Tax credits for nursery . .

jetplane

I personally just don't think it is a good enough excuse, on the opposite.

I wasn't talking about people who want to work. I think you have taken my reply out of context. I agree with you but I was answering the original question which was,

Seem's an odd question but I was curious to see how many people CAN actually work (so no disability etc) - but refuse to and if there was a reason for it?

I think some mothers would refuse to work and give their children as a reason for it. I don't agree that any of my other examples are good enough excuses either but I hear them often enough.

embob74

I know when I was a working, single parent I felt like I had money thrown at me - I was definitely better off financially, mind you that was a few years ago now.
I think being a single parent on benefits has a certain safety net. The logistics of finding a job, finding childcare, organising your work day etc can be a nightmare.
If you find a childcare place you then have a limited time to find a job or lose that place, if you get a job chances are you will need to go on a waiting list to get a childcare place so end up unable to take up the job offer.
Added to that is the worry about what happens when your child falls ill? Most employees don't get sick pay nowadays so if your child is ill you lose money and yet childcare and household bills remain the same. I was in the situation where the company I worked for went bust and I hadn't been paid for a couple of weeks. At the time workplaces paid tax credits in your wages and I hadn't received these either. It took me 6 months to get my owed wages and tax credits - if I hadn't been supported by family I don't know how I would have managed. I have to admit I didn't go back to work for a few months as at least on benefits I was certain I would get money each week with no hassle.

FBaby

There are many single parents working, not just the odd one off, so surely, it is very feasable when you actually put some efforts into it. Of course, if you believe that the perfect job, flexible around your needs should come to you before you can work, you might end up waiting a long time.

it's about long term prospects too. What do you do when your kids reach a certain age and you can't rely on all the benefits any longer, but because you haven't build work experience (won't even talk about a potential career), no job will pay you as much as benefits do.

nannymiaow

zagfles wrote: »

One for DT really but you really don't want to bother as it's mostly extremist loonies on both sides.

Or you could watch the BBC documentary on the so called "entitlement culture" last week:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016ltsh/The_Future_State_of_Welfare_with_John_Humphrys/

That was a really enlightening programme.

Tons to talk about but this is not the place.

MikeR71

All I can tell you is personal circumstances, I don't know about others because each is different.

My wife and I have had twins and the cost of nursery is just over £1000 a month for 3 days a week. So even if my wife goes back to work 3 days a week, her salary will not be enough to pay for the nursery. Someone convince me why she shouldn't stay home and raise the kids herself. We will make ends meet on my salary.

flutterby_lil

jetplane wrote: »

Crash helmet is on...

Firstly I think its understandable that some mothers want to be with their children. I also think its hard going out to work when you have a child. Unless you have a live in nanny getting the child/children ready for childminders, nursery, time off when they are ill etc makes for a long day. I think a lot of people don't appreciate how hard it is to be a working mother

It is very hard to be a working mother. I am a full time working mother with a 3 year old, pregnant with child number 2 and a step daughter every other weekend. I am also at college 2 nights a week. We seem to manage! yes it is a struggle but I would rather make it a struggle than sit on my backside watching jeremy kyle, eating greggs pasties up town, watching loose women, etc etc. I don't want my children growing up thinking this is the way forward. Yes I probably would get more money not working, saving the childcare costs etc but I get far more satisfaction setting my alarm, getting up, gettin gmy son ready for childminders/nursery, giving him his breakfast at a set time, taking him, saying goodbye to my partner and looking forward to seeing him later and going out to work to learn something, to provide a service and do some good to more deprived people and feel a sense of worth within the community!

Yes it would be easier to have a lie in til 9am, keep my son up til 10 at night so i could do this and he would sleep in and leave him in his pyjamas until I could be bothered to go up town to get his sausage roll.

I am not saying that all SAHP do this but a bl00dy lot do. I could never be a SAHM. I love life how it is.

I think if you can work you should.

(Jetplane, nothing aimed personally at you, I saw and quoted your comment, just a rant lol)

AimeesMum_2

I am a full time working mum to two kids (one is 1 this month, the other is three).

My nursery bill is £1500 a month and my incomings are £2,700 including £800 from tax credits. After my rent, council tax, travelling I am left with less left over than someone who is claiming benefits for two children but I know that it won't always be this way.

Having my daughter at 19 - if I was to take a 7 year gap out of work until they were in school I would have no way at all of securing any kind of decent future for them - it is likely that I would spend the rest of my life relying on benefits or working on minimum wage and hoping for government top ups. Thankfully in 4 years time I will have very minimal nursery bills, a wage over £35,000 a year and be able to provide my children the life they couldn't have if I had stopped working.

It is hard and it's demoralising to have had to be away from my kids for 12 hours every day but I want to teach them the importance and responsibilities of your actions. No one made me have a baby so young or without any financial backing - It's not up to the tax payer to support everyone who doesn't work.

embob74

MikeR71 wrote: »

My wife and I have had twins and the cost of nursery is just over £1000 a month for 3 days a week. So even if my wife goes back to work 3 days a week, her salary will not be enough to pay for the nursery. Someone convince me why she shouldn't stay home and raise the kids herself. We will make ends meet on my salary.

I have a toddler and another baby due soon and it isn't feasible for me to go to work as, like your wife, childcare would be more than my earnings.
It is very different for most single parents though. Although they don't have a partners support they also don't have a partners income taken into account so can get more help with costs associated with working.

janninew

FBaby wrote: »

There are many single parents working, not just the odd one off, so surely, it is very feasable when you actually put some efforts into it. Of course, if you believe that the perfect job, flexible around your needs should come to you before you can work, you might end up waiting a long time.

it's about long term prospects too. What do you do when your kids reach a certain age and you can't rely on all the benefits any longer, but because you haven't build work experience (won't even talk about a potential career), no job will pay you as much as benefits do.

I don't think a lot of people think about life after their children have grown up and the benefits dry up, you only have to read these boards around Summer time when children start leaving education and they start to panic about how they will manage.

I'm pregnant now and I have thought about giving up my job to stay at home with my baby (supported by my husband) but after much thinking I don't think its the smart thing to do in this climate. Things will be a struggle for a couple of years and I know I'm going to hate leaving my baby, but when they start school and I still have my job (which I've worked hard for and really enjoy) I'm going to be in a much better position financially and career wise than if I take 5+ years off.

I remember reading somebody on here who described children as looking after their parents financially these days instead of the other way around, and it really rung true. Some people can't manage to live and pay bills when their children grow up.

FBaby

MikeR71 wrote: »

All I can tell you is personal circumstances, I don't know about others because each is different.

My wife and I have had twins and the cost of nursery is just over £1000 a month for 3 days a week. So even if my wife goes back to work 3 days a week, her salary will not be enough to pay for the nursery. Someone convince me why she shouldn't stay home and raise the kids herself. We will make ends meet on my salary.

If you make ends meet, then your wife can do what she wants. However, one reason why she might decide to go back to work is the potential of being much better off in a few years time with continuous employment so that working for 'nothing' is then seen as an investment?

yesterday it suddenly dawn on me that in 2 years time, I will be done with paying childcare... and will as a result be £250/300 a month better off (after 10 years of paying some form of childcare!). That in addition to the obvious increase in my salary due to progression means that I will certainly be much better off than I would be if I'd stopped working all this time and only gone back to employment recently.