Don't it just take the P. !!

Report today in paper.
Mother of two, on the dole, claiming everything is sight- has enough left at end of year to spend £2 thousand on her daughters at Xmas, they get 20 presents each !! don't it make you mad.

She says it does not pay for her to seek work.

 

i have just been reading that in the mail ,,, she must play the system better than my daughter because she certainly doesnt get that kind of money, she budgets down to the last penny and is lucky not to be robbing peter to pay paul by the end of the month ! most of what will be under the Christmas tree will be second hand, refurbed or home made !
MY EX used to be like the one above mind and have the latest cars and holidays

 

At least she tells it how it is. Cheers, Tony.

 

Why rub it in people's noses, Tony? I think it is absolutely disgusting and one of the reasons I don't live in the UK anymore. Sadly, I still have to pay taxes there for these rip-off artists who probably have never earned an honest penny in their life and can live a very nice life off the backs of those who have slaved for what they have ...

 

She wont be bragging next christmas. It takes a special kind of stupidity to brag publicly about how you're fiddling the system right when the government is having a massive clampdown on such things.

 

She is claiming what she is entitled to. She is budgeting; which is commendable. She is saving for what she prioritises as important to *her*.

And, she raises a valid point. She has two small children, which would cost her a small fortune in childcare; she left school without GCSE's so she's right to say she would be on minimum wage. But, this is precisely what the Government said it wanted to address: it isn't right that people are better off on benefits than working

How she manages to save so much is her business; but I doubt she is completely and utterly dependent on making ends meet purely on her benefits. Chances are she has family and they help her out (what mother wouldn't help her daughter out in those circumstances?).

I'm not buying into sensationalised journalism. It is designed to provoke a reaction

Deep breaths and really think about what is being written:
"Designer bedlinen" ... you can get that at TKMaxx Or, Debenham sales. Or, Ebay. It doesn't mean she is paying full whack, or that it is the very latest design

Ipads - same thing; maybe refurbished ones? (Although what a 1yo and 2yo need one for is beyond me; if she was that money savvy, she'd either keep it in the bank and gather some interest until they are of an age when they will know how to use one!

Lunch out might mean a Big Mac. Holidays abroad might even me a day trip to France;; or maybe her family include her and the children in their annual jaunt? It's not explicit and leaves much to the imagination

Calm down, dears and carry on

 

The problem to me Mum IS that she is claiming what SHE is entitled to ...

The likes of my goodself who worked non-stop (I didn't have children, by choice) for 38 years could NOT claim benefits because I was ABLE to get a job.

Why does she have two children? I took precautions.

Where is the husband / father of the children? Is he contributing to their welfare ... I would think not ...

The Ipad thing is a joke and a half surely ...

Big Mac is not always a cheap meal out ... day trips to France are not cheap ... I would suspect her family has not a lot to do with her financially ... but that is only my opinion unless they are gleaning from her profits!

Sorry, my dear, I don't need to calm down and carry on ... I STILL PAY MY TAXES FOR THE LIKES OF THIS PERSON!

 

Even if he is contributing to their welfare, whatever amount it is would be deducted from her benefits; so the total amount would be about the same anyway.

It is not her fault that the benefit system is as ... generous (?) ... as it is. And there are many on benefits who struggle to make ends meet and feel it is not enough!

All these articles tend to do is cheese people off, get their blood pressure up and their immediate focus is the claimant.

Put your energy into the Government reforms!

 

What makes me steamingly mad about this is the comparison between her and my youngest daughter. My daughter worked damned hard at school, got herself into a good Uni and got a 1st class BSc., she spent a year trying to find a full-time job, working in the interim, in a number of 'minimum wage' and indeed 'no wage' jobs - she worked part-time 3 days a week in a supermarket (from 5 - 9 a.m.), came home and got a train to London (spending her wages on the train fare) where she did a series of internships most of which didn't even pay her travelling. We lost count of the number of jobs she applied for, most of whom didn't even have the courtesy to acknowlege her application.

She eventually got a job with the Civil Service - in the same month they imposed a wage freeze - with a First Class degree and after 4 years in the job, she now earns precisely £18,207 p.a. from which £3,790 immediately goes out on her season ticket, leaving her just under £14,500 to live on. True, she doesn't have a student loan, her Grandmother died, left her a small amount of money and she decided to use her 'inheritance' to pay off her student debt.

At 26, she'd and her fiance (also with a degree and a Masters) currently rent a miniscule flat, they would love to get married but can't afford to even think about buying a house, don't see how they'll ever be able to contemplate having a family of their own, they never buy one another birthday presents (unnecessary expenditure) and when it comes to Christmas, set a budget of £5 each.

This woman, who has no qualifications, who's never had a job, clearly can't say 'no' in bed and so hasn't contributed a single penny to the economy, spends £2,000 on presents and partying - what a wonderful role model she makes for her own children! If she can save this amount from her benefits, then isn't it about time she stopped receiving so damned much? And isn't it good to know that part of the taxes my daughter (and the rest of us) pay, contribute to this woman's (many others like her and their little brats) very comfortable life style?

Bitter? Me? Too bl**dy right I'm bitter.

 

True. The article is attempting to manipulate our opinions by (possibly selectively) presenting information in a very leading way with a hidden political agenda behind it. Seems to have worked a treat if GC reaction is anything to go by.

Wonder which paper it was? The Guardian?

I'm betting the initials were the DM or probably the DE. Guaranteed to make me steam before I get to the end of the first paragraph.

 

This is the original article,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-20-presents-children.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

under which I read an interesting comment -about-vouchers- which makes me think ...

If money was issued for the benefits in the form of vouchers. Not universally accepted, but accepted for a sufficient number of products that can cover the family basic needs in a decent way...

The family in question would be able to maintain itself, which is the purpose of the benefits, but at the same time could not take advantage of a life, so to speak, more lustful, that only those who are in regular employment would be able to afford.

Whether I would want the family depicted in the article as my neighbour, Big fat NO

 

It is true that there is a propaganda campaign currently in full swing against benefits claimants at the moment, because the government wants to cut benefits and they don't want us to object.

The girl in the article has not only shot herself in the foot, but she's also contributed to the campaign against ALL benefits claimants, including the majority, that I think are genuine.

I did a stint on the dole years ago, and I know others who've had to, and for most people, it is not the free and easy lifestyle that the propaganda would have us believe. I've known many dolies (and been one myself as I said), but I can't say any of them were job dodging lazy scroungers. All just people who've found themselves in a pickle through no fault of their own, forced to claim benefits or go hungry (in fact usually both, its more a case of choose between claiming benefits and being hungry, or not claiming and just starving).

There are however a minority of folks that find ways to cheat the system or at least manipulate it to some extent, and those people are the ones that the media focuses on to paint the picture of the 'typical claimant', so that over time, the masses gradually grow to hate the people who are stuck at rock bottom often through no fault of their own. The trouble is, that attitude is really good for the government, because it effectively means that nobody has to worry about those people. It is no different to the caste system in India that western folks are often so critical of, marking people as worthless just because of their situation.

The girl in the article has helped to create that situation, and for that she should at least be ashamed of herself. Ok, we can blame the newspapers, but she could have simply refused to have anything to do with them. She'll have been paid a couple of hundred quid for helping them with their story, for helping them to shaft probably 3 million genuine claimants just to get at the minority of dodgy ones.

 

I've found the more time you have, the more you can manage stuff like that

 

Why would she refuse? In her opinion, she is an honourable parent, because she not only gets by on benefits, but budgets to save some to give her children what *she* believes is the "norm" and is proud of herself for doing so (however materialistic that may be). Bit deluded to think that working people prioritise branded goods etc (Burberry and the like has definate connotations of "chav" attached to it!).

As for being paid for the article, that is a tricky one, because she would be entitled to earn "some" money and continue with benefits, but, it that amount exceeded a particular sum, the difference would be deducted.

Did you notice the "photo shoot" set up? Isn't that all a part of the "celeb-pretty" culture that many of our yoof aspire too? The Andy Warhol "5-mins of fame, culture A number of "celeb-pretties" have made their fortune off the back of a nicely staged photo shoot and a bit of "drama" thrown into the mix. I would say she is very short-sighted and somewhat naive; yet, we have spawned a youth culture for which these attitudes are not shocking (to them!) and feel no shame for it.

She is claiming what she is entitled to (no manipulation of the system is suggested) and managing her money the way she sees fit. What she's entitled to had been steadily increasing under the previous government. Now we're up the creek without a paddle facing constant austerity measures, that is going to be redressed.

Which supports what Ms Broderick is suggesting:

If your daughter struggles on £18k pa (no mention of how much her fiance earns) ... this woman *manages* on £15k pa (for herself + two children). And not all of that is cash in hand ... that also takes into account her housing benefit of £5770 p.a.; so she's actually living on just under £9,710k pa in cash benefits, in comparison to your daughter's £14,500 (for herself + her fiances income).
Ms Broderick: £186.73 pw. for herself and two dependents.
Your daughter: £278.85 pw. almost £100 per week better off (not forgetting her partner's income, so probably a lot more than that for the two of them).

However, the longer term prospects differ considerably between this single, non-qualified woman and your qualified daughter with a partner So, why be bitter? Its very short-termism really. At some point in time this woman will no longer qualify for benefits; aspires only to minimum wage employment and her daughters grow up to become tax payers too (one day )