Proof that work just doesn't pay:

ninky_2

lightninjim wrote: »

It took me 2 months to finally cave in to the idea that IM BETTER OFF NOT WORKING. September I gave my notice to a disheartened and upset supervisor and manager.
I remain in limited contact with my former collegues and everyone finds it hard to believe my family is £60 a week better off.

it's short termism v long termism however. if you invest in a career it may mean a time of relative hardship where your wages are less than benefits might be. however, longterm career experience usually means increased pay and therefore you will be better off. being on benefits basically means you've accepted you will just stay at that level indefinitely - assuming benefit rules don't change and make you worse off. it's also a passive (and therefore vulnerable) position.

obviously if you just stay doing minimum wage jobs forever this is slightly different. however i'd suggest that for anyone with anything vaguely about them this will not be the case.

valten

Nothing written in the Daily Mail is 'proof' of anything aside from their own twisted agenda.

tr3mor

wageslave wrote: »

I expect every child in this country to have food on her table, shoes on her feet and a cleanish, warmish house. If that means I (and you) have to support her ne'er-do-well parents so be it.

Surely that's akin to handing over aid money to corrupt third world governments and expecting them to spend it on their needy citizens?

Most of the households people are talking about suffer much more from a poverty of intelligence and ambition than a lack of cash. Something needs to be done for the sake of the children, but not just throwing money at their layabout parents.

lightninjim

ninky wrote: »

it's short termism v long termism however. if you invest in a career it may mean a time of relative hardship where your wages are less than benefits might be. however, longterm career experience usually means increased pay and therefore you will be better off.

This much I understand. I'm 32 not 15. I have invested time in a career. It really wasn't an easy decision, hence over 7 weeks of hesitation accruing more debt.

ninky wrote: »

being on benefits basically means you've accepted you will just stay at that level indefinitely - assuming benefit rules don't change and make you worse off. it's also a passive (and therefore vulnerable) position.

I agree this is a vulnerable position but I had to make choices and this was the only way to keep a roof over our head until my wife finishes uni.

In the past I've been unemployed for a grand total of 6 weeks. I earned too much for tax credits etc. I take offence to the fact you think i've accepted that I'll stay on benefits. I've contributed more to society in any fiscal year since age 16 (including this one) than many people I know and read about have in their entire lives.

ninky wrote: »

obviously if you just stay doing minimum wage jobs forever this is slightly different. however i'd suggest that for anyone with anything vaguely about them this will not be the case.

I haven't worked for minimum wage at any time in my life and have technically worked since age 12.

What gives you the right to be so holier than thou here. I have done whats right for my family, what more would you of done?

Jim

WhiteHorse

Percy1983 wrote: »

Until the government definition of poverty changes I don't care, right now it is to have less than the average, so if your TV is 26" you are living in poverty...

You laugh, but some years ago, a social services department did actually define poverty as living in a household that does not possess a DVD player.

abaxas

ninky wrote: »

it's short termism v long termism however. if you invest in a career it may mean a time of relative hardship where your wages are less than benefits might be. however, longterm career experience usually means increased pay and therefore you will be better off. being on benefits basically means you've accepted you will just stay at that level indefinitely - assuming benefit rules don't change and make you worse off. it's also a passive (and therefore vulnerable) position.

obviously if you just stay doing minimum wage jobs forever this is slightly different. however i'd suggest that for anyone with anything vaguely about them this will not be the case.

The only issue with a career is when your skillset becomes worthless, you become worthless.

50k to burger flipper in one easy step.

Percy1983

I respect the fact you are willing to admit that you took the benefits as the best choice and from what you have said I would do the same in your situation.

You have to agree its worrying that it can be an option, at the point of it being bad it should have got worse on benefits. I would like to think I will never be in such a position but who knows what the future brings.

From the sound of it you haven't made a career of claiming benefits and have worked to which in my opinion does seperate you from the average 'never worked a day' Chav so I don't think you should be too ashamed.

If anything it just shows the imbalance of the system right now.

halight

lightninjim wrote: »

I was going to give a seriuos reply to this but given the tone of the other replies this is as good as it'll get:

At the beggining of 2010 I was laid off for a short period, my financial position at that time was crap and being laid off made it worse. Upon my return to work I was on limited overtime which meant we were slowly catching up with the situation. A few short weeks later I was put onto basic hours only.
This meant every week I was loosing money working. My wife and I cancelled everything that could be cancelled and reduced everything that couldn't. We were still losing money.
In july we had difficult decisions to make (fuel in the tank for work or food on the table). After reading for hours daily for a couple of weeks a decision was made. I had to give up work while my wife would continue in her part time role outwith college/uni.
It took me 2 months to finally cave in to the idea that IM BETTER OFF NOT WORKING. September I gave my notice to a disheartened and upset supervisor and manager.
I remain in limited contact with my former collegues and everyone finds it hard to believe my family is £60 a week better off.

I've worked since leaving school and was brought up knowing that if you had a job you were better off. (i'm feeling sick writing this and still can't believe it).

Jim

Many thanks for your post, You told the truth and i do belive that you have done the best for your family.
I hope that there is some light at the end of the tunnel for you.
All the very best to you and your family mate,
I hope that things work out for you in the end.
Good luck

halight

tr3mor wrote: »

Surely that's akin to handing over aid money to corrupt third world governments and expecting them to spend it on their needy citizens?

Most of the households people are talking about suffer much more from a poverty of intelligence and ambition than a lack of cash. Something needs to be done for the sake of the children, but not just throwing money at their layabout parents.

A very good point.
Lack of ambition is a real problem.

ninky_2

abaxas wrote: »

The only issue with a career is when your skillset becomes worthless, you become worthless.

50k to burger flipper in one easy step.

that is why you need to keep an eye on your skillset and its value in the market place.