View Full Version : Welfare mothers to be forced to work
Del Lardo
07-12-2008, 12:32
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5299325.ece
Ignoring the utter hilarity of Brown going Tory I must it's about time something like this was implemented.
Recently ranted elsewhere about last time I was getting my hair cut I was sat next to a young lady getting an £80 hair cut who was telling the lady cutting her hair how she'd got knocked up so she could get "one of them nice flats off the council and not have to work". This was the same day I was taxed over £4000 on my gross pay.
Personally I'm sick and tired of paying for the scroungers that the welfare state has created. There are definitely people out there that need help but after ~60 years of the welfare state, a system designed to help people when they are in trouble, there are a lot of people out there that see it as their right to live off the state.
Whilst I understand that there are people who cannot work, it boils my blood at the number of people who choose not to work. I'm fed up of paying for them to live off the state.
About bloody time.
Whilst I understand that there are people who cannot work, it boils my blood at the number of people who choose not to work. I'm fed up of paying for them to live off the state.
About bloody time.
Hear hear.
Whilst I understand that there are people who cannot work, it boils my blood at the number of people who choose not to work. I'm fed up of paying for them to live off the state.
About bloody time.
Agreed.
I'm pretty left wing in my political views, but I'm firmly of the opinion that if you're actually capable of aiding society, you damn well should be. Most importantly though, you shouldn't be the one that makes the decision whether you're capable of it. Our local government is always short of staff in various areas, like street cleaners and so on. Nothing to stop most of those lazy slack-arsed scroungers from cleaning streets. Hell, any bloke under the age of 25 that is on benefits for more than 6 months ought to be conscripted.
I think this recession has hit hard that the people actually making this country tick (the working class) are being shafted, high house prices in my village you are talking at least £100k for a bog standard terraced house even private owned ex council homes were selling for £130k last year, literally impossible to get social housing, people who have worked for years should be at top of the list for homes and benefits not people who have never worked.
Not all council estates are tarred with "wont work people" but you can spot an area that has young single mothers and tear away kids from the area and the huge ASBO, simply people who work for a living and pay rent/mortgage keep the area nice and act like normal people.
I agree with the principle - can't be bothered good-for-nothings do my nut in just as much as the next taxpayer, but maybe now isn't the right time.
If it was a choice between one of these fools being forced to take a job and that same job being available for someone who actually wants to work but can't find anything, I know which option I'd prefer, every time, because it's pretty obvious who will get the job done and who will deny the genuine worker and still try to skive.
Of course, cutting their benefits off, period, would remove the need for this discussion.
Thats all very well, but with it costing 70 quid + a week for childcare, who will pay? The government? The parent?
Its says that the government will "assist" What does that mean? Single mothers who have a hard enough time on their own will be forced into being separated from their children? Why not have gulags? Hey, shall we change the union jack to a swastika? This sort of thing specifically stigmatises single mothers.
What about where there is a couple, but one has to stay at home because its cheaper than paying for childcare?
There is a definite need for reform, but this smacks of the typical out of touch way that this government dictates and is very ill conceived.
What about where there is a couple, but one has to stay at home because its cheaper than paying for childcare?
How many of those parents are on welfare? My understanding of it is that having a working partner would make you ineligible for welfare? I'm firmly of the view that one or other parent should stay home to raise the kids, at least until they're at secondary school age.
Thats all very well, but with it costing 70 quid + a week for childcare, who will pay? The government? The parent?
How about people wait til they can actually afford to have kids? Two birds, one stone.
How about people wait til they can actually afford to have kids? Two birds, one stone.
Sometimes it not just that easy, it just happens. Don't get me wrong, I think that people who are capable of working should. Its just we shouldn't be victimising single mothers who are in their situation by choice or not.
How many more bad ideas is this government going to come up with before they force people into open revolt?
It's not like - 'Whoops I've had a baby' is it? Phil and I nearly had to make that decision a few years ago and it was like 'Well we can't really afford it at the mo can we?'
Del Lardo
08-12-2008, 17:30
Sometimes it not just that easy, it just happens. Don't get me wrong, I think that people who are capable of working should. Its just we shouldn't be victimising single mothers who are in their situation by choice or not.
How many more bad ideas is this government going to come up with before they force people into open revolt?
More likely to be civil war than open revolt. There's a hell of a lot or harding working middle class people out there like myself who are utterly fed up with paying for people to sit on their arses because they believe the state owes them a living.
Single mothers aren't the only ones to be effected as these are sweeping reforms but they have been highlighted in the article as currently they do not have to look for work until their youngest child is 14 years old. Now taking some of the single mothers living just down the road from me as examples they have kids ranging from new born to ~12 years old meaning that if they had their first kid at 16 under current legislation they wouldn't have to work until they were 42.
I could give numerous examples of single mothers who have wanted to work to support their family rather than claiming benefits and have made it work because they have the right mindset. Unfortionately in the modern day X-Factor Britain a lot of people believe the state owes them a living and they can get rich not by hard work but by becoming the next Jordan.
I'm not trying to say that there aren't people out there who don't genuinely need help or people that want to work who can't get work but in number terms there are probably hundreds of thousands of people who see living off the state as a long term 'career' and something has to be done about these people otherwise the welfare system will simply collapse.
It's not like - 'Whoops I've had a baby' is it? Phil and I nearly had to make that decision a few years ago and it was like 'Well we can't really afford it at the mo can we?'
Yes, but you can get pregnant accidentally. Thats the point I was trying to make.
And then you can assess the situation and deal with it accordingly. that's the point I was trying to make.
Reference the single Mums, I have known a number of single Mums in my life time and all of them have managed to work to support their children. Yes, they have had some extra support income wise which I think is fair enough considering they're trying their best.
How is it then that these people I have known (civvy police officers, nurses, accountants etc) have managed to juggle jobs and a child and others can't?
In fact, one of them was superb. She left her child with child care three days a week and then two days a week with her family. She did part time work with the police which worked around child care and school and any overtime she could manage she did. Not long after meeting her, the council found her a home and she moved in there. She was so over the moon. After doing some research she found out she could earn more if she wasn't working - after the child care was paid for etc she was left with not a lot to spare.
However.
She didn't quit her job - she just worked harder. Why? Because she wanted to one day own a house of her own and show the kids that she was doing something to provide for them. Plus it gave her independence to an extent and meant she had a social life and so on.
In my opinion, the government should do more to support these type of people than to those without work.
Another case I would mention too - when I was working at a school I was dealing with kids with Behavioural issues. When I was speaking with one of them about what she was going to do after her GCSEs her words to me was:
"I wanna have a baby"
When I asked why she said:
"cos they're cute ain't they. I love 'em."
When I asked how they would support them:
"I'd just do nuffink like my Mum. She gets paid and everything. Ha!"
This was the view of a number of girls at the school. Two of them have since been knocked up. :/
So, being a single Mum and living at home and doing nothing.... in my opinion *can* give off the completely wrong impression to kids.
On the contrary, another kid I know in a single Mum home loved his Mother so so SO much. She was struggling like crazy to get a job/hold one down (she had anger management issues) but she tried and tried so so hard and her son saw that and thought it was amazing. He actually spent his own money on her from his Father to buy her shoes for an interview. His words to me: "I don't want to end up jobless like my Mum. She gets really sad. I want to get a job and help her as much as I can. I could get her a suit for work and everything."
Such a sweet heart :)
TinkerBell
09-12-2008, 09:38
I have to agree with the majority, that you shouldn't have children until you are able to look after them yourself, to feed them with your own hard earned cash, but I do see that there are times when this is not possible. I for one would find it mightly difficult to have an abortion, which I can see would be the same for alot of woman, but I do not think that this means that they shouldn't get a job or try and earn some money.
I can kind of see mejinks point, but at the end of the day why should some single mother's be able to stay home and spend that special time with the kids while other single mother's have to go to work? I know what it was like for my mother being a single parent, and she found it hard, but she never gave up trying to keep a job, there were times when money were tight. I remember being very young and my mom cleaning houses and she took me with her because there was no one else to look after me, and another time when I was older, we used to have to get up really early on a weekend and set up a market stall to earn some more money.
I think that everyone should at least attempt to make money, and if they have children and they are tight with money, then that is what family and friends are for, ask them to look after the kids while you do some part time work, especially when they are in school. What is stopping mother's from getting a part time job while the kid is at school? Nothing, just pure lazyness.
If there are literally no options to get around it, then they should at least do something to help the community. After all the people in the community pay for their food, community service should be a must to be quite honest.
AboveTheSalt
09-12-2008, 13:15
...
Another case I would mention too - when I was working at a school I was dealing with kids with Behavioural issues. When I was speaking with one of them about what she was going to do after her GCSEs her words to me was:
"I wanna have a baby"
When I asked why she said:
"cos they're cute ain't they. I love 'em."
When I asked how they would support them:
"I'd just do nuffink like my Mum. She gets paid and everything. Ha!"
This was the view of a number of girls at the school. Two of them have since been knocked up. :/
...Not all that unusual. I think that most people agree that this behaviour is wrong. However, I have yet to hear a practical solution. What I would really like to know is how you plan to stop this happening: compulsory sterilisation compulsory abortion allow the mother to have the child and take it into care allow the mother to have the child and then let them both starve
I am aware of a local "educationally challenged" woman who has had ten children, with more than one man. All have been taken into care, shortly after birth. It seems likely that some of them at least are also "educationally challenged" and will probably end up following their mother's path. What do you do?
Not all that unusual. I think that most people agree that this behaviour is wrong. However, I have yet to hear a practical solution. What I would really like to know is how you plan to stop this happening: compulsory sterilisation compulsory abortion allow the mother to have the child and take it into care allow the mother to have the child and then let them both starve
I am aware of a local "educationally challenged" woman who has had ten children, with more than one man. All have been taken into care, shortly after birth. It seems likely that some of them at least are also "educationally challenged" and will probably end up following their mother's path. What do you do?
What do you do or what would you do?! ;) :p If it's what do I do, I'm a designer :p
See now you say educationally challenged but these girls weren't. When I worked with them and spent a year getting to know them their grades rapidly came up and they were on the road to some good GCSEs. Not brilliant, but good enough to get into college. One girl admitted to me that she didn't think she was any good at anything because that's all she heard from everyone else. It was a kind of stigma, which was really sad as she would have made an *excellent* hair dresser... but she decided to jack it in because "why bother" getting up in the mornings when she can get paid for lying in and doing nothing. :/
Wish I had been in that school a year or two prior as she just needed a bit more time to work with and she would have been able to do it.
Personally I think a lot of these "educationally challenged" people are using this as an excuse - you don't need a degree or GCSEs to be a cleaner or do sales or be a hairdresser. It's a load of codswollop. You just need the drive and determination.
Solutions wise, I can't really offer much. I've always said that the government should provide benefits for the first two children that are had - the rest is up to them to sort... but then you're basically punishing the 3rd or 4th child that comes along.
Boo :(
The solution for me is to replace most of the money handed out with vouchers. Vouchers can be accepted anywhere, in any shop, but only on certain items. Now you can reduce the benefits being handed out and make sure it's only spent on necessary items and not beer, fags, sky and consoles.
I understand that people don't always choose to be in the position they're in, but that also doesn't mean that some can sit there and, in my opinion, take the piss out of the rest of working society.
I know I've over simplified the whole process somewhat, but I do think that vouchers, and not cash, are the way forward.
I like your thinking Desmo.
AboveTheSalt
09-12-2008, 18:33
See now you say educationally challenged but these girls weren't.I really didn't express myself very well there, did I :o
I didn't mean to suggest that the girls you describe were "educationally challenged". I quoted a particular example of which I am aware, where a "not very bright" woman keeps having children simply because she lacks the sense to do otherwise. She will produce children who may well follow the same path in the future. How does one break this cycle, other than by a fairly drastic attack on her rights as a woman?
The same would apply in the case of a reasonably intelligent girl or woman who sees having children as a desirable "life choice".
The solution for me is to replace most of the money handed out with vouchers. Vouchers can be accepted anywhere, in any shop, but only on certain items. Now you can reduce the benefits being handed out and make sure it's only spent on necessary items and not beer, fags, sky and consoles.Seems reasonable except that I suspect that the recipients of the vouchers would soon find a way of converting them into more "usable" currency and you would end up devising ever more complex ways of administering them.
Still, might help to get the unemployment figures down, so perhaps you are onto a winner ;)
Seems reasonable except that I suspect that the recipients of the vouchers would soon find a way of converting them into more "usable" currency and you would end up devising ever more complex ways of administering them.
Still, might help to get the unemployment figures down, so perhaps you are onto a winner ;)
Agreed, good idea. You'd be almost guaranteed see a return of the post-WWII style black market, but I imagine it would be fairly easy to police such things. If they're on benefits require them to prove how their financial incomes and outgoings work, or such like.
If they're on benefits require them to prove how their financial incomes and outgoings work, or such like.
We already have to do that.
I'm going to stay out of this thread now. I am so fed up of explaining my situation whenever the topic of single parents comes up :p
I am aware of a local "educationally challenged" woman who has had ten children, with more than one man. All have been taken into care, shortly after birth. It seems likely that some of them at least are also "educationally challenged" and will probably end up following their mother's path. What do you do?
In the worst cases, prison or community service, preferably the latter of course.
I know it sounds drastic but if you were to neglect a pet you would be punished and rightly so. If a woman chooses to have children without the means to support them, then that's negligence in my opinion and she should be punished accordingly.
Having children (or pets) should never be a right, they should always be considered a privilege. It's a shame more parents don't see their kids as such.
Personally, I find it abhorrent that I have no choice but to fund these people's life choices. There are far more deserving cases for my charity.
I didn't mean to suggest that the girls you describe were "educationally challenged". I quoted a particular example of which I am aware, where a "not very bright" woman keeps having children simply because she lacks the sense to do otherwise. She will produce children who may well follow the same path in the future. How does one break this cycle, other than by a fairly drastic attack on her rights as a woman?
For all its ills, this might be a case where an ID card scheme would actually make some sense. If implemented properly, you would need such a card both to receive these 'vouchers' and to spend them. That's going to make any fraud attempt somewhat challenging, though it could of course lead to an increase in trade of stolen IDs.
Just please make sure you don't lump all single Mothers into the same category.
Some of us didn't have children just so we'd get a house and free money.
Some of us got really screwed and ended up with a choice, become homeless with a young baby or have a roof over our heads and food.
I worked full time before I had Megan. I went on maternity leave, and then a few weeks before I was due to go back to work, her Dad left us.
Because of my depression, I was strongly advised not to go back to work, and also how the heck was I going to pay for childcare?
I went back to work when I was ready, and got screwed around, the job centre and the people who deal with benefits urged me to quit and go back on benefits.
Then I found out I was pregnant with Toby. I couldn't get another job because I had complications early on in my pregnancy, and then later on I was having physio twice a week. I'm still suffering with my back now. And I'm also suffering with other things too.
Not all of us had our lives turn out remotely like we'd hoped and planned. I should've been happily married living in my own house with a mortgage, pfft, he had other ideas!
I think (hope) we're all mature enough to not do that Tiggy. The key here is being prepared to work. We all recognise there are genuine reasons why some mothers can't work, and that the people that cause the problems are the ones who sit around at home making babies seemingly only for the sake of receiving more benefit. It should be obvious which category you fall into.
I think (hope) we're all mature enough to not do that Tiggy. The key here is being prepared to work. We all recognise there are genuine reasons why some mothers can't work, and that the people that cause the problems are the ones who sit around at home making babies seemingly only for the sake of receiving more benefit. It should be obvious which category you fall into.
Agreed.
cleanbluesky
27-12-2008, 14:22
I think (hope) we're all mature enough to not do that Tiggy. The key here is being prepared to work. We all recognise there are genuine reasons why some mothers can't work, and that the people that cause the problems are the ones who sit around at home making babies seemingly only for the sake of receiving more benefit. It should be obvious which category you fall into.
This comment is based on assumption, there are no 'categories', no clear boundaries - you speak about them as if they were a cohesive group yet you have no knowledge of who these people are or their prevalence amongst society. This initiative only serves for Labour to divert more attention to one group as supposed scroungers, while they fill their second home full of blenders and LCD TVs from the John Lewis list at our expense.
This comment is based on assumption, there are no 'categories', no clear boundaries - you speak about them as if they were a cohesive group yet you have no knowledge of who these people are or their prevalence amongst society. This initiative only serves for Labour to divert more attention to one group as supposed scroungers, while they fill their second home full of blenders and LCD TVs from the John Lewis list at our expense.
I think that was the original point. Tiggy rightly suggested that single mothers shouldn't be lumped into one category. Mark, and then I, agreed.
dirtydog
09-01-2009, 10:59
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5299325.ece
Ignoring the utter hilarity of Brown going Tory I must it's about time something like this was implemented.
And ironically David Cameron has gone old Labour because he opposes these measures and has said he'll vote against them.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.