MSE News: 'I'm on benefits but I'm no scrounger'

Mupette

Conan_the_librarian wrote: »

I think you missed the point he was trying to make.

Well i would swap their life for mine on benefits, only you have to take my incurable degenerative disease too, with the drugs that have side effects just as nasty as the disease, try and get a proper job, knowing most won't see you at interview level even if you ticked all the boxes as you are deemed a liability to take on. I CAN work (when i am feeling well), I WANT to work.

Then take the daily ca rp from people who can't see the illness refuse to believe that you are ill, just bone idle lazy.

oh and my life on benefits.. I don't have a flat screen tv, i dont have and i pod/pad/kindle
I dont have a ps3/3ds etc etc
very rarely take holidays unless paid for and i am invited free.


I do have sky, basic sky, tv, internet and phone. no sports channel, no film premier channels.. having sky is not like having all singing and dancing sky, my basic package is cheaper than bt and or internet providers, this i have tried and tested to what is available in my area, i am always looking out for cheaper.

Things i can do without paying but can't is tv license, this isnt my choice i HAVE to pay for it.

Oh yes the freebie car, yup hands up i have one of those, not technically free tho is it, all my mobility money goes on it each week so i am paying for it, and the fuel, would it be cheaper to use my mobility money on public transport, no, can't use them if they are not fit to take wheelchairs can i, taxi? i would spend more on taxi's per month than on the mobility car, so the myth that you get a free car ..... you don't.

what point did i miss...

meher

Edinburghlass wrote: »

Just in case you missed Martin's post early on in the thread as you seem to think you have a right to answers

I haven't taken any interest in figures leave alone spoken of any rights; what I said was tha it is only fair to expect questions, not the same as right to answers, because after someone deciding that folks are prejudiced, I wouldn't, rightly or wrongly, assume what's said to be accepted in passive agreement.

Derivative

Mupette wrote: »

Things i can do without paying but can't is tv license, this isnt my choice i HAVE to pay for it.

TV licenses are optional - if you don't watch the box, get rid and save yourself some money to spend on more exciting things

£145 a year to watch a shiny box just doesn't appeal to me at all. Two years of that buys a laptop that can be used for watching videos, gaming, running office software, browsing the web, etc...

Or a few subscriptions to magazines, likely to be far more educational and less time consuming.

I've never had to pay for a TV license as I've always fell under someone else's until now. But I can't see myself ever buying one. £145pa straight into my savings, or £10k+ over a working life in today's money. Not an amount to scoff at.

Dognobs

Mupette wrote: »

Well i would swap their life for mine on benefits, only you have to take my incurable degenerative disease too, with the drugs that have side effects just as nasty as the disease, try and get a proper job, knowing most won't see you at interview level even if you ticked all the boxes as you are deemed a liability to take on. I CAN work (when i am feeling well), I WANT to work.

Then take the daily ca rp from people who can't see the illness refuse to believe that you are ill, just bone idle lazy.

oh and my life on benefits.. I don't have a flat screen tv, i dont have and i pod/pad/kindle
I dont have a ps3/3ds etc etc
very rarely take holidays unless paid for and i am invited free.


I do have sky, basic sky, tv, internet and phone. no sports channel, no film premier channels.. having sky is not like having all singing and dancing sky, my basic package is cheaper than bt and or internet providers, this i have tried and tested to what is available in my area, i am always looking out for cheaper.

Things i can do without paying but can't is tv license, this isnt my choice i HAVE to pay for it.

Oh yes the freebie car, yup hands up i have one of those, not technically free tho is it, all my mobility money goes on it each week so i am paying for it, and the fuel, would it be cheaper to use my mobility money on public transport, no, can't use them if they are not fit to take wheelchairs can i, taxi? i would spend more on taxi's per month than on the mobility car, so the myth that you get a free car ..... you don't.

what point did i miss...

This ones always saying she hard done by! I can't afford sky I have one of them silly Ariel things on the roof for my freeview!
My kids have never had a holiday, we also have to use our holiday time from work on child care anyway.
Off to get 10 year old car MOT'd and Serviced as I need this to start work at 4am.
But then again I work so I can't expect much in life![rollseyes]

Flyboy152

krisskross wrote: »

I assume by the silence that the answer is no. This could add minimally £6000 a year to the £11K+ and would therefore give an income equivalent to a £24K per annum wage.

Families with just £2K a year more and 1 child are losing child tax credits I believe.

I presume, by you not bothering to wait more than a few minutes for an answer, that you have no interest in what he has to say anyway, so why should he even bother turning his computer on?

Flyboy152

Dognobs wrote: »

This ones always saying she hard done by! I can't afford sky I have one of them silly Ariel things on the roof for my freeview!
My kids have never had a holiday, we also have to use our holiday time from work on child care anyway.
Off to get 10 year old car MOT'd and Serviced as I need this to start work at 4am.
But then again I work so I can't expect much in life![rollseyes]

So, to summarise, you are jealous of a person who spends a great proportion of their life in a flipping wheelchair, because they spend a meagre amount of money on SKY television? Are you serious? :eek:

Dognobs

Flyboy152 wrote: »

So, to summarise, you are jealous of a person who spends a great proportion of their life in a flipping wheelchair, because they spend a meagre amount of money on SKY television? Are you serious? :eek:

Nope just the fact she feels hard done by because she only has the basic package on sky, Only gets a holiday every now and then and has to put fuel in her brand new fully maintained fully insured car.

Flyboy152

Dognobs wrote: »

Nope just the fact she feels hard done by because she only has the basic package on sky, Only gets a holiday every now and then and has to put fuel in her brand new fully maintained fully insured car.

No, her post was not about feeling hard done-by, because she has the basic package from SKY, or that she has an occasional holiday, not even that she has to put fuel in her car. She was answering the assumption that she had life "so good," being disabled and on benefits.

I suggest you read the post again, but this time, take off the green spectacles of envy, don't make silly assumptions and don't compare it with your own, relatively, very lucky life. Or would you swap with her tomorrow?

Oliver14

krisskross wrote: »

I assume by the silence that the answer is no. This could add minimally £6000 a year to the £11K+ and would therefore give an income equivalent to a £24K per annum wage.

Families with just £2K a year more and 1 child are losing child tax credits I believe.

I see you're using dodgy arithmetic again. This so called equivalent of an earned wage figure is so misleading and fails to take into account numerous factors.

zigzigzag

Flyboy152 wrote: »

I presume, by you not bothering to wait more than a few minutes for an answer, that you have no interest in what he has to say anyway, so why should he even bother turning his computer on?

Please stop being rude to fellow posters - if you'd read the posts, you'd know that we've been waiting days.
If he'd rather not give a approximate figure that is in the context of the £26k cap, that's fine - but then we need to forget the £11k figure altogether, because there is no context for it which renders it meaningless (in comparison to the cap and to a full-time wage - note that these are comparisons that Ross raises, not me).
And I think it's very disappointing that some posters are telling others that they're not allowed to ask some pretty obvious and simple questions to put things in context, which could be cleared up very easily. If I'm not mistaken, Ross himself asked for questions.