# ConDem's possibly stopping family tax credit and child benefit in next budget!



## Rusty06

Hi 

As you will see form my signature I am not even pregnant yet but am interested in peoples views on this issue. It seams that there is talk of the new government stopping or changing criterea for who will recieve these benefits. Currently child benefit goes to all and family tax credit to those with joint income under 58k. 

It is typical that those of us on middle incomes will end up feeling the pinch as the rich are so rich they won't notice and of course the conservatives in particular won't want to upset their millionaire relatives and backers. Those on benefits on the very low income will probally be better off. If they are working I have no problem with but those who sit on the dole of course will just get more hand outs for doing nothing.

Sorry for the rant but I am anxious enough about how we will make ends meet when we have children as although I am a good wage earner my partner has been made redundant so our joint income would of entilted us to getting some help. But now as well as paying for all our fertility treatment privately and never having claimed anything form the sytem, DP cannot claim the dole because I earn too much, we will not be able to get any help when we have a family.  

Bl......y hell what does everyone else think


----------



## vickym1984

I think it is just the family element which, to the people it will withdrawn from is worth £10 a week. With the dramatic increase in personal allowance (up to £7500 with a phase into £10,000) and the scrapping of the NI increase planned by labour, these families will end up better off xx


----------



## Rusty06

Hi Vicky

Thanks for your response although I don't think this is correct. David Cameron has just been asked ths very question this am on the David Marr show and he can not confirm but the general feeling is that it is middle class families who will be worse off. Lets see how this pans out as I am sure there will be more in the news.

Rusty


----------



## vickym1984

Unless they have changed the levels since they have seen the defecit? Hmm, got my info from

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/parties_and_issues/8652303.stm

_Let's look at a couple earning about £24,000 each - with a total income of just above £48,000 as an example. Under both the Conservative and Lib Dem proposals, they would no longer be entitled to claim child tax credits. _
_Although the couple's earnings are around average in the economy and they might seem like "middle income", looking at the spread of all family incomes they would actually be above the median. _

_Stuart Adam from the IFS says poorer families would not be hit
But although that couple on just above £48,000 would lose out under Conservative and Lib Dem child tax credit plans, if you take into account other policies, the same couple would gain in other ways. _
_The Conservatives, if they took office, would reverse Labour's planned National Insurance rises for many workers. So our couple, assuming they both earn about the same amount, would be £300 better off than under Labour. That partially offsets the £545 lost from child tax credits. _
_The Lib Dems would raise the tax free income tax threshold to £10,000. Our example couple would gain £1,400 under this policy - more than compensating for the tax credit losses. _
_So back to the question - the narrow answer is that some middle income families will lose out on tax credits. But you can't ignore the effects of other policies._

The main issue for working families is the effect if they scrapped the childcare element of tax credits, which they haven't yet mentioned (not to say they won't)


----------



## Rusty06

Hi Vicky

thanks for thatvery useful evidence and the link for the site. Lets hope that it is not the childcare aspect which is what I had calculated as being entitled to under the current system. 

Thanks 

Rusty


----------



## Cate1976

I'm concerned about what is going to happen.  DH and I are on benefits and no we're not sit on bum type either.  I'm on maternity leave but due to only working a few hours a week, I couldn't get SMP so have been claiming Maternity Allowance.  DH was working but has been off since last June due to work related stress and anxiety (caused by being bullied) and also a bad back.  I work because I want to work and it means that some of our income is from earnt income.  There's so much rumours going round, the benefits system does need changing to make it harder for the people who don't want to work to 'sit on the dole' but it's going to be hard to do that while still ensuring that people who are unable to work due to ill health getting the help they need.


----------



## vickym1984

Hi Cate, sorry to hear you are having a tough time of it.


----------



## JW3

I can't believe they will make changes to child benefit that will make the poorest families worse off.  After all these politicians are also under significant pressure to reduce child poverty in the UK the same as the Labour party were.  Even if the parents aren't making the effort to work its often the children that suffer when these benefits aren't paid and they don't deserve to live in poverty because of their parents shortcomings.  And of course there are many unemployed parents out there who really want to work and provide a good life for their children but are not able to find work due to the recession.


----------



## vickym1984

Jenny-They aren't making it worse for the poorest though? Whats been stated at the moment is talking about taking away the entitlement for those earning jointly over £40,000 a year, rasther than the current £50,000 limit. Those couples at the moment are only entitled to approx £10 a week or £520 a year anyway, which should be mostly, if not all compensated by the scrapping of the NI increase planned under labour and the increase in the personal tax allowance.


----------



## JW3

Hi Vicky    thanks for the facts on family tax credit    .  I don't think I've seen anything about reducing child benefit for higher/middle earners though - have you?  Seems like there are just some people who want to spread misery/panic when nothing has been said.


----------



## vickym1984

Not child benefit no, sorry thought that was what you meant. Haven't heard any news re amending child benefit, don't think it would happen, we had it even under Maggie Thatcher (remember back in the day my mum used to have to walk to the post office to collect it lol).

I'm sure plenty of anti-tory media are happy to spread panic. I'm all for kicking up a fuss if they do screw up, but at the moment we seem to have some good comprimises with the tory/lib dem policies.

There is one thing they are thinking of scrapping, but again I think this is just going to eb changed to means tested and thats child trust fund and possibily health in maternity grant. Not definite since the co-allition but both parties were discussing that pre-election


----------



## roze

We are also very concerned about potential changes. We are not well off at all but would probably be considered so if the Tories get their way. If we lose tax credits and child benefit we would be worse off the tune of £600 per month and this will put us on the breadline even though my partner and I both work.  We currently spend £20 a week on formula alone and another £15 on disposable nappies, plus £50 on nursery feels for our toddler. Thats £400 a month and thats only the basic stuff; we cannot therefore afford to lose our benefits- like a lot of people.


roze


----------



## JW3

I actually think I agree with the Child Trust Fund being changed or scrapped.  After all people on middle incomes should be able to give their child £250 by the time their 18 if they want to unless their budgetting/spending habits are really bad.  Also this is money that is not going into our economy now and therefore not particularly helping with the recession.  Although I suppose on the positive side if the parents stick it in a savings account that does provide more money for individuals and businesses to take loans and mortgages which will also get plugged back into the economy.


----------



## roze

iIm not so bothered about the Child Trust Fund as its not 'essential' to day to day living, (I can still see the sense in having such an arrangement for the long term) but I can assure you that Child Benefit is under the spotlight as a soft target for cuts- its in the papers.


roze


----------



## vickym1984

But the papers have their own biases, its not like they are impartial, so to be honest I would take anything they say with a large pinch of salt.

The most unbiased source I have found during this has been BBC news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8677088.stm is a guide to the policies drawn up by the co-allition and the full wording http://www.conservatives.com/News/News_stories/2010/05/Coalition_Agreement_published.aspx

Defintely at the moment only says Child tax credit and child trust fund, and again, the tax credit bit would be being lowered from £50,000 limit to £40,000, I am not sure if they are talking about some or all of it as I did a calculation on those on that £40,000 line would be entitled to £30 a week rather than £10, but I think its made up of 2 parts so not sure on that

For you to be worse off by £600 a month you must be under that threshold anyway Roze?


----------



## Mish3434

The problem with Child Trust Funds is its linked with stocks and shares.  If I could of put it in my childrens savings accounts it would of made some good interest by now.  As it stands both of my LO's Child Trust Fund accounts are at around £170 and tbh I doubt it will improve much.  I do understand why the government made everyone put it in certain accounts it was to stop parents from spending the money themselves

TBH  I don't get any financial help other than the usual Child Benefit that everyone with children gets.  I got £10 a month up until my son was 1 then zilch after that.  

Lets face it the state of the countries finances means that cuts will have to be made from somewhere.  I'm sure things will be a little clearer after a budget

Shelley x


----------



## MrsMaguire

Thinking about things another way...

I remember the horror of finding out my younger sisters best mate got her child benefit as pocket money as her parents were really blase they didn't need it, they were really high earners. Some may argue that what people do with the money they're given is up to them, but I think the middle/high earners should get their child benefit scrapped as it'll save the economy money. 

The same about middle income families, will they really miss the £520 a year? A joint income of about £48000 is quite considerable if you consider before tax they're taking home £2000 a month, which I'm guessing would lead to a joint take home of about £3000! 

We need to help those who work hard and have low incomes. We need to penalise those who are on benefits like JSA long term! Assist those who are of genuine need on disability benefits.


----------



## Mish3434

MandyM said:


> Thinking about things another way...
> 
> The same about middle income families, will they really miss the £520 a year? A joint income of about £48000 is quite considerable if you consider before tax they're taking home £2000 a month, which I'm guessing would lead to a joint take home of about £3000!


This may be the case but these people will also have Mortgages and outgoings to match their earnings, I really don't think it is particularly fair to hit these people all the time. If they manage to get good jobs and have a better lifestyle say to someone who doesn't work at all, then I say good on them. They earn their money, pay more tax and NI into the system than low earners (and quite right they pay more) but why do we penalise them for getting on in life?

I totally agree that we should be helping the people that really need the money, the low earners and geniune people that are on benefits. However in the process I'm also paying my taxes/NI to keep people who have absolutely no intention of working and supporting themselves. I'm forever reading in the paper about families and individuals whose benefits come to the same or similar to my annual wage, the only difference is I get penalised for having a job, and I also have to fully fund the child care costs for my children that I already 100% support myself aswell.

Is it a fair system?

Shelley x


----------



## *Bev*

For us, we both work, the children are in nursery, my wages just cover the nursery payment - so why don't i give up work?!  Because if I do I loose my tax credits and my virtual vouchers which compensate the nursery payment, leaving me about £200 in pocket per month - if I quit my job and care for my children myself - which i'd love to, I don't get the tax credits or the vouchers so therefore i'm then £200 out of pocket and unable to survive on my husbands salary alone.... we are in the £40,000-£50,000 bracket at present - if tax credits get scrapped for our bracket which is VERY likely then we are screwed.... its all very well looking at a bracket, our bracket looks healthy but not with a £1000 mortgage (which is not on a huge house, its on a very ordinary 3 bed semi), £1000 in nursery - and then the day to day on top....!

Bev x


----------



## ~ Chux ~

MandyM said:


> A joint income of about £48000 is quite considerable if you consider before tax they're taking home £2000 a month, which I'm guessing would lead to a joint take home of about £3000!


I am completely with Shelley on this one and I think it's all too easy to think that because a family has an income of X amount they must have a bigger disposable income. If I sit and think about it, yes, I am concerned over the potential to cut child benefit - not so much tax credits as that's just £10 per week to us, but the child benefit is the difference between me being able to be a SAHM and having to work part time.

So my dh has a good income but he's worked damn hard to get where he is, plus we also have a bigger mortgage than some with bigger bills to match. I have 3 SIL's all of which live in council housing, get rent/coucil tax rebates and goodness knows what other benefits, and would be deemed "poor". Yet I'm willing to bet that their actual disposible income is more than ours, so why should we be penalised for working hard?? The reason we have our own house is because we both worked full time to pay for it...........is that really so bad?? Surely hard work should be rewarded not penalised??

Chux xx


----------



## MrsMaguire

We'll have to agree to disagree really. 

People who have jobs that don't get paid very much work just as hard, my DH puts in 70 hour weeks with no paid overtime due to staff shortages. I work too as its simply not an option not too. Once he's finished all his training he'll be entitled to a lot more. 

If you focus on the other stuff that was said, it was stated that people with genuine need should get support via benefits, those who shirk from working should receive cuts, with the ultimate aim that everyone is incentivised to work. 

If our income ever increased that significantly then I wouldn't expect to receive child benefits either. We don't get tax credits at the moment as we don't trust the system due to problems friends have had with over payments and that kind of thing. 

It's only my opinion, its probably not the right one lol! I guess the old saying is true, you can't judge anyone else unless you've walked a mile in their shoes.


----------



## Jane D

I fully sympathise with Bev.  We are middle income earners (but not middle class just cause we are middle income, hate the way the press use that phrase). We spend £550 per month on nursery fees and use child care vouchers.  The nursery fee is almost twice our modest mortgage of £300.  I would be worried if they scrap tax relief on the child care vouchers as I feel everyone should get a little help with child care.  People power stopped GordonBrown from scrapping them for now, but I am sure that will come under the spotlight potentially as well as child benefit.  For me Child Benefit is a sacred thing,  and yes I would miss £80 per month particularly as to basically live keeps going up and wages dont that much. Our water and electricity is £50 per month each!  I can stomach the tax creditgoing, worth £40 per month, but not child benefit.  Yes the maternity grant and child trust fund is an easy save too. THe ctf for me was a little patronising and not right that you could not access it earlier than 18 for say drving lessons,first car.  But thats just my opinion.  A conservative candidate said to me 4 weeks ago those on less than £50000 wont lose out.  They will now, and I guess they will blame it on the lib dems.  Still my conscience is clear, I never voted for either of them.

Jane


----------



## ~ Chux ~

MandyM said:


> People who have jobs that don't get paid very much work just as hard


I agree that a lot do, but unfortunately there are also an awful lot that don't. Either way, I think it's all too easy to assume that someone must be well off and not "need" tax credits and/or child benefit when they earn more, yet their disposible income may not be all that different to a low income family.

As to not claiming tax credits, in the nicest possible way, I think you are mad!! AFAIC (and it has been my experience) providing you tell them of even the slightest of changes, there is no reason you should be hugely overpaid.

*Jane D* - From the little that I did read, I got the impression that the Tories were going to help the family by making things easier for them to work?? Like you, I have a clear conscience.  

Chux xx


----------



## Jane D

Nice one Chux. Tory Leopards never change their spots and in their case I will never forgive or forget. 

Quite right what you said about disposable income.A lot of modest homes will of course have large mortgages and as I keep saying, the cost of living in this country is astronomical hmm cos all the utilities companies got privatised all to give the share holders tidy returns.  At least they look like they are gonna hammer the second home owners and buy to let greed merchants with the capital gains tax hike.  Is a second home a necessity?  

Jane


----------



## MrsMaguire

Someone was saying to me the other day that its this buy to let malarky and second homes thats pushed up the price of houses. I remember when I got my first house 7 years ago you could get a 3 bed terrace for £20k in a nice part of where I live, you could get a 3 bed detached in a really posh part for £35k. Now if we wanted to move then we'd need to fork out a fortune for somewhere half the size. 

M x


----------



## ~ Chux ~

Jane D said:


> Is a second home a necessity?


I know a couple of people who have a second home instead of a pension but I actually don't have a problem with those who buy and let all year round - let's face it, some people do like the no-responsibility type thing that renting can bring. As to the utilities, we by no means live in a huge house yet it's ridiculous what we pay out per month - £40 for water and £112 for gas/electric just for starters.

I dunno, whoever is running the country is never gonna keep everyone happy, but why does it always seem to be the middle earners that are targetted??

Chux xx


----------



## brownowl23

MandyM said:


> The same about middle income families, will they really miss the £520 a year? A joint income of about £48000 is quite considerable if you consider before tax they're taking home £2000 a month, which I'm guessing would lead to a joint take home of about £3000!


Would I miss £520 per year heck yes I would. Lving in London to be near DH's work our house costs us a fortune and no its not a mansion. travel to work alone is £1500 per year.

You forget even someone on £48000 gets half their wage practically taken as tax. We may have a reasonable wage coming in but running a home and twins with me not working we still scrimp and scrape to make ends meet.

Also certainly in my husbands line of work in London, they think nothing of making them work a double shift for no more money and a regular 2 hours unpaid overtime a day. So he may get paid well but he has to work bloomin hard for it, and at times the boys might not see daddy for a few days.


----------



## MrsMaguire

I'm probably going to get beaten with a very big stick. 

But I look at these cuts as a good thing for very selfish reasons in that I work in the public sector for a large public company who are screwing about the new government. Selfishly I'd rather high earners lose £520 a year than me losing my job - something I love and wouldn't be able to do anywhere else due to the level of disabilities I have from the way the endo has attacked my major organs. The company I work for is very disability friendly, I'm so worried that they'll have to make cuts and my job will be at risk. (I get to work from home on days I feel really grim, my job is tailored to what I can do and achieve)

So the way I look at it is very blind sighted and very selfish. Looking at it another way its probably not going to have much of an impact at all, but in my little bubble I'd like to think it does. 

My understanding was that you got taxed normally till the 40k mark, then it was 40% thereafter. Hopefully the tories will stick by their word of providing better tax relief for married couples. Surely it'd be better to have the savings at source, than them taking the money away to give it back again. 

Sorry just wanted to add again that my DH works stupid hours for quite a low wage, coming home from work and having to do additional hours due to staff shortages that his company have no intention of resolving. 

I sort of feel I'm being spoken to as someone who may be jealous of people who earn lots, I guess we all have different objectives in life. I work to send my son to private school, we're lucky in that our mortgage is quite low, the usual bills are about £250 a month on top of that. We're lucky that even though we fall just below £35k threshold we still achieve quite a lot.


----------



## ~ Chux ~

*MandyM* - Noooooooooo..........................no stick beating allowed!!!!

However, I think that is the key, i.e. we all are looking at this from a 'selfish' point of view, in other words, how will it affect ME?? The problem I have though is that a £40/50K family income isn't high and, if you're talking of cutting tax credits _and_ CB, it's a fair bit more than £520.

Just to add, I don't think you come across as jealous at all, but it just goes to show actual income isn't everything - yes our income maybe higher, but so is our mortgage and bills - I would quite happily give up my CB and tax credits for a low mortgage and £250 bills, plus private eduation isn't really an option here!!!

Chux xx


----------



## MrsMaguire

That's sort of good, was hoping someone would beat all this fluid out of me!  

There was a point when we had quite a large amount between our mortgage and the house value that I was begging DH to let me look at bigger houses, but he was quite firm thankfully, we've just stayed here so there was no hike in mortgage. If I had of got my own way and had a 4 bed for 2 people, there's no way DS would get the things he does.


----------



## Rusty06

Ooh I am so happy that I started this debate. I notice I got acused of scare mongering earlier in the thread. The point I was trying to make was that 50k is not necessarily a lot its all relative to what else you have to pay out particularly if you live in london with average 1 bed flat costing 200-250k. Oh and add to that thousands in fertility treatment means by the time you do have 'children you are up to your eyes in debt as well. 

Really interesting to hear everyones views 

Rusty


----------



## Jane D

Well this has been a lovely thread. We will all know soon enough what is going on. Both me an dh are public sector workers and for my dh in particular he would get paid 10-15k a year more in private sector, but he does like working in social housing.  For some reason politicians think every public sector worker gets bonuses and wage increase.  We got something like 1% last year, that is not even covering inflation.  With regards to middle incomes, I estimate that for one partner to stay at home comfortably, the other would need to bring in at least £50k in order for you to not be watching every penny.  The marriage tax break mooted by Cameron was a joke, £150 a year and it was only of benefit for non working mums -please correct me if I am wrong.  Hmm we are in for a tough ride, but as long as every single adult resident has to give something we will ride it out.

Jane


----------



## MrsMaguire

Hi Jane,

It goes without saying really that if I did my job in the private sector I'd be on about £10-20k more a year. There was always that notion though that working in the sector the pay isn't fantastic but the job prospects are good, as in you shouldn't really be made redundant. The industry I work in was majorly affected by the credit crunch, it still is now to a degree, jobs in the private sector are pretty limited. 

From what I've been reading recently it looks like for £50k earners tax credits will be scrapped, for people earning £40k and above they'll be reduced. 

What sort of confuses me is the Health in Pregnancy Grant, not sure about that one, is that for fruit and veg and vitamins or something? The SureStart Maternity Grant seems like a good idea but probably should be in the form of vouchers so you have to spend it on baby so the system can't be abused.


----------



## JW3

Rusty - sorry didn't mean for you to think that the comment about scare mongering was directed at you    I work in the housing sector, covering all regions of the UK, and have seen in real terms how the economy has been impacted by the doom and gloom all over the media.  Whilst people are still feeling uncertain about the economy and government they will hold back from the spending that will help the economy recover.  Unfortunately the media never seem to promote the positive messages to the same extent.


----------



## Cate1976

I have to say that I can sympathose with those who are going to struggle due to outgoings such as high mortgage if they lose the Tax Credits.  The link to the article on BBC website is interesting as it seems that you'll lose in one area but gain in others.  All we can do is to wait and see what actually happens.  A few of you have mentioned those on benefits and I can assure you it's no picnic, DH should have got his ESA last Friday but didn't cos ESA in Belfast lost his sick note which he'd sent in in plenty of time.  We got it on Monday.  Just to make it clear DH would work part time if he was fit enough but he's not at the moment.  I'm going back to work 4 hours a week in June but am going to look for job with more hours so that more of our income is from earnt income.  I was out of but seeking work from September 2002 and October 2004 when I started the job I'm still doing.  When I got my first month's wages DH said for me to spend it on myself and it felt so good paying for the things I'd got with money I'd worked for.


----------



## Rusty06

Hi Everyone,

Jenny no offense taken you are right you cannot trust the press and half the time you don't know what to believe. Lets watch this space and hopre that everything balances out with what they take in one hand and give back in the other. Cate good luck on the job front I'm not sure what ESA is but hope you get things sorted out and are able to find more hours.

Thanks 

Rusty


----------



## MrsMaguire

Hey Cate,

If people have genuine needs then there should be no problem in them getting the help they deserve, I think what gets peoples backs up is when people are on long term job seekers allowance because they've learnt all the tricks they need to get away with it. My best friends Dad's been on JSA for over 14 years, it astounds me that you can be looking for a job for that amount of time and not find anything suitable! 

Maybe people on JSA should be made to do so many hours community service every week, so they have to earn the money they receive. Maybe 16 hours of doing something, which should then motivate them to find a proper job. 

x x

PS... I've also discovered that its those that need it the most that don't get what they deserve.


----------



## brownowl23

MandyM said:


> Maybe people on JSA should be made to do so many hours community service every week, so they have to earn the money they receive. Maybe 16 hours of doing something, which should then motivate them to find a proper job.


 I totally agree with this, if they had to get off thier backside for their money thne perhaps the wouldnt be so keen on not getting a real job.

I by the way worked as a BA fraud officer years ago and lots of money is fraudulently claimed.


----------



## Cate1976

I did voluntary work after I moved to Omagh because I wanted to rather than be sat at home all day.  I declared it as well.


----------



## roze

A previous thread discussing Cameron and potential Tory policies was heavily modified after the discussion went downhill with people saying a lot of things about the unemployed, immigrants etc.  I don't want to see this happen again, but I have to say that I am really angry about some of the comments made here about unemployed people and would politely suggest that people check their facts and frankly, stop being so smug; it happened to me and it could easily happen to you.  Keep praying ( religious or not) that you are not one of the many who have lost their jobs in the recession and found it difficult to get another or else you will really know what it is like. There are severe job cuts ahead for anyone in the public sector so you may experience it sooner rather than later.

I have been unemployed for 9 months in 2009 and it wasn't pleasant especially when I actually did meet people with views like some here, ie why can't I get a job etc. The facts are that for the majority of JSA claimants it is very difficult to sit around doing nothing. I was made redundant quite deliberately after I fought for flexible working and against sex discrimination, as were two of my colleagues who refused to be bullied into full time work. As we were paid off, there was no case to go to a Tribunal as nothing could be gained. Sex and also age discrimination is widespread in the employment market as is discrimination against mothers with children. I am even experiencing that now in a local authority with a 'right on' attitude but I am not in a position to do much about it. I have many friends who have experienced the same , ie the part time mothers usually are first in the line of fire.

Whilst unemployed I spent a full 7-8hours each day looking for work on the internet, calling round former colleagues etc who might be able to get me into something. I even applied to be a Lollipop lady. I just wanted to work. So badly that we continued to spend £900 pcm on childcare, most of my redundancy payment and I spent £2k on courses. So were the many people I met at the Job Centre every fortnight, mostly young people or people in their 40s and 50s who were just dumped at the first opportunity by desperate employers. 

If someone has been on JSA for 14 years then someone will have been on their case day and night, as its just not possible to abuse the system for any length of time any more. In any case, it really is not a life.

I really do think the moderators on this thread and on this site should take a stance against people who think its right to hurl abuse at other sections of the community on this thread. I find this view that the unemployed are at the end of the day largely wholly responsible for their own unemployment to be deeply offensive and objectionable on a website that is aimed at providing mutual support to others.

roze


----------



## vickym1984

Roze-I think it depends on the area you live.

A friend of my husband is constantly in and out of work, never workd longer than 12 months anywhere, usually less, before going back on JSA for 1-2 years at a time, he has done that for the last 10 years

My father in law was made redundant last November, and he does want to work if he can, but the job centre is so poorly run that most weeks no one even talks to him, he just gets told to sign in a box and go, so it is very open to abuse.


----------



## MrsMaguire

Hi Roze,

I'm really sorry you feel that way, in the recession it really has been tough for people to find jobs, there's no doubt about that. 

I know in our local area there was a boom time where there was lots of jobs, we live in a gateway where lots of distribution companies choose to have their businesses here due to easy access to the transportation network. I find it hard to believe that someone might not have been able to find a suitable job in 14 years, I would expect someone to be on their case day and night about it. Bearing in mind there was a period when I started working where I could leave a job one day and be in a new one the next day. 

My Dad got made redundant last April time, he'd worked at a company for 25 years and they paid him the bare minimum which was £6000 when the company closed. Within a week he had another job as he had the thoughts that a jobs a job not matter what it is, he literally took the first thing he got offered as he had a mortgage and bills to pay. He went from being a manager within a company, to someone working in a warehouse which wasn't what he wanted to do, it was something he needed to do so his house wasn't repossessed. 

The government are discussing schemes to get people re-educated and re-trained, I think it will help people in your situation so hopefully you don't have to spend your own money on gaining new qualifications. I think it will be a very positive step forward, to help people grow through a time of crisis. 

Do you think it would look better for instance on your cv - if whilst you were unemployed you were doing some form of voluntary work - ok maybe not in your situation as you've got young children. But those who don't have responsibilites. 

I'm really sorry if it seems like we're bashing the unemployed, or if I'm doing it personally, that really isn't my intention at all.


----------



## Mish3434

I am not for one minute being smug about my situation, I am leaving my job in the military next year after 22 years service and so is my DH, so who knows where we will be this time next year.  I'm also not hurling abuse at unemployed people.  The one thing that gets my back up is people who don't work because they don't want to/can't be bothered to and make no effort to find anything.  Of course there are lots of genuine people who are unemployed and are looking for work, there are also people who are genuinely off work sick, and I don't have any issues with them getting money from the system as they have paid in over the years.

However I still have friends in the area I was brought up and I know of at least half a dozen ladies who are or will be 40 this year that have never ever worked.  They left school at 16 some had kids straight away some waited a few years then had kids.  So please someone explain to me that whilst I have worked for 24 years how these ladies have managed to claim  benefits for this long? I presume its benefits as none of them come from wealthy families! Mostly the men in their lives don't work either. 

I feel for anyone who is trying to find work during this recession and I really hope they manage to find work.  My point intially on this thread was why should people who have managed to get on in life be penalised, it was certainly not to have a go at people less fortunate and through no fault of their own have found themselves out of work!!

Shelley xx


----------



## levin

I personally think any cut in tax credits and certainly in child benefit is ridiculous which is why i didn't vote for the Conservatives or the Lib Dems. I'm sure there must be  other areas that the government can save money rather than taking it from hard working families. I don't think that they will cut the tax credits we are getting as we don't earn anywhere near £40,000 a year - but i don't begrudge people who earn that amount being given tax credits because as people have pointed out, often people who earn more money have more expensive outgoings and need that little bit of cash to help get by. Also it is in essence penalising people for working hard to get a well paid job.
I think the Working tax credits system is a little flawed at the minute though and needs reforming a bit because i think there is a tendency for tax credits to give you money with one hand and then at the end of the financial year taking it back off you with the other hand because they say they have overpaid. This has recently happened to us and we are stuck with a £350 bill because we mis-estimated my DH's earnings from self-employment by a mere couple of hundred pounds.

Roze -   Big hugs hun, it must be a truly terrible position to be in. I don't think anyone on here was referring to people like yourself who want to work and make every effort to do so - i think they were referring to those people who can't be bothered and sit on benefits for years. There are certainly a lot of people in the city i live who do this - one man who lives on my mums street has never worked a day in his life as he claims he has a bad back, however he has no problems putting a new fence up or working on peoples cars for money on the side - it's people like these that give the unemployed a bad name. I hope the ConDems will make life more difficult for these people and not penalise hard working families.

Love Leanne x


----------



## MrsMaguire

Hey,

I'd heard something along the lines of the people at the job centre can't make you do a job that you really don't want to do, something to do with human rights. 

From the same family with the Dad who hasn't worked in 14 years, my best mates brothers and sisters have grown up with no work ethic at all, all on benefits. Her brother had a place booked to start the army, he then decided it was his life long ambition to be a model, so he scrapped the army and is back signing on hoping to be discovered - where we live    They think jobs like working in the fast food industry, cleaning, warehouse work is beneath them, but they have no experience or qualifications in the jobs they feel they should be getting. 

I think people should use their time whilst not at work to try and further themselves even more, take up all the courses you can go on, take the opportunity to develop new skills, people who are proactive like that I have all the time in the world for.


----------



## Cate1976

What really annoys me is that due the small minority of people claiming benefits when they shouldn't be or those who somehow manage to not work becuase they don't want to mean that everyone on benefits including the genuine ones get tarred with the scrounger brush and it's got worse since that Wife Swap programme.


----------



## Rusty06

Hi Kate 

I agree that ungenuiene ones make it worse for the genuiene ones claiming. Although having worked for over 20 years in the public sector (NHS) I've seen so many examples first hand of un genuiene that it does make you wonder how they get away with it. For some people its a way of life and for those of us who have held off having children until we could afford its incredibly frustrating to see some (and by all means not all) people on benefits just having child after child and being happy for the state to support them.

I just want to stress I don't want to offend people claiming benefits because as people have already said none of us know when we might need the benefit system ourselves but it should be used as a saftey net when needed not as a way of life.

Hope everyone gets to enjoy the susnshine this weekend

Rusty


----------



## Be Lucky

Until recently we wld hav taken home 3000 a mth but then we had 2 take out a loan 4 20k 2 pay with our mortgage 2 pay 4 ivf.failed but dont regret it as mite hav helped me conceive our beautiful son naturally!


----------

