Wife works i don't would i be able to claim benefits?

patricia50

judywoody wrote: »

I can see where people are coming from and it surely is NOT ok to rely on state benefits. However, not everyone is in the fortunate position to have a job that pays enough to put some money aside. If the state doesn't want us to apply for benefits they should have not offered it in the first place. Because of the way the system has developed over the last 20-40 years, things have become far more expensive and even people who don't live beyond their means, can hardly put a penny aside. The state wants us to pay taxes to support the benefit system and they want us to raise children who make sure that pensions are still being paid in 50 years time. Living (especially renting) is more expensive nowadays because landlords think that if a person hasn't got enough money he can apply for some benefits. The system is the way it is because of the way the governments have spoiled the public over the last decades. Now they want to pull away the rug underneath their feet..But still expect people to cope with all the other issues this system has caused.One of my friends had her DLA taken away from her all of a sudden rather than assessing her properly and giving her the time to get back into work - work that she CAN do. A lot of people were not entitled to DLA but still claimed it. But a lot of people really can not do work that helps them to survive and probably won't find anything either that pays more than national minimum wage (wonder why the gov hasn't raised NMW to prevent people from applying for more benefits!?!). Parents should have the choice to look after their children themselves and YES they should have the right to get a little bit more money for it. At the end of the day THESE children will pay YOUR pension. Not every child might have parents that are good role models but I presume that parents who are interested in their children's future and chose to spend more time with them rather than leaving them in the nursery all day are usually good parents and they probably raise their children to become valuable (working) members of the society. It's neglected children who cause problems....

Agree with a lot of what you say. Some people on here have been very judgemental and maybe they have been lucky enough to not be on benefits. Not everyone is some sort of scrounger who expects the state to keep their children. I have 4 months until I reach pension age and need to find work. Am I regarded as some sort of leech of the benefits system if i claim benefits.

sassyblue

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

If you've been trying for that long you would've thought that you'd have got yourself into the position where you didn't need to rely on benefits.

Do you think all couples who can't conceive earn high wages and don't have bills then?

Googlewhacker

patricia50 wrote: »

Agree with a lot of what you say. Some people on here have been very judgemental and maybe they have been lucky enough to not be on benefits. Not everyone is some sort of scrounger who expects the state to keep their children. I have 4 months until I reach pension age and need to find work. Am I regarded as some sort of leech of the benefits system if i claim benefits.

It depends on whether or not you worked before but the vast majority of people do not have a problem with people taking benefits when they need it.....WHEN THEY NEED IT, as it is alot of people take benefits to help their lifestyle which isn't really on.

And no one is saying everyone on benefits is a scrounger, in fact where has anyone said that?

Evilm

cassieB57 wrote: »

The relevent tax years are the two complete tax years before the calendar year when benefit is first claimed.If you reclaim within 12 weeks of a previous claim, the same tax years will be used (eg claim on 1/5/11, RITYs=2008-09 and 2009-10. If you stop claiming on 1/12/11, then reclaim on 10/1/12 the same tax years 08-09 and 09-10 will be used. But if you claim on or after 24/2/12, the tax years would be 2009-10 and 2010-11)

Thank you.

Oldernotwiser

sassyblue wrote: »

Do you think all couples who can't conceive earn high wages and don't have bills then?

I think that 10 years is a good long time to save enough money so as not to have to rely on benefits when/if this much wanted child comes along.

ManicMum

del76 wrote: »

Well done the conservatives! They have encouraged you to get back to work, or at least looking for it. Presumably you thought why should i work, my wife earns more than me and I can sit at home and get money for nowt. Now they have sensibly removed the money for nowt from you, you now realise you have to work for your money. Why should you get jobseekers allowance? you've not been looking for a job!
Congratulations again to the Tories

Because some people believe it is important to have one full time parent at home when their children are young. If you can afford to live on one wage, then that is your business. It would also help if we could have a transferable tax allowance. Research shows that children with a full time parent grow up emotionally more secure instead of being farmed off to nurseries at a young age.

See http://ftmuk.wordpress.com/about/

There will probably be little help in terms of JSA, particularly as your wife is a high earner. Maybe just time to economise?

ManicMum

dmg24 wrote: »

If someone wishes to stay a home they may, but why should they expect the state to pay for this?

and why should those parents who work expect the state to pay for their childcare? A LOT of parents are getting help towards their childcare. I don't work at the moment but therefore do not claim for childcare. So to be honest, it probably balances out in terms of tax credits. My husband's wage covers the bills. My children know I am there to take them to school and pick them up. I had them because I wanted them, I get to go to their shows and presentations and they love that. Imagine the sad faces of the children whose parents are too busy climbing the greasy pole to turn up. I am prepared to sacrifice a few years of earning power to raise my children. This country is obsessed with the concept of both parents working. It is not being lazy or lifestyle choice to be at home with your children. It is what should be done in my opinion in the early years. Lifestyle choice is people who farm their kids out to childcare providers so they can earn more money to fund their materialistic lifestyles.

Googlewhacker

ManicMum wrote: »

Because some people believe it is important to have one full time parent at home when their children are young. If you can afford to live on one wage, then that is your business. It would also help if we could have a transferable tax allowance. Research shows that children with a full time parent grow up emotionally more secure instead of being farmed off to nurseries at a young age.

See http://ftmuk.wordpress.com/about/

There will probably be little help in terms of JSA, particularly as your wife is a high earner. Maybe just time to economise?

Which is fair enough but should you be dependant on the state to do this?

catmiaow

OP would you not prefer that your child see how hard you worked to bring them up? I think you getting a part time job will be a good thing.

My mother never stayed at home with me when I was younger, she went out and drafted and worked very hard. I can't say I wouldn't have preferred her to be home, but she always said if you have children then you should pay for them and not expect handouts and I respected her for it. Same for my grandmother who had 5 children, Do you think she got child benefit?

I am not saying people shouldn't get some help but I know people who have never worked in their lives, have children and get everything paid for them. Surely this encourages people to have children to get a free flat and this is why the benefit system needs to be changed further.

jim22

What percentage of the population gather, or supposedly benefit by, some kind of state "handout." This includes child benefit, child tax credits, working tax credit, council tax benefit, housing benefit,pension credit,pension, esa, jsa, mortgage interest payments, and many more. Who is not getting something?