can you actually afford to have a baby?

[Princess81]

Oh sweet Jesus! Well that definitely showcases the "entitlement culture" at it's best.

Where do people get off thinking that it's the governments responsibility to house and feed them. Obviously there has to be a safety net for people who find themselves in difficulty but not an infinite stream of handouts for years on end to people who are perfectly capable of working (be that for minimum wave or not).

I know this family is an extreme example and not typical either of refugees or benefit recipients but they definitely seem to have assimilated the sense of entitlement that is becoming more and more prevalent.

I hope this wasn't aimed at me

20/06/2012 - Elliott born at 129 x

11/02/2011 - Leo born at 11:37 x

It wasn't. It was aimed at the family in the link. This isn't personal against you x

 

[Humesy]

yep crazy! the opposite!

i actually think fair play to you for posting ur benefits in a heated topic like this! that alone gets respect from me!!!

the bad thing is, not what ur getting but the fact that when ur partner gets work u may actually be worse off and so were saying its not really fair? does that make sense? x

 

[Elfs Mummy]

I promise I don't get those amounts in bennefits x

 

[MrsCow]

I just don't get how there's no apparent consistency. Honest, hard working people who, for whatever reason, fall on hard times are really put through their paces and made to feel like an inconvenience to get some help back from the very system they've actively contributed to. On the other side of the spectrum, people with no interest to seek work, know every trick in the book to get more money and seem to be able to brazenly continue claiming for years with no challenge whatsoever.

Exactly!! This is the point!! And to top it off I see on the news today that train fares are rising massively again, there is just no let up for the honest working man, even when travelling to work lol!

 

[LikeJohnnYoko]

I promise I don't get those amounts in bennefits x

I think the thing is that the DM (I have them blocked on my laptop for the benefit of my mental health/blood pressure ) finds very extreme examples because that is their forte, they get pageviews due to the extreme nature of what they print (and they've had some humdingers in the last fortnight.)

The thing is, cost of living massively varies over the country, as do wages, council tax etc.

I'm not a massive supporter of the "people on benefits shouldn't live in expensive areas" concept, due to the fact that there is a movement to remove vulnerable people out of the nations big cities.

Historically, this has been achieved through slum clearance programs that saw communities destroyed and bused off to council estates all over the country, and I think everyone can see what happened there. The destruction of community, family social groups etc hit them hard and has led to these areas having high crime etc.

To an extent, the argument should be - why are these rents so high when they're housing social tenants. There is a lack of social housing because in the 1980's so much of the social housing stock got sold off without re-investment and building replacements. This is why benefit claimants are living in private rented houses with astonishingly high rents. Transplanting those families to areas with lower cost of living does not help this, it creates rootless people. The heat should be centred on the government who are not doing anything to ease the situation.

Just think of all the housing that has been built as part of the Olympic village - I haven't seen any data on whether a percentage of it will be social housing yet, but I hope so. I feel that the entire thing should be given over to social housing personally, and would not be pleased if the units are sold for a profit.

 

[babyem]

I actually have a question for everyone here, some of you seem a lot more clued up than I am about these things...

I know a woman, she has a son and is with a new partner, he's a self employed manual worker of some sort. She's going to college, but also put up a status on FB a while ago about being stuck in the job centre and how much she hates it.

They go abroad on holiday a fair bit, run a car and a work van for him.

Does anyone know if this sounds right?? I can't personally see why she'd need to go to the job centre unless she was claiming? And if it is legitimate, does college cost her anything if her fiance is working? I'd love to go to college - Want to work in the catering industry but have been put off doing it now by the costs.

It could be legit..
When OH was out of work, I was at college and worked part time. I had to go upto the job centre to sign on as well and actively look for work, as he wasn't entitled to any help as a single claimant as they had to factor in my wages. My course was paid for due to my age, so didn't get any money towards that, just my wages which were about £200 a fortnight. Even when I got confirmation of my place at uni and told them that it would be unfair to apply for a Part / Full time job when I would be leaving a couple of weeks later I still had to keep applying and then turning down interviews. It annoyed me as there are obvs people who really want jobs and the chance to even have an interview, yet I was forced to apply when I couldn't take a new job anyway. Also, her OH could be self employed but working for a company. OH used to be self emplyed but worked for a plastering company. If he didn't work, he didn't get paid. I know that he has mates etc who are the same and are provided with a van by the company x

 

[babyem]

I promise I don't get those amounts in bennefits x

I think the thing is that the DM (I have them blocked on my laptop for the benefit of my mental health/blood pressure ) finds very extreme examples because that is their forte, they get pageviews due to the extreme nature of what they print (and they've had some humdingers in the last fortnight.)

The thing is, cost of living massively varies over the country, as do wages, council tax etc.

I'm not a massive supporter of the "people on benefits shouldn't live in expensive areas" concept, due to the fact that there is a movement to remove vulnerable people out of the nations big cities.

Historically, this has been achieved through slum clearance programs that saw communities destroyed and bused off to council estates all over the country, and I think everyone can see what happened there. The destruction of community, family social groups etc hit them hard and has led to these areas having high crime etc.

To an extent, the argument should be - why are these rents so high when they're housing social tenants. There is a lack of social housing because in the 1980's so much of the social housing stock got sold off without re-investment and building replacements. This is why benefit claimants are living in private rented houses with astonishingly high rents. Transplanting those families to areas with lower cost of living does not help this, it creates rootless people. The heat should be centred on the government who are not doing anything to ease the situation.

Just think of all the housing that has been built as part of the Olympic village - I haven't seen any data on whether a percentage of it will be social housing yet, but I hope so. I feel that the entire thing should be given over to social housing personally, and would not be pleased if the units are sold for a profit.

There's a video on youtube about the Daily Mail..
'It really must be true cos it's written in the Daily Mail' Not a reliable news source at all lol x

 

[LikeJohnnYoko]

I promise I don't get those amounts in bennefits x

I think the thing is that the DM (I have them blocked on my laptop for the benefit of my mental health/blood pressure ) finds very extreme examples because that is their forte, they get pageviews due to the extreme nature of what they print (and they've had some humdingers in the last fortnight.)

The thing is, cost of living massively varies over the country, as do wages, council tax etc.

I'm not a massive supporter of the "people on benefits shouldn't live in expensive areas" concept, due to the fact that there is a movement to remove vulnerable people out of the nations big cities.

Historically, this has been achieved through slum clearance programs that saw communities destroyed and bused off to council estates all over the country, and I think everyone can see what happened there. The destruction of community, family social groups etc hit them hard and has led to these areas having high crime etc.

To an extent, the argument should be - why are these rents so high when they're housing social tenants. There is a lack of social housing because in the 1980's so much of the social housing stock got sold off without re-investment and building replacements. This is why benefit claimants are living in private rented houses with astonishingly high rents. Transplanting those families to areas with lower cost of living does not help this, it creates rootless people. The heat should be centred on the government who are not doing anything to ease the situation.

Just think of all the housing that has been built as part of the Olympic village - I haven't seen any data on whether a percentage of it will be social housing yet, but I hope so. I feel that the entire thing should be given over to social housing personally, and would not be pleased if the units are sold for a profit.

There's a video on youtube about the Daily Mail..
'It really must be true cos it's written in the Daily Mail' Not a reliable news source at all lol x

The Dananddan one? Also see Russell Howard's "The Daily Mail: Everything Gives you Cancer."

 

[netty]

I just don't get how there's no apparent consistency. Honest, hard working people who, for whatever reason, fall on hard times are really put through their paces and made to feel like an inconvenience to get some help back from the very system they've actively contributed to. On the other side of the spectrum, people with no interest to seek work, know every trick in the book to get more money and seem to be able to brazenly continue claiming for years with no challenge whatsoever.

i 100% agree with this SO much

me and oh took the plunge many years ago and moved in together, one month later he was made redundant slyly enough just before he reached a point that he would have got a redundancy payout

so we were fucked basically, i was only on 14k a year at the time, just signed a 12 month lease on a house for 500 a mnth the bills rent, food all came to 1000plus a month....................something i just did not earn

and were we allowed anything...........nope.........nothing

becasue i HAD to work 12 hour shifts for the overtime to be able to live and support us both, i earned too much

it took him a little under a year to get a job, and we didnt get a bean to help us

it was dire and i just thank god our relationship survivied it, and also i am so glad i didnt have a child at this time!

previous to this we have both worked, paid taxes, each of us only having to claim once in our adult lives to get by

and apparrently we werent entitled to anything

it sucks, i hope the system gets a massive reform so it can be used as it should be!

its so sad that people end up trapped in the system due to the amount they are paid on benefits/rent/council tax, its not their fault really x

 

[EssJayPea]

I promise I don't get those amounts in bennefits x

I think the thing is that the DM (I have them blocked on my laptop for the benefit of my mental health/blood pressure ) finds very extreme examples because that is their forte, they get pageviews due to the extreme nature of what they print (and they've had some humdingers in the last fortnight.)

The thing is, cost of living massively varies over the country, as do wages, council tax etc.

I'm not a massive supporter of the "people on benefits shouldn't live in expensive areas" concept, due to the fact that there is a movement to remove vulnerable people out of the nations big cities.

Historically, this has been achieved through slum clearance programs that saw communities destroyed and bused off to council estates all over the country, and I think everyone can see what happened there. The destruction of community, family social groups etc hit them hard and has led to these areas having high crime etc.

To an extent, the argument should be - why are these rents so high when they're housing social tenants. There is a lack of social housing because in the 1980's so much of the social housing stock got sold off without re-investment and building replacements. This is why benefit claimants are living in private rented houses with astonishingly high rents. Transplanting those families to areas with lower cost of living does not help this, it creates rootless people. The heat should be centred on the government who are not doing anything to ease the situation.

Just think of all the housing that has been built as part of the Olympic village - I haven't seen any data on whether a percentage of it will be social housing yet, but I hope so. I feel that the entire thing should be given over to social housing personally, and would not be pleased if the units are sold for a profit.

Well said, as always, LJY xx

 

[babyem]

I promise I don't get those amounts in bennefits x

I think the thing is that the DM (I have them blocked on my laptop for the benefit of my mental health/blood pressure ) finds very extreme examples because that is their forte, they get pageviews due to the extreme nature of what they print (and they've had some humdingers in the last fortnight.)

The thing is, cost of living massively varies over the country, as do wages, council tax etc.

I'm not a massive supporter of the "people on benefits shouldn't live in expensive areas" concept, due to the fact that there is a movement to remove vulnerable people out of the nations big cities.

Historically, this has been achieved through slum clearance programs that saw communities destroyed and bused off to council estates all over the country, and I think everyone can see what happened there. The destruction of community, family social groups etc hit them hard and has led to these areas having high crime etc.

To an extent, the argument should be - why are these rents so high when they're housing social tenants. There is a lack of social housing because in the 1980's so much of the social housing stock got sold off without re-investment and building replacements. This is why benefit claimants are living in private rented houses with astonishingly high rents. Transplanting those families to areas with lower cost of living does not help this, it creates rootless people. The heat should be centred on the government who are not doing anything to ease the situation.

Just think of all the housing that has been built as part of the Olympic village - I haven't seen any data on whether a percentage of it will be social housing yet, but I hope so. I feel that the entire thing should be given over to social housing personally, and would not be pleased if the units are sold for a profit.

There's a video on youtube about the Daily Mail..
'It really must be true cos it's written in the Daily Mail' Not a reliable news source at all lol x

The Dananddan one? Also see Russell Howard's "The Daily Mail: Everything Gives you Cancer."

yeah thats the one!

 

[Me, My Girls & I]

The fail has certainly increased my blood pressure this week

Babyem, you're right about the van, I reckon my neighbours must either think we''ve come into money or are up to something dodge cos jn the last week we've had 2 diff vans and a new car all company vehicles! My OH is the same, self employed but works for a company! And that's a pain in the arse, luckily he's never not had any work since we've been together, but it's not uncommon for him to work 16h days 7 days a week purely cos he can't turn the work down for fear that it'll dry up! Take today for an example, he left the house at 7.30, might be able to pop back for some tea and then has to start another job at 10pm!

 

[Froslass]

I know the DMnprints anythings and everything, but if you google there are lots of cases about people like that...its awful x

 

[LikeJohnnYoko]

I know the DMnprints anythings and everything, but if you google there are lots of cases about people like that...its awful x

Oh definitely, but they (and most of the media) fail to print/discuss the other side of the whole social welfare state (the high rise in suicide amongst those denied enough money to survive on, for instance), which really makes me irate as I like balance in my reporting!

 

[babyem]

The fail has certainly increased my blood pressure this week

Babyem, you're right about the van, I reckon my neighbours must either think we''ve come into money or are up to something dodge cos jn the last week we've had 2 diff vans and a new car all company vehicles! My OH is the same, self employed but works for a company! And that's a pain in the arse, luckily he's never not had any work since we've been together, but it's not uncommon for him to work 16h days 7 days a week purely cos he can't turn the work down for fear that it'll dry up! Take today for an example, he left the house at 7.30, might be able to pop back for some tea and then has to start another job at 10pm!

Its so annoying! OH could earn the wage he earns in a week at his current job in 2 days or less if he did his plastering. But the security just isn't there so can't take the risk with a LO on the way x

 

[AugustMum]

Id also like to add I don't get that kind of money as a single parent lol. Im lucky in a way though in that when I get a job I'll get a fair bit of help so it really will be worth while working. They NEED to do something to reward working couples as it's a massive oversight. I think when my partner moves in and we're both working we'll be worse off which makes no sense.

 

[babyem]

I know the DMnprints anythings and everything, but if you google there are lots of cases about people like that...its awful x

Oh definitely, but they (and most of the media) fail to print/discuss the other side of the whole social welfare state (the high rise in suicide amongst those denied enough money to survive on, for instance), which really makes me irate as I like balance in my reporting!

Out of hundreds of news stories that they are sent we only see about 10 of them. They pick and choose the 'juicy' stories. And most of the big news companies are owned by the same corporations. In fact, about 10 companies own the hundreds if not thousands of media companies, so it's the same people picking the same crap x

 

[redbear]

I know if i was a private landlord in London and i could rent my house out at say £1000 a week but the people who run benefits wanted the rent lowered to £200 I wouldn't rent to people on benefits, they cant force landlords to lower the rent only refuse to pay it, what they need to do is make more council properties available that are at a low rent price x

 

[Emma.b]

Hey ladies,

Did anyone watch the 'docutmentary' about the Dole the other night, i recorded it and watched it yesterday. It was a prime example of how 'some' people abuse the system for years. And one of the reasons they get away with it is because of how the dole is ran. Aparently according to the programme the workers at the job centre are trained on how to use the computer systems etc but not given enough training on how to get people into work! The one thing its ment to do! One fella as an experiment wrote a shopping list in his 'work agreement book' and the woman never even checked it, just logged him on the system and sent him on his merry way, said we would be paid next week! If you ask me the hole system needs a shake up.

As for the 'would you have a baby on benefits'~nope! When i had jake i was only just 18, i worked right up to 8 months. But as i hadnt been in the job that long i wasnt entilited to maternity pay. So when it came to having jake i had no choice but to claim. While i got by on benefits....as we all do/would in difficult situations.....it was horrendous. I tried to back to work when jake was 1 and half but the cost of childcare made it difficult. I would never plan to have a child on benefits, but thats not to say its never gonna happen through no fault. Things happen and if they do i'll be thankful.

However.....my sister is 23 and done all of 6 weeks work in her life! She is a prime example of the lazy cheats we get out there. She has no children, no ties....and is more than capable to get a job. But chooses not too, she has even mentioned trying for a baby in the past. When confronted about it her reply is 'you managed' yeah because i was forced into a difficult situation. Anyhow its people like her that should have there cases reviewed and benefits cut. If this happened there would be alot more help for the genuine people who need it like single mothers, elderly, families on low income ect.

P.s i do love my sister....she just makes me sooooo mad! lol x x x x

 

[Maru]

I found this thread very interesting and agree with a lot of the sentiments stated on here. I thought I'd offer my slightly nuanced situation. My partner and I both work very hard. We juggle multiple jobs and are always working on additional projects for other sources of income. We are both performers, and times are tough for performers. We are not on benefits, as we believe that we can earn elsewhere (office work etc) in between the performing jobs. For years we have said we want to have children when the time is right. When we can rely on our income being enough, when our lives are more stable, etc. Each year we said "this is the year we'll make it happen", and so time passed this way. We are still pretty hard up, but we finally decided that waiting was a fool's game, that we would start trying for a baby, and that we would figure it out as we went along. After all necessity is the mother of invention!