Benefit Street

[caro]

I think you've demonstrated very well that there are all sorts of people on benefits DD so it's really best not to generalise. I'm thankful that had my daughter got pregnant when young and single that there may have been help for her.

 

I don't think having a baby automatically provides accommodation. The bedroom tax has clearly shown there's a shortage of one bedroomed accommodation.

 

I'm lucky that so far I've rarely had to claim benefits but am glad that safety net is there - at the moment.

 

I've been around long enough to know that circumstances can change overnight. As the saying goes, there but for the grace of God go I.

[leigh04]

Me and my partner have 4 kids, been together 20 years, he works very long hours, my 2 eldest have both been on benefits BUT they both wanted to work, both now have jobs, My son was on benefits for about 8 months and fair play to the job center they done everything the could to help him ( hes classed as disabled)

And my daughter was on jsa for 2 months after leaving college.

My 2 youngest are in school.

We pay rent privately no HB

No CTB

Its a struggle at times and we would most probably better off on all benefits going but its not what we want and we certainly dont want our kids staying on benefits.

 

So after watching this program in my opinion certain people shown in it should lose benefits.

[popeyethesailortam]

But it's not just young girls. I used to be friends with someone who would be about 40 now. She has 5 children by 4 different fathers and her eldest is a parent too. But unlike her, he appears (or appeared, rather. I'm not in contact with her now) to be actually wanting to do something with his life.

 

She said a few years ago that she doesn't know what she's going to do if she's found for fit work and how she can't work because she had at the time, 2 children under 3.

 

Therein lies the crux of the problem here. Lack of responsibility for their own actions. Most working people plan their family around their personal & financial circumstances. For people like your friend she had family as she pleased andleft the taxpayer to foot the bill.

 

How can she not work because she has children? For working parents that is not an option. What a selfish attitude.

[Desperate Daniella]

Me and my partner have 4 kids, been together 20 years, he works very long hours, my 2 eldest have both been on benefits BUT they both wanted to work, both now have jobs, My son was on benefits for about 8 months and fair play to the job center they done everything the could to help him ( hes classed as disabled)

And my daughter was on jsa for 2 months after leaving college.

My 2 youngest are in school.

We pay rent privately no HB

No CTB

Its a struggle at times and we would most probably better off on all benefits going but its not what we want and we certainly dont want our kids staying on benefits.

 

So after watching this program in my opinion certain people shown in it should lose benefits.

 

Good for you, Leigh.

[Desperate Daniella]

I think you've demonstrated very well that there are all sorts of people on benefits DD so it's really best not to generalise. I'm thankful that had my daughter got pregnant when young and single that there may have been help for her.

 

I don't think having a baby automatically provides accommodation. The bedroom tax has clearly shown there's a shortage of one bedroomed accommodation.

 

I'm lucky that so far I've rarely had to claim benefits but am glad that safety net is there - at the moment.

 

I've been around long enough to know that circumstances can change overnight. As the saying goes, there but for the grace of God go I.

 

As you say, Caro, there but for the grace of God.

 

But I know you would have supported your daughter regardless of whether she could have claimed benefits.

 

One of the things that I found most depressing about the girls I met, and obviously it wasn't just these three, is that not a single one of them was in a committed relationship with a responsible boyfriend/partner. They either had no contact or support from the fathers of their children or, as in Claire's case, they had someone living with them who gave them no support and who was clearly staying in the flat because it meant they had somewhere to doss down.

 

I think it is absolutely tragic.

[Grotesque]

It was a cretinous program enjoyed by cretinous individuals.

[Desperate Daniella]

I'm pleased to say I didn't watch it then.

[antone]

 

But clearly most of you think that is all many young girls should be aspiring to, and it's fine to support them and their ever-growing families for about 50 years.

 

Wow. Is there a surplus of straw where you live? No one has said that, and no one thinks that's OK. Well, maybe someone does - some people think that Elvis is still alive and that the Holocaust didn't happen - but still, I'm not seeing hoards of people showing up arguing that the best approach for young women is a life on benefits.

 

I don't think we disagree that much. But let's clear up one thing: benefit claimants have, on average, the same number of children as everyone else. There are not squadrons of teenage girls popping out sprogs so that they'll get their pittance in state support. So we have to consider the policy issues, because whatever benefits we offer, and whatever lines we draw as to who may receive them, we will still end up declining them to some "deserving" people and paying them to some "skivers" (or whatever the correct term is for such people these days - I'm not well up on Conservative rhyming slang.)

 

Where to draw the line? Well, I think the line has already moved too far in the direction of denying benefits to those who need them. And to the extent that there are young women who see no hope other than children and benefits, that's a failure of society as a whole, and not one that can be effectively addressed by punitive benefit cuts.

[Desperate Daniella]

I've met a number of young girls who don't want to work. They have actually said it. Why should they work? They have a flat and enough to live on and go out on. What amazes me is that their "pittance" seems to allow them to have Sky, laptops, enormous TVs, tablets, playstations, Wii, a couple of Nintendos, and they smoke and send out for takeaways too. £12 for a pizza!!! There are families with two working adults who can't afford that. I'm a single mum and we have one TV, one Nintendo, and one laptop, and that is it.

 

A girl with just one child like "Teresa", mentioned above, won't get much in benefits but with three or four the money starts to mount up.

 

I agree that it is a failure of society that there are young women who think they should live their lives on benefits having children from various blokes who don't stick around. I think it is absolutely tragic. The only way to stop it is to stop automatically providing accommodation to every girl who gets pregnant. They should stay at home with their families in most cases. Difficult if you can't identify the father, but in many cases it's possible to do so and money to support their offspring should be deducted from their benefits or wages if they work. There are more than a few young men who think it's okay to have kids with various girls they shack up with on an occasional basis. They might think differently if they had to pay for them.

 

I feel desperately sorry for their babies and young children too. You see some of these single mums in the supermarket. They are very young. Everything in the trolley is cheap - cheap tins of this and that and cheap instant meals - though not as cheap as fresh vegetables. Alongside the cheap food is a 12 or 24 pack of whatever lager is on offer, and then you'll see them stop for 100 cigarettes. Do you know how much cigarettes cost? It's many years since I went out with someone who smoked so I thought by now cigarettes must cost about £3.50 for 20. They are about £6.50!!!!!! I nearly fell through the floor when I heard someone buy 20 last month.

 

Do you seriously think this shouldn't be tackled? "Tracey" is doing what her own mum did. Do we want her daughters, and the daughters of countless others like her to be doing the same in 10 years' time?

 

Do you think that people who choose not to work or make themselves unemployable, as opposed to those who are genuinely trying to find work or who simply can't because of a disability, are entitled to the same lifestyle as those who do work? Because that seems pretty tough on all those people who actually do get up and go to work every day, often not in very well paid jobs. I expect some of them don't really like going to work either, but thank heavens they do.

 

If people genuinely need help they should be helped. The ESA situation is a disgrace. People who need benefits and deserve them aren't getting them which is appalling. You know, I think, that I fought very hard and successfully for ESA benefits for a friend's disabled child. There is a big difference between him and some 17 year old lad who has never worked, doesn't want to work, and just wants to lie around all day drinking lager, smoking whatever he smokes, and having a shag with whatever silly girl happens to be around. Would I cut his benefits? You bet!

[Desperate Daniella]

And I'd direct money saved on the feckless 17 year old lads to some other lads in their teens: The ones who come back from Afghanistan with arms and legs missing. They really do just get a pittance.

[Desperate Daniella]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2536893/At-TV-dares-tell-truth-benefits-says-founder-Big-Issue-magazine.html

[estellyn]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2536893/At-TV-dares-tell-truth-benefits-says-founder-Big-Issue-magazine.html

 

 

After your last few posts, I was expecting a daily mail link.

[Desperate Daniella]

I wouldn't have put in a Daily Mail link if it hadn't been written by John Bird. I've always had great respect for him.

 

I know what many people on here think about the Daily Mail so there would be little point usually in a link to the paper.

[Grotesque]

After your last few posts, I was expecting a daily mail link.

 

Don't sterotype like that!!!

 

 

 

 

...that's wot they do

[estellyn]

Don't sterotype like that!!!

 

 

 

 

...that's wot they do

 

 

Erm, I wasn't stereotyping. I observed to myself that the comments were very much like views expressed in the daily mail. Then when a daily mail link was put up, I commented on it.

 

 

I don't see this as a 'them versus us' issue. Saying 'that's wot they do' has in fact suggested that there is a group that maybe Desperate Daniella belongs to that stereotype people, thus is fact insinuating the stereotype - or maybe you were intending to be ironic?

 

 

People have different opinions. People will often read papers, blogs or other writers that express opinions or views on the world that are similar to their own. For instance, I read the Guardian and left wing blogs. If I wrote a post with my views and then someone said they weren't surprised to see me post a Guardian link in support of my post, I wouldn't be offended or feel 'stereotyped'.

 

 

Unlike some, I don't see those with different views as 'enemies'. I respect a person's right to feel and think differently to me, even if I may disagree with their opinion.

[Grotesque]

Erm, I wasn't stereotyping. I observed to myself that the comments were very much like views expressed in the daily mail. Then when a daily mail link was put up, I commented on it.

 

 

I don't see this as a 'them versus us' issue. Saying 'that's wot they do' has in fact suggested that there is a group that maybe Desperate Daniella belongs to that stereotype people, thus is fact insinuating the stereotype - or maybe you were intending to be ironic?

 

 

People have different opinions. People will often read papers, blogs or other writers that express opinions or views on the world that are similar to their own. For instance, I read the Guardian and left wing blogs. If I wrote a post with my views and then someone said they weren't surprised to see me post a Guardian link in support of my post, I wouldn't be offended or feel 'stereotyped'.

 

 

Unlike some, I don't see those with different views as 'enemies'. I respect a person's right to feel and think differently to me, even if I may disagree with their opinion.

 

(Redacted) Yep, just a mild dose of irony, I'll get over it soon

Edited January 10, 2014 by Grotesque

[Desperate Daniella]

I didn't think I was being stereotyped. Grotesque did add a wink.

 

I read the DM, but I also read the Guardian and other newspapers too.

 

I don't see people with different viewpoints as my enemies either.

[estellyn]

I didn't think I was being stereotyped. Grotesque did add a wink.

 

I read the DM, but I also read the Guardian and other newspapers too.

 

I don't see people with different viewpoints as my enemies either.

 

 

Lets all join hands and sing

[labrat]

cum by ahhh my lord

cum by ahhh

[popeyethesailortam]

I think if you asked the average working man on the street where he would rather see his money go. A single early 20's girl or lad who haven't worked a day in their lives. Or a wounded soldier returning from fighting for his country. There would be a resounding thumbs up for the soldier.

[Desperate Daniella]

cum by ahhh my lord

cum by ahhh

 

I was wondering about what we would all agree to sing together.

[Desperate Daniella]

I think if you asked the average working man on the street where he would rather see his money go. A single early 20's girl or lad who haven't worked a day in their lives. Or a wounded soldier returning from fighting for his country. There would be a resounding thumbs up for the soldier.

 

I think that too.

[osdset]

I think if you asked the average working man on the street where he would rather see his money go. A single early 20's girl or lad who haven't worked a day in their lives. Or a wounded soldier returning from fighting for his country. There would be a resounding thumbs up for the soldier.

 

I think the average man in the street should not have to choose one over the other.

[antone]

I think the average man in the street should not have to choose one over the other.

 

Yes, quite.

[osdset]

I feel desperately sorry for their babies and young children too. You see some of these single mums in the supermarket. They are very young. Everything in the trolley is cheap - cheap tins of this and that and cheap instant meals - though not as cheap as fresh vegetables. Alongside the cheap food is a 12 or 24 pack of whatever lager is on offer, and then you'll see them stop for 100 cigarettes. Do you know how much cigarettes cost? It's many years since I went out with someone who smoked so I thought by now cigarettes must cost about £3.50 for 20. They are about £6.50!!!!!! I nearly fell through the floor when I heard someone buy 20 last month

I feel desperately sorry for the lot of the single parent in general.

I was (a male) single parent of two children from 1983-1998, I had a stark choice to make when my (then) wife left myself and her children behind. That choice was carry on working and see my kids go into care, or give up work and look after them on benefits.

 

I worked as a self employed carpenter on building sites back then, construction companies don't subscribe to creches, or nursery day care, they weren't particularly interested if a child needed looking after when sick,or dad had to take two weeks off for Easter, or six for the summer holidays, it was work or don't get paid. Go missing during the holiday's and your jobs gone.

 

I had no family or social network to help out as I'm sure is the case with some young girls today, and paid-for childcare was unreliable. So I reluctantly claimed single parent benefit and family allowance, the weekly amount of these two benefits combined were the equivalent of one days pay in my last job. So to say I had a bit of a struggle budgeting would be an understatement.

 

I doubt the ratio between cost of living and benefits is any better now, in fact with current welfare reform I'd say it's worse.

 

I've been on that side of the fence and I would not wish the experience on anyone, which is why I refuse to judge someone on the basis of a packet of fags.