is her business
not ours.
if she is better off on benefits then she would be mad to work

surely if her youngest is 4 then she doesnt have to work

Lots of people wouldn't.

I know at least two people who openly admits that they are better off with benefits then looking for a job or extension of their current working hours.

The drop off at 18 tends to be the point where work pays.
I knew a family where dad worked 30 hrs NMW, mum SAHM, ( they had a smallish mortgage) 2 kids were academic and they sat with them while doing homework, no tv at home, she cooked, baked..you know the type. Extremely lovely family.
They had done calculations based on getting TC until after university, and they honestly thought they would get benefits until after then. The reality was a shock. I moved, so I don't know how they coped with the transition.

I really think it's unfair that people like her can choose to be a SAHM and expect to get money handed to her on a plate.

It might be unfair, but it's also unfair that households need two full time incomes.

It's not what the benefits system is for, so in this case YNBA, but back in the day a man working an average full time job was enough to run a house on, modestly, if the wife wished to be a stay at home mum. Now it takes a lot of benefits.

Best to not tell your 'friends' about your finances whether working or not. People are allowed to claim what they're entitled to.

😂😂

You don't "claim" a specific amount of DLA. You are assessed and told what rate you get.

You are sitting hairs. You have to put in a claim to get assessed. If you didn't claim you wouldn't get assessed would you?