1949 benefits programme on C4 now..who is watching?

[Allthingspretty]

anyone?

True Stephen we probably only saw what they wanted to but it is still a question that I think is relevant and there has been research into this. There may have been the males off camera living elsewhere.

Ashley did seem to thrive when he was working with the builder in a male environment

I saw 2 generations not working and the elder had health problems that prevented it. not sure where you are getting 3/4 generations.

did it say whether Ashley's mum worked or not? I know she had a very young child aswell so possibly not at the moment but she seemed very encouraging of him working as did his gran which made me think they both do work.

I didn't see any evidence of poor parenting in last night's show. what did you see?

I think the grandmother wasn't a great parent and she just seemed to want to sit back and let other people pay. Her grandchildren are seeing this and what message does it send out.

also benefits bingo with her puffing and then saying she had angina etc. well give up smoking love. it may help.

also the mum said she was there for her dc which is great but they were teens not babies and they didn't need her to make them a sandwich. Also if the grandmother lived there as it appeared then the mum could have worked as she had someone to help with dc.

also malaise and lack of aspiration seemed to permeate.

how do other parents manage to work and have dc? what if we all had gradmothers attitude. where would we be?

the grandmother isn't a parent- she's a sick relative who is living with her daughter. she's done her parenting. the parenting is what Vanessa was doing and I didn't see anything that could be called poor. you could say the fact she didn't work was poor parenting because it sets a bad example but does that mean all SAHPs are poor parents? I don't think so. I agree her dcs were old enough that she can be working and she agreed herself at the end of the programme but I disagree that she was a poor parent.

i don't think dd was a poor parent in a caring sense but lots of grandmothers look after grandchildren and i don't think grandmother was that sick. i think some of it is in the mind and they have told themselves they cannot work and why bother if they don't have to.

alot of parents work without any grandparents around and dd had a golden opportunity.

if they money wasn't so freely available from the state then they would have to do something and I think that is where the problem lies and always will.

if they had combined the grandmother with last week and poor Mervyn (?) where pensioners got hardly anything it would have been more interesting. I wouldnt want to go back to the days when the elderly practically starved or were forced into homes. The same with disabled people. If you cant work then the support should be decent. But young men like Ashley or older men like Michael or women like Vanessa then yes. But there werent any jobs for Michael. I was so hoping he would be offered a job or Ashley get an apprenticeship. The 1949 system with its personal help into work system would work for them but it was very harsh on elderly people, disabled people (into institutions with them) Carers and single parents.
It was also a different world then, with more work. My mum was 15 in 1949, left school with no qualifications and walked into jobs. If she didnt like them she could walk into another one. She joined the WRAF at 17 but had to leave at 19 when she got married but no biggie as the next day she walked into another job (telephonist I think). She was never unemployed until she had me in 1970 (when it was expected you gave up work) but she said when her grandparents and parents retired they were up shit creek without a paddle on the meagre pension and family were expected to pay. Can you imagine trying to support your parents and grandparents now? While raising your own children and struggling with today's mortgages and rents?
In some ways this programme is like comparing apples and oranges but certain bits are intersting.

Just to qualify:

1. While the families we say were just 2 generations out of work, I was just noting that intergenerational unemployment is a major issue and there can now be 3 generations of families who haven't worked which is disconcerting. Certainly an issue on major estates and from what I understand in places like Glasgow where I used to live.

1. In terms of bad parenting, of course I didn't see anyone hitting their kids and only had a brief insight into their lives. I just think part of parenting is providing an example and providing some form of aspiration and I didn't feel like the grandmother or the mother featured was doing much of that. I also think it's important for parents and grandparents to set the standard re: dressing, washing etc as it demonstrates what is and isn't acceptable to the kids. I'm not trying to sound victorian, just aware that parents are the main locus of evaluation for children and create a standard of what is 'normal.'

1- I would love to see your stats concerning 3 generations of non working families. I keep hearing people quote this on MN but have yet to see any proof that there are families where 3 generations have never worked.

1. are you saying that family were dirty and unwashed? I certainly didn't get that impression from it. yes her clothes weren't 'professional' but that's because she didn't have a profession or job to get dressed for so she wore comfortable clothing. it didn't look dirty to me. when the time came for her to dress for work she rose to the challenge and IMO did it very well.

1. While 3 generations of wordlessness is rare it does exist and having a look online there are policy documents produced for both Scotland and Wales that refer to them. Certainly it's possible - if you think of someone who may have been signed off sick when the shipyards closed in the early 80s. That person may have had a child who was 10 at the time, now in their 40s with children in their 20s. Having worked for a local authority in Scotland I can recall discussions about this phenomenon when discussing policies to tackle deprivation.

1. I did think the woman looked a bit unwashed, frankly. We all have different versions of clean but maybe washing her hair would be a start. Unless you're aware of some sort of malady whose primary symptom is greasy hair which I am therefore probably discriminating against, right?

Worklessness not wordlessness!

well I was thinking her hair resembled a bit what mine looks like after I've been out in the rain to be honest. if I wash it and tie it up it goes frizzy but cant completely frizz as it's restrained so bits stick out and those that don't look greasy cause of the rain. but maybe she's just a dirt bird. at least she was able to remedy that as soon as a job opp became available. her hair didn't look greasy at the job experience.

can you link to the proof of 3 generational workless families? it's one of those phenomenons that every tory other MNer has witnessed but the other half of us have yet to come across.

or even tell me about the families you know personally who fit that group?

You're all still watching the shitty propoganda, then?

I think one of those fact checking organisations looked into this and said it was a myth. That said I find it very easy to believe that we now have two generations...possibly who have never worked. In my experience with people who are out of work it seems that they are in and out of work depending upon available jobs at the time. I think it would be rare to find a huge number of families where nobody has ever worked. That's not anything I can back up though.

You only think it's propoganda gobby because it doesn't fit in with your liberal lefty views.

You're all still watching the shitty propoganda, then?

Look at the shit Jamie Oliver is getting from the loony left all because he is telling the truth and how it really is.

It IS propaganda, I haven't watched it at all because of this. Being on benefits at the moment I am a tad sensitive to being stereotyped when evidence is slim to back things up.

The again if you repeat a "fact", however dodgy, long enough to people then a significant number will eventually believe that "fact".

Might have something to do with being on the receiving end of shit from being in the benefits system myself, actually.

He is also "getting shit" from my lifelong Tory friend who thinks he is being an idiot and stereotyping people.

'loony'?

Yep. Cos having empathy and believing in fairness and supporting the vulnerable makes you loony, twisty.

Me, me, me, pull the ladder up and treading all over people, not caring if they live or die so you pay a few pence less tax is eminently the sane option.

I want a "like" button for your last post there Gobby.

Y'welcome ;)

Well with the amount of hyperbole and scaremongering they come out with then yes loony is one word I would use to describe them.
TBH this site has a tendency to make out everyone on benefits are saints and everyone else is just unsympathetic etc. I for one am glad all these benefit reforms have come in as it has been a very long time coming.