The responsibilty of a parent ...

[Eternal]

Opening this up a bit (and playing devil's advocate ) - on the benefits side - I think it's important that we in the UK remember that most of us in the UK get some kind of benefit for them in the form of Child Tax Credits and Child Benefit .... and until very recently literally everyone got CB.

Without that extra money a lot of people would struggle to raise their children

there is a big difference between someone not working and someone receiving a top up. We only receive CB, basically because its too complex to claim anything else because my husbands wages change all the time and bonuses make it even more complicated having to declair all of them.

In an ideal world wages should be high enough to cover the cost of living, without needing top ups, its silly the county has got its self in such a state that we need to top up working wages so people can survive. Mimimum wage should be high enough that working people can survive AND afford some extras, without top ups. I know thats a very simplistic view, but its seems stupid that we need to top up, surely something is wrong with our economy?

Planning having children without the means to afford them is silly IMO. Thats not to say that accidents dont happen and the worse can happen to any of us, but planning on bring children into family who can not afford them is wrong.

 

[Feltzy]

The benefits thing is a difficult one, you'll always get people who take advantage of the system and yes I don't agree with people using benefits as a lifestyle choice. But then with the top ups situation, the cost of living is so high that a lot of people really do need the top ups, otherwise they wouldn't eat, have electricity etc.

Also, if people didn't have to pay so much tax on everything they buy, they wouldn't need so much in top ups. Even people on the minimum wage have to pay out a lot in tax, not just on their wage but on purchases too. So I think its fair that they get their wage topped up, to recoup a bit of that tax back that they couldn't afford to pay in the first place. I know everyone pays tax and you could argue that higher earners pay more into society but people need to eat, I know my OH pays a lot in tax but we don't have to go without necessities because of it.

As for the argument where people say if you need benefits then you shouldn't have children, I think its easy for people who can afford to have children to say that. Having kids is a natural instinct to most people. I feel very lucky to be in a position where we can get by comfortably and don't begrudge those who need a little more help financially.

 

[smelly07]

what if there was no help though, do you think people would still choose to have children?
if you are old enough to want children, then you should be old enough to get an education and a job to support them.

i dont think people should have the attitude,...... i want kids.... i cant afford them but oh well i will get benefits and a roof over my head.

myself and my husband work hard really hard...... we are not entitled to any benefits and its a struggle.... we cant afford more than two children. it would be selfish of me to have another if i couldnt support that child. we cant. end of. i would have a nervous breakdown due to money lol!!!
whereas i know someone on benefits with two kids, working out how much more she would be entitled to if she had another child! its crazy!

basically if people want children that badly they would or should find a way of supporting them themselves x

 

[Feltzy]

Yeah I see what your saying and people do abuse the system. But what about people who never earn above minimum wage, work just as hard as someone on £40k a year but they only get £12k, they'd never be able to have kids! Unfortunately even if everyone in the country worked their butts off to get a good paid job, there's just not enough good paid jobs to go round. So I think for those who do work hard but unfortunately just never get a good wage then top ups are fair.

 

[TattiesMum]

Yeah I see what your saying and people do abuse the system. But what about people who never earn above minimum wage, work just as hard as someone on £40k a year but they only get £12k, they'd never be able to have kids! Unfortunately even if everyone in the country worked their butts off to get a good paid job, there's just not enough good paid jobs to go round. So I think for those who do work hard but unfortunately just never get a good wage then top ups are fair.

I totally agree with this .... how much people get paid is not a reflection of how hard they work sadly

And yes Eternal I do agree that the Nat Minimum Wage should be a wage that people can live on ... it won't ever happen though because companies need investors (who in turn want a return on their investments - ie profit) and consumers (customers) want an affordable product or they won't buy ... paying every worker a living wage would:

1.cut profits

2.result in higher product prices .... which would in turn lead to lower sales, leading in turn to lower profits, then to companies going out of business and the workers not receiving any wages at all.

3.increasing product prices to the consumer, which would increase the cost of living/inflation and thus wipe out the increase in Min Wage

It's a vicious circle and one that ensures that virtually everyone with children in the UK relies on some kind of benefit in order to make ends meet ...

Although I accept that it is irritating to see people with no income producing child after child and seeming to get rewarded for that, I for one wouldn't want the alternatives - which would essential boil down to either children living in abject poverty and deprivation because benefits didn't exist, or every citizen being forced onto compulsory birth control until such time as they could prove their financial fitness and be 'approved' for reproduction by the Gov't - VERY scary stuff

 

[Eternal]

Yeah I see what your saying and people do abuse the system. But what about people who never earn above minimum wage, work just as hard as someone on £40k a year but they only get £12k, they'd never be able to have kids! Unfortunately even if everyone in the country worked their butts off to get a good paid job, there's just not enough good paid jobs to go round. So I think for those who do work hard but unfortunately just never get a good wage then top ups are fair.

As I said I have no issue with top up, altough I think wages should be relfected by inflation, in the sense that someone on minimum wage should be abel to survive on minimum wage and be able to afford a few extras, instead of topping up peoples wages, but i doubt we will ever get to that stage.

But there is a huge difference between someone working and trying to support their families and getting some of their tax back to be able to afford that, to someone who doesnt work and expects the tax payer to pay for their children.

At the end of the day those who work and get top us are just getting their tax back, which is a big difference to someone who doenst work.

 

[Eternal]

Yeah I see what your saying and people do abuse the system. But what about people who never earn above minimum wage, work just as hard as someone on £40k a year but they only get £12k, they'd never be able to have kids! Unfortunately even if everyone in the country worked their butts off to get a good paid job, there's just not enough good paid jobs to go round. So I think for those who do work hard but unfortunately just never get a good wage then top ups are fair.

I totally agree with this .... how much people get paid is not a reflection of how hard they work sadly

And yes Eternal I do agree that the Nat Minimum Wage should be a wage that people can live on ... it won't ever happen though because companies need investors (who in turn want a return on their investments - ie profit) and consumers (customers) want an affordable product or they won't buy ... paying every worker a living wage would:

1.cut profits

2.result in higher product prices .... which would in turn lead to lower sales, leading in turn to lower profits, then to companies going out of business and the workers not receiving any wages at all.

It's a vicious circle and one that ensures that virtually everyone with children in the UK relies on some kind of benefit in order to make ends meet ...

Although I accept that it is irritating to see people with no income producing child after child and seeming to get rewarded for that, I for one wouldn't want the alternatives - which would essential boil down to either children living in abject poverty and deprivation because benefits didn't exist, or every citizen being forced onto compulsory birth control until such time as they could prove their financial fitness and be 'approved' for reproduction by the Gov't - VERY scary stuff

yeah, its a weird sytem to me, i think more business should become "not for profit" organiasations, I am more than happy for people to be paid big wage packets but NOT for investitors to sit on their bum, do nothing but declair they expect there to be more profits made year upon year! Its bizzare to me, another way to make the mega rich richer, banks should be more willing to loan money to compnaies to expand and set up and then they just pay that back, rather than have a number of share holders take the profit.

How much better would business be on the whole then? bonues back for workers, and customers!

 

[TattiesMum]

yeah, its a weird sytem to me, i think more business should become "not for profit" organiasations, I am more than happy for people to be paid big wage packets but NOT for investitors to sit on their bum, do nothing but declair they expect there to be more profits made year upon year! Its bizzare to me, another way to make the mega rich richer, banks should be more willing to loan money to compnaies to expand and set up and then they just pay that back, rather than have a number of share holders take the profit.

How much better would business be on the whole then? bonues back for workers, and customers!

I know, but the Communist 'workers co-operatives' system simply didn't work ... it's Human nature to be greedy I guess - you know the Orwellian 'all pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others' thing

So we are kind of stuck with this horrible, dog eat dog, everyone trample on everyone else capitalist system

 

[fidgets mammy]

what really annoys me, and as i have worked with these children i feel i can say it, is - the parents who have children taken off them for valid reasons yet keep on producing more babies in the hope that social services will allow them to keep one eventually. this is wrong on all accounts. this isnt about wages this is pure NOT taking any responsibility and acting on own personal selfishness.

 

[ahcigar1]

Yeah I see what your saying and people do abuse the system. But what about people who never earn above minimum wage, work just as hard as someone on £40k a year but they only get £12k, they'd never be able to have kids! Unfortunately even if everyone in the country worked their butts off to get a good paid job, there's just not enough good paid jobs to go round. So I think for those who do work hard but unfortunately just never get a good wage then top ups are fair.

If you can't afford them then don't have them. No one should ever expect someone else to pay for thier choices. And honestly there is always a way to afford children if you absolutely WANT to have them even on a lower income.

The real problem is society in general today. Everyone wants luxuries that they don't need. i.e. television, cell phones, internet, take out food, sterio, ipods, ipads, etc.

My own mom is a perfect example. When my 2 brothers were only 3 & 5 years old she left her husband because he was cheating on her with 3 other women at the same time and engaged to another. She only had a high school education. Was only 23 years old, and had NO money. And had no family near her for support. My uncle flew out to pick her up and drove her back home. She lived in a scketchy 1 bedroom apartment. My brothers shared the bedroom while she slept on the couch in the main room. She often times went without food for herself so that my brothers could eat. She worked 1 full time job as a waitress. She had no idea what she was doing but she knew she had to learn to do it fast. She often times had no more than $.50 in her pocket. But she managed to feed and clothe my brothers. She brought home to todays standards only $13K/year. And never once did she collect a government check. If she had to go somewhere she walked, and saved money for the bus only if the weather was bad.

How did she do it? She didn't have luxuries. She didn't have all the material things. All she had were neccessities. Food, clothes (second hand shops), roof over their heads, and a bed for them to sleep on.

Society today thinks that we have to have this or that when in fact if cut out a lot of things if on a low income then would discover that it isn't as much of a struggle as originally thought.

But people want the easy way. They don't want to have to work and struggle to get ahead. They want handouts so they can have the luxuries.

Look at octomom. Perfect example. She had 6 kids already that she couldn't afford then goes and has 8 others. She still collects government checks of almost $100K per year and yet she says she still struggles to make ends meet and goes to get a $500 dollar hair cut.

The problem is people's priorities are all screwed up.

 

[angelandbump]

ahcigar1 - Your mum sounds amazing and you must be proud.

I bet 90% of people on full benefits can somehow manage to afford sky or virgin TV, internet, fags, alcohol, nights out with friends, take aways, contract mobile phone and i can go on. Every single person i know who is on benefits has at least 3 items on that list and to me, that list is all luxury items.

My and my partner work full time and struggle to make ends meet. I am not entitled to child tax credits because we earn too much yet after we pay our bills and mortgage we have a very small amount left over. BUT after reading what ahcigar1 put about her mum i have realised i can cut back so much more.

Sorry i am going off topic x

 

[ahcigar1]

ahcigar1 - Your mum sounds amazing and you must be proud.

I bet 90% of people on full benefits can somehow manage to afford sky or virgin TV, internet, fags, alcohol, nights out with friends, take aways, contract mobile phone and i can go on. Every single person i know who is on benefits has at least 3 items on that list and to me, that list is all luxury items.

My and my partner work full time and struggle to make ends meet. I am not entitled to child tax credits because we earn too much yet after we pay our bills and mortgage we have a very small amount left over. BUT after reading what ahcigar1 put about her mum i have realised i can cut back so much more.

Sorry i am going off topic x

I'm happy my mom is an ispiration for you. She has raised me to be proud for everything that I do have and to be grateful. After having LO hubby and I were struggling financially because of her medical bills on top of everything else. Then went through and discovered all the money we were putting out. Satalite radio ($20), cable ($200), cell phone ($100), Netflix ($20), etc. It adds up. We cancelled all of those. We now have antenna tv, we do still have internet so can stay connected with my family 2000 miles away, and I jumped onto my brother's family plan and so only pay $5 a month. We were going out to eat constantly because didn't feel like cooking. While now stay home and make larger portions and freeze for later. And the only luxtury I get is to go horseback riding once a month, and I work that off.

 

[Feltzy]

Yeah you're right ahcigar1, your mum sounds like an inspiration!

I know my mum really struggled as a single mum when we were growing up, she worked long hours for next to no money, she never went out, never spent money on herself, it was a struggle for her to make sure we were all provided for. There were times we had no food in the cupboards, literally! But my mum did receive a little help, free school dinners, council tax exemption, child benefit, if she didn't have that help then she wouldn't have been able to provide for us, it just wouldn't have been possible because we were living on the bare minimum anyway. We had a big old TV, hand me down clothes/furniture etc no luxuries at all.

I have an old school friend on my facebook who is a single mum to 4 kids and she's out of work, which in itself doesn't bother me. But in the last couple of years she has learnt to drive, bought a car, runs the car, goes out a couple of times a week on the lash, all on benefits. Now thats whats wrong with the system over here.

 

[smelly07]

totally agree with ahcigar1

 

[Eternal]

totally agree with ahcigar1

 

[Lightworker]

This might be abit OT, but I was watching Eastenders last night, and the way Bianca was struggling. It made me wonder about the whole benefits thing. I know her situation was complicated by loans she took, but in contrast to the assertion on this thread, aren't benefits there to help people in her situation?

This is so OT I know, but it made me think of this thread.

 

[Feltzy]

Funny you should say that Lightworker I thought the same when I watched it. I thought the storyline was a bit far fetched though, maybe I'm wrong I've never been in that situation.

 

[smelly07]

LOL!!! I was thinking the same thing!!!!! x

 

[mummy3]

ahcigar1, your mom is an inspiration.

I live in the states (cali) but was born and also lived in the UK so have experience of both. Have to say its a lot clearer cut in the US, being that its taxed differently so you can say more easily whether or not you are receiving assistance.

I feel the key here is ambition. I have no problem with benefits/welfare, its definately a lifesaver for those in real need and should be an amount to live on That said there should be more in place to deal with the problem of abusing it. I see no problem in top ups, esp in UK where tax is so much higher and its complicated in the way the system is set up that you pay so much out in tax initially and are essentially getting it back, either way you're contributing and that not only lowers the burdon to society but shows a good example to your children

Personally, aside from accidents, I feel you should plan your children when you can provide for them, you never know if assistance is going to continue to be availible

 

[ahcigar1]

My mom who works as a pharmacy tech now was talking with a few other eployees she works with, about this topic. One of them said "Maybe I should go on welfare so i can drive a Cadilac." My mom then said, "no I'd much rather have a Benz."

The sad truth is, this isn't just a joke but a reality. Time and time again they see people abusing this system. And able to drive luxurious cars, wear designer clothes, be talking on thier blackberries or iphones, and not have a struggle at all, while those of us who "can't" collect (not that I would ever want to) are struggling to make ends meet living pay check to pay check.

Using my mom as an example again, even though she doesn't have 3 kids to provide for anymore, still has her rent to pay, she walks to work, has sold one of her cars (so now only has one, which is paid off), my dad is out of work and has been for 3 years now, so only income coming in is from my mom, and she doesn't qualify for benefits because she is just above the scale.

Yet multiple times on a daily basis she sees these people coming in. I just don't understand it. And in all honest really wish that they would fix the system and actually give it to the people who really do need it and have it on a temporary basis, to encourage people to not loaf.