Skip to main content

Post content has been hidden

To unblock this content, please click here

Cilla
Beginner April 2012

Benefits rant

Cilla, 11 of January of 2013 at 09:15 Posted on Off Topic Posts 0 88

So the woman who came to see our house yesterday wants to rent it so yaaaaay!!!! Now we are set to move into our new one next month without trying to pay two mortgages.

Now I know that benefits are needed for some people to just get by, and that many single mums would like to work but it's just not financially viable....however.....this woman is probably early 30's, has 5 kids to different dads. She is leaving a 5 bedroom house that she's ('she' being the tax payer) is paying £800 pcm for....apparently she needed a big house for when her mum came for Xmas but now she's dead and the two older kids are ready to leave home so she's looking for somewhere smaller.

Oh, and she drives a massive BMW (ok so it's an old one but nicer than my car). If her kids need/want anything she calls up the relevant dad to provide it. From what I can tell she has more disposable cash than OH and I have!

I'm not jealous of what she has......ok, I am a little in that I wish we had more money left at the end of the month...but I wouldn't swap situations for all the tea in China. But surely benefits should cover what you need to live comfortably and no more. She wrinkled her nose at me when I said I was trying to do my weekly shop at Aldi for the foreseeable future to save money for the new house!

Still....Mr C rationalised it by reminding me that she (*the tax payer*) will be paying the mortgage on this house so that we can afford to pay for our new one.

88 replies

Latest activity by quackers, 12 of January of 2013 at 00:32
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I don't understand what any of that has to do with benefits?

    • Reply
  • Rod
    Beginner
    Rod ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I am guessing that the woman is on benefits and Cilla works?

    • Reply
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    But she is downsizing so in theory costing less in benefits?

    I guess I don't understand why how many dads the children have got matters either.

    It seemed to be a rant that about benefits that benefitd Cilla so am confused?

    • Reply
  • OB
    Beginner January 2011
    OB ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I think it's that the woman clearly wants for nothing and has got there by popping lots of kids out, not by working.

    • Reply
  • Cilla
    Beginner April 2012
    Cilla ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I was ranting so I apologise if it wasn't concise and to the point.

    My point is, why should someone who doesn't work and is on benefits have more of a disposable income than a couple who work. I'd love 5 kids and a five bedroom house...but I can't afford it so I don't. Yet she can not only afford it, she has more money left over to play with. Surely the benefits should be just enough to cover what she needs.

    • Reply
  • Barefoot
    Beginner August 2012
    Barefoot ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Until benefits are all paid directly to the supplier (ok so that does seem to happen now with rent etc) and the remainder is given either in food/clothing vouchers or in actual goods the person needs (not wants) there will always be people like this. Sadly even if the above scenario came into place, it would only lead to a black market in voucher trading. And it will never happen because "its against my human rights, innit?"

    • Reply
  • Arquard
    Beginner May 2011
    Arquard ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Don't judge. You don't know her full situation, nor can you guarantee that you'll never fall on hard times.

    • Reply
  • Barefoot
    Beginner August 2012
    Barefoot ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    If that's directed at me, no judgement at all. I have been on benefits and would have been more than happy with food vouchers etc rather than money in my account. I was just grateful that there was help available.

    • Reply
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    You see to em I can't really what there is to rant about in that circumstance... she is downsizing, she has five children and she has a car. If she was insisting on staying in a larger house and was expecting a brand new car and was sitting on her bum all day drinking, smoking, takign drugs I can see why people might get judgemental and have a rant. But there isn't a hint of that. There is no explanation as to how she arrived in that situation either. I think it is if anything a good example that she is downsizing and saying I don't need a large property anymore.

    Also Cilla is benefiting herself from it.

    At no point in the above message is there a statement of she sits on her bum all day - if she has five children (of which we know nothign about) I imagien she is very busy indeed.

    I know people that earn less than me and have a larger disposable income because we spend to our limits soemtimes don't we? Personally at the moment it is because I have been left with the bills that were being paid by two people with relative ease that I'm now strugglign to pay on my own.

    And again why does the different parentage of the children have matter? I think it would reflect more poorer on the father than the mother.

    A friend of mien also has a nice car but not a lot of money. Why? Because her Dad managed to get a good deal on a car for her and helps her out with the payments.

    Anyway I've possibly annoyed the demographic who think those that receive benefits are lazy scum because some of us aren't!

    • Reply
  • samjh87
    Beginner October 2012
    samjh87 ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    Agree with this. It is unfortunate that the minority take advantage of the situation. I also think that if benefits weren't handed out in cash it would give more people the incentive to look for work (not saying this is easy at the minus as 2012 has been a difficult year for work for me and H).

    From my example, H's ex recieves pretty much the same monthly earnings from benefits as I do working full time. This would be fine if they were spent wisely but she constantly has hair/nails/fake tan/ tattoos done and is always out while when we pick H's daughter up she is/has often worn clothes 2 years too small. This means we then have to take her home, bin said clothes and buy new clothes to replace them. We are forever spending more money on top of child maintenance to clothe her because her mother doesn't seem to think this is an issue. I'm sure if vouchers were available for clothes instead of cash she would soon learn what is a priority.

    Also, where is the incentive in getting back to work? Either work full time or dont work and earn the same money?

    • Reply
  • Ali_G
    Beginner October 2012
    Ali_G ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    When my sister was on her own with 2 children & receiving benefits to get by, she received more money than I did working 40 hours a week.

    Would I have traded places with her just for the disposable income? Not in a million years. I can guarantee bringing up 2 children on her own was a lot harder than me sitting at a desk typing all day.

    As with everything, there are users and abusers.

    • Reply
  • ATB
    Beginner August 2014
    ATB ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    The way I took Cilla's OP was her viewing her dissapointment that someone who does not work, but has 5 children is living relatively well from benefits and maintence from the children's fathers.

    This is a situation repeated constantly, those people who work can only afford to have a couple of children but those on benefits are paid more per child so continue to have them. More often than not those children will then go on to claim benefits themself, and the cycle continues.

    The reason she may be 'downsizing' may be that she does now not recieve benefits / maintence for her older children - hence why she now has to find a smaller home.

    • Reply
  • samjh87
    Beginner October 2012
    samjh87 ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    My post wasn't necessarily in connection with the original post. More agreeing with BBB's post regarding vouchers etc.

    I don't think anyone can disagree with benefits as you don't know what situation you may find yourself in and would gladly recieve help then, my only gripe is that there are always going to be people who mis-use the system and think looking at how we can reduce this as much as possible has got to be worth trying.

    • Reply
  • Barefoot
    Beginner August 2012
    Barefoot ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Hmm well that's not strictly truce is it? Lets say tomorrow I decide not to work and OH decides the same. In 6 months we would be homeless, without a penny for food. Since of course if we were choosing not to work, it would be fraudulent to claim JSA. We have no children so would not be rehoused as a priority, nor would we get child benefit. Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me!

    • Reply
  • slightlymad
    Beginner
    slightlymad ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    As an ex single mum with 5 kids (now 6)who was on benefits I think some of you are being a little judgemental. Yes there will always be people who abuse the system but it's not just people who claim benefits that do this, people owning small businesses that don't declare to HRMC. At least she is downsizing. The benefits system is seriously flawed but do you really think food vouchers are going to help? talk about back to the days when the poor kids who were on free school meals had to stand in a different line and be segregated from their peers because of the families financial position.

    The people who do abuse the system are few and far between, it's just that it is so hyped up by the media that it seems it's everywhere. There are probably more people who fiddle their tax returns than claim benefits they aren't entiltled to.

    Cilla I know you weren't having a rant about benefits themselves and it just seemed a bit unfair to you.

    • Reply
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    It is easier to use people that claim benefits as a scape goat though. I would rather big businesses that manage to not pay tax were picked on than single mums. And unfortunately there are a lot of single mums who are certainly not in that situation by choice, whatever they Daily Mail says.

    • Reply
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Cross posted with you there SM!

    Shall we bring back the work houses??

    • Reply
  • slightlymad
    Beginner
    slightlymad ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Ah yes the good old work houses!

    I just think the whole benefits system is not black and white that a lot of people seem to think it is. I was on benefits for god knows how long, out of the 5 of my kids 2 have gone on to uni the other is a SAHM with a H that works so the vicious circle of benefits bleeders doesn't always breed benefits bleeders. The others still at school.

    • Reply
  • slightlymad
    Beginner
    slightlymad ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Doesn't surprise me in the least....

    • Reply
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    ?It's all those Kleeneze/Avon/Betterware reps isn't it?

    • Reply
  • Storky
    Beginner May 2011
    Storky ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    *polishes self-employed halo*

    • Reply
  • slightlymad
    Beginner
    slightlymad ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Dont forget the good old ebay sellers that buy at car boots/charity shops specifically for profit, and the people with facebook pages that make and sell

    • Reply
  • Storky
    Beginner May 2011
    Storky ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I'm too honest for my own good! We declare everything, although this works both ways, I guess, as it means I can offset various things.

    • Reply
  • slightlymad
    Beginner
    slightlymad ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I just don't worry about it, I have too much going on in my own life to worry about whether Joe Bloggs is earning an extra tenner a week by selling (for profit) on fleabay and not declaring it. Obviously big companies fiddling tax etc is a different story

    • Reply
  • HatTrick
    Beginner September 2010
    HatTrick ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    I can see both sides to this. I don't think that everyone who lives a comfortable lifestyle on benefits is doing so by being dishonest, in fact I know that it's not always the case. To me, that's not fair and I don't care if that's me being judgemental or not. The benefit system should be there to help people when they need it rather than being a long term life style choice as it clearly is for some.

    Personally, I would not want to stay at home and claim benefits if I was capable of working but there are many out there that and would and do. If they are able to receive a similar amount in all the various benefits and credits that they would when working then where is the incentive for them to get a job?

    I know you've already been picked up on this but what a ridiculous statement to make.

    • Reply
  • HatTrick
    Beginner September 2010
    HatTrick ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    If I were to choose not to work I would have 2 choices:

    1) Claim JSA which, if my understanding of this is correct, will be available to me providing I apply for jobs regularly and have evidence of this and attend training courses offered to me. If I don't do that (which if I was choosing not to work I wouldn't do as it would be pointless) my JSA would be stopped. This is the case for my two younger brothers.

    2) Claim no benefits whatsoever which would leave me with no income to provide a roof over my head or to buy food. Not really a choice is it?

    So essentially, as option 2 is pretty much a no-brainer, by stopping your benefits if you do not at least attempt to find employment, the government IS forcing you to work.

    If no one went to work, who the heck would be paying taxes to provide everyone with benefits?

    • Reply
  • OB
    Beginner January 2011
    OB ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Well there you go then hatters, next 20 years sorted eh!

    Sorry missrae but most regular people HAVE to work to live.

    • Reply
  • samjh87
    Beginner October 2012
    samjh87 ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I think the point is that if you are CHOOSING not to work then you aren't entitled to any JSA whether you can or can't make appointments/ training courses due to child care.

    • Reply
  • Ali_G
    Beginner October 2012
    Ali_G ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    This isn't actually true. The group that causes the most damage to the country's finances with regards to fraud is "criminal attacks" - co-ordinated, systematic attacks which are organised, e.g using false identities to get money. It costs the system £6bn a year.

    To put it into perspective, of all the fraud committed in the UK, only 8% is committed by benefits - income support, pension, job seekers etc.

    Tax evasion costs the economy £4bn a year.

    I know this because I completed my fraud training about half an hour ago ?

    • Reply
  • samjh87
    Beginner October 2012
    samjh87 ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    Gold star for you ? hehe

    • Reply
  • Pittabre
    Pittabre ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Wow Ali_G that's incredibly I didn't know about that about criminal fraud - do you know how we can get a piece of the action as well??

    • Reply
  • MummyMoo82
    Beginner October 2012
    MummyMoo82 ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    As I see it, if you have a kid of school-age or older, there is no reason at all why you shouldn't be working. I'm a SAHM, but when youngest is at school I am going back to work.

    • Reply

You voted for . Add a comment 👇

×

General groups

Hitched article topics