Originally Posted by Irene Pearson

I am not demonising the poor at all. Please do not misinterpret my words. How have you got to Lets take away all benefits. Is anyone suggesting that? Let us just agree to disagree.

Sorry, Irene. I was venting more generally than in your direction. Don't take that personally, it wasn't meant.

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

bazinga!
Hit the nail on the head there nessa... Whats the soloution? make work pay more than staying on benefits then.
Thats all most people want, not 2nd homes or duck houses..
A living wage so they can raise their children, not be a drain on resources and not be looked down on by those who are blinkered to the real issues of large scale corporate tax avoidance, and expenses fiddling (which equates to the same thing as it is creamed from taxpayers) that face the UK.

Exactly. She can still work in the daytime while the kids are at school.

Originally Posted by Vanessa

Exactly. She can still work in the daytime while the kids are at school.

Employers are desperate for workers willing to work from 10am till 2pm, whilst still paying a wage that will allow them to have some kind of life.

[Irene Pearson]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

From next year they will cut benefits for everyone. I think that's fair. I believe everyone should go to work. I don't like spongers.

The problem there is we are in the middle of a recession with a lack of jobs available. I agree that any able bodied adult should work and not be able to opt for benefit funded living. I don't know when in our history that this happened.

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ

Employers are desperate for workers willing to work from 10am till 2pm, whilst still paying a wage that will allow them to have some kind of life.

Yes. Part time work is perfect for busy mothers. My sister is looking for this kind of work.

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Irene Pearson

The problem there is we are in the middle of a recession with a lack of jobs available. I agree that any able bodied adult should work and not be able to opt for benefit funded living. I don't know when in our history that this happened.

There's always part time work. It's better for mothers i think.

[Irene Pearson]

Part time work is great for mothers. If more money is available on benefits where is the incentive. That I suppose is more my point.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

From next year they will cut benefits for everyone. I think that's fair. I believe everyone should go to work. I don't like spongers.

Are you willing to create the extra 1,000,000+ jobs that would be needed in order to get even just people on JSA back into work? This is before starting on the single mothers and such who are on income support or other benefits

Its easy enough to say everyone should work. Everyone who is able SHOULD support themselves, I agree. However if the jobs arent there, they cant.

That said I have had this argument many times before, and I always seem to get someone telling me that there are millions of jobs out there at the minute just people arent looking hard enough, even though thats absolute bollocks, so I think after this reply I wont return to this thread as as soon as that **** starts it will annoy me too much

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Irene Pearson

Part time work is great for mothers. If more money is available on benefits where is the incentive. That I suppose is more my point.

This is the aim of universal credit. To make people better off by a considerable margin even by doing part time work. I hope it works out like that, but I dont think it will.

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Are you willing to create the extra 1,000,000+ jobs that would be needed in order to get even just people on JSA back into work? This is before starting on the single mothers and such who are on income support or other benefits

Its easy enough to say everyone should work. Everyone who is able SHOULD support themselves, I agree. However if the jobs arent there, they cant.

That said I have had this argument many times before, and I always seem to get someone telling me that there are millions of jobs out there at the minute just people arent looking hard enough, even though thats absolute bollocks, so I think after this reply I wont return to this thread as as soon as that **** starts it will annoy me too much

I think anyone who's unemployed should at least try to find a job. I have no respect for those who don't want to work.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

I think anyone who's unemployed should at least try to find a job. I have no respect for those who don't want to work.

The vast majority do. Unfortunately we dont hear about those people, the media is only interested in the ones who can sell papers due to peoples outrage at these scroungers who 'live it up' on the taxpayers money

(I will point out again though, that this particular story does not add up. She does NOT do all this stuff on her benefit money, she clearly has income/help from somewhere else too)

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

The vast majority do. Unfortunately we dont hear about those people, the media is only interested in the ones who can sell papers due to peoples outrage at these scroungers who 'live it up' on the taxpayers money

(I will point out again though, that this particular story does not add up. She does NOT do all this stuff on her benefit money, she clearly has income/help from somewhere else too)

My brother in law has had many interviews since coming to the UK last year. He has been offered three office jobs recently and has had to choose. I admire his determination to find a job.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

My brother in law has had many interviews since coming to the UK last year. He has been offered three office jobs recently and has had to choose. I admire his determination to find a job.

Good on him. Glad to hear a good story about this kinda thing for once

[Vanessa]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Good on him. Glad to hear a good story about this kinda thing for once

I'm so happy for him! He just started a new job and he'll be able to go home for Christmas.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

The vast majority do. Unfortunately we dont hear about those people, the media is only interested in the ones who can sell papers due to peoples outrage at these scroungers who 'live it up' on the taxpayers money

(I will point out again though, that this particular story does not add up. She does NOT do all this stuff on her benefit money, she clearly has income/help from somewhere else too)

Exactly it has been structured to get readers waving their pitchforks in the general direction of the DSS..
I wish that folk were not so easily influenced by these tales, meanwhile other far worse news is quickly passed up on for these tales.

[Irene Pearson]

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

Exactly it has been structured to get readers waving their pitchforks in the general direction of the DSS..
I wish that folk were not so easily influenced by these tales, meanwhile other far worse news is quickly passed up on for these tales.

Unfortunately true.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ

What's too much, then?

If they have £10 in their pockets after bills, food and daily expenses, is that OK? £50? What's the cut off?

Nobody knows anything about this womans life, other than she saves £2000 over a year. She may serve beans on toast every night of the week, just to give her kids a really special Christmas.

Who knows?

You don't think the fact that she doesn't work, and yet is able to dress her children in designer clothes and buy them ipads while working people cannot, is even slightly unfair? Benefits are not supposed to be a lifestyle, they're mean to be a stop-gap to help people who are out of work. Unfortunately it's a career choice for some.

[Mrluvaluva]

Leanna reveals: “All my babies’ things were new – I had designer buggies and a beautiful nursery. I do sometimes buy Next or Gap – I’m not a snob – but I prefer designer quality.

“I don’t want my girls to be teased for not having the best.”

“I’m not one of those girls who gets pregnant for the benefits, though – both my pregnancies were accidents. People may say I should have been more careful, but I think it’s better to be a young mum – you have more energy. The benefits are for my kids, not me.”

In the next breath she says: “I go clubbing with my friends every fortnight and love having lunch at Italian restaurant Prezzo. I dress nicely as I don’t want to be labelled a ‘benefits mum.’ Even though she says she uses the money on her kids.

She now claims £1,290 a month, including £430 in child tax credits, £132 child benefit, £444 in rent, £80 to cover council tax and single parent benefit of £180 a month – plus £24 worth of vouchers for free milk and fruit.

Leanna adds: “The people at the Job Centre have actually told me I’m better off on benefits than in a minimum-wage job. It’s the system’s fault. My kids would suffer if I worked. This way, taxpayers know I’m raising two well-brought-up kids.”



Her housing benefit covers her rent, so that leaves her with about £740 per month (excluding vouchers). Say her bills were a couple of hundred at the most per month, that would leave her with £540. If she saves around £170 per month, that leaves her with £370, which equates to around £90 per week with which to buy food, clothes etc. I suppose it's quite feasible if you have no personal vices. Although I don't know where she finds the money for designer clothes and lunching out?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ

Employers are desperate for workers willing to work from 10am till 2pm, whilst still paying a wage that will allow them to have some kind of life.

The woman who cleans my office is a single mum on benefits, her youngest child is 6. She also cleans for two other businesses and a private home, I guess it totals about 18 hours per week. Her benefits are adjusted because of the little amount she earns. She has a work ethic because her parents had a good work ethic. When her child is a little older she plans to try to start her own cleaning business. However, right now, she can afford neither designer clothes nor ipads. She has self-respect, and she has my respect. I guess that's the difference between one person on benefits, and another.

[Cherie]

I'm at a loss to know what the silly bint who gave the interview was trying to achieve..

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Mrluvaluva

Leanna reveals: “All my babies’ things were new – I had designer buggies and a beautiful nursery. I do sometimes buy Next or Gap – I’m not a snob – but I prefer designer quality.

“I don’t want my girls to be teased for not having the best.”

“I’m not one of those girls who gets pregnant for the benefits, though – both my pregnancies were accidents. People may say I should have been more careful, but I think it’s better to be a young mum – you have more energy. The benefits are for my kids, not me.”

In the next breath she says: “I go clubbing with my friends every fortnight and love having lunch at Italian restaurant Prezzo. I dress nicely as I don’t want to be labelled a ‘benefits mum.’ Even though she says she uses the money on her kids.

She now claims £1,290 a month, including £430 in child tax credits, £132 child benefit, £444 in rent, £80 to cover council tax and single parent benefit of £180 a month – plus £24 worth of vouchers for free milk and fruit.

Leanna adds: “The people at the Job Centre have actually told me I’m better off on benefits than in a minimum-wage job. It’s the system’s fault. My kids would suffer if I worked. This way, taxpayers know I’m raising two well-brought-up kids.”



Her housing benefit covers her rent, so that leaves her with about £740 per month (excluding vouchers). Say her bills were a couple of hundred at the most per month, that would leave her with £540. If she saves around £170 per month, that leaves her with £370, which equates to around £90 per week with which to buy food, clothes etc. I suppose it's quite feasible if you have no personal vices. Although I don't know where she finds the money for designer clothes and lunching out?

Plus the holidays and such she claims to be able to afford. And she says she saves 250 per month. Which would leave 290. About 70 quid a week to feed and clothe herself and 2 kids. Before the treats and great lifestyle she has.

[Kizzy]

She is not a benefit cheat..she is not getting anymore than anyone else in her position she budgets for christmas is all.
If she worked she would still get child benefit, child tax credits and help with rent and council tax.
Plus lets not forget that as a part time wage earner would pay no tax anyway.

It is a snapshot of how things are, don't shoot her for stating facts.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Mrluvaluva

Leanna reveals: “All my babies’ things were new – I had designer buggies and a beautiful nursery. I do sometimes buy Next or Gap – I’m not a snob – but I prefer designer quality.

“I don’t want my girls to be teased for not having the best.”

“I’m not one of those girls who gets pregnant for the benefits, though – both my pregnancies were accidents. People may say I should have been more careful, but I think it’s better to be a young mum – you have more energy. The benefits are for my kids, not me.”

In the next breath she says: “I go clubbing with my friends every fortnight and love having lunch at Italian restaurant Prezzo. I dress nicely as I don’t want to be labelled a ‘benefits mum.’ Even though she says she uses the money on her kids.

She now claims £1,290 a month, including £430 in child tax credits, £132 child benefit, £444 in rent, £80 to cover council tax and single parent benefit of £180 a month – plus £24 worth of vouchers for free milk and fruit.

Leanna adds: “The people at the Job Centre have actually told me I’m better off on benefits than in a minimum-wage job. It’s the system’s fault. My kids would suffer if I worked. This way, taxpayers know I’m raising two well-brought-up kids.”



Her housing benefit covers her rent, so that leaves her with about £740 per month (excluding vouchers). Say her bills were a couple of hundred at the most per month, that would leave her with £540. If she saves around £170 per month, that leaves her with £370, which equates to around £90 per week with which to buy food, clothes etc. I suppose it's quite feasible if you have no personal vices. Although I don't know where she finds the money for designer clothes and lunching out?

As someone else said the figures do not add up at all. I'd really like to know how she is saving just under 200.00 a month, she could patent that concept and make herself millions.

[Niamh.]

This bit would annoy me If I were a British tax Payer :

"This way, taxpayers know I’m raising two well-brought-up kids.” Like she's doing you all a service, knowing she's spending your money wisely

[Vanessa]

She's spoiling the kids. That's far too many presents. One is enough.