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

Flyboy152

bongoali wrote: »

Firstly, and most importantly, I really do hope the family concerned are holding up emotionally and have a good support network. (Someone gave me some advise when I was struggling emotionally - "remember for any particular experience, "I'm doing the best I can at this moment in time" ")
I would guess that reading some of the crap on here probably knocked them back a bit causing difficult emotions on top of existing !!!!!! emotions. Not great.
It will pass and any intensity wont always be how you're feeling. I hope you are ok.

Secondly, regarding if the article changed my outlook - yes it did.

I am a benefit basher (probably influenced by programmes like Saints and scroungers and similar undercover stuff on TV as my parents didn't raise me that way). I don't actively hunt claimers!! but I probably add fuel to fire by talking to friends, colleagues etc. Yes I get wound up when, like in the article, people say it's a struggle to be on benefits, because I'm like "what do you expect , it not to be a struggle?". Or I can't afford a holiday etc.
I tended to think some claimers could paint playgrounds, schools etc in return for benefits.
When I drive go into town, I park on the outskirts where it's free and walk in. I don't park right in town where is costs money. So its on that sort of basis I get wound up.
I am also one of those who when they see a picture like the guy's wrist say "oh, you're ok to claim then mate".

I'm hoping going forwards I won't be so black and white. That I can slowly change my automatic thought when I hear the words benefit claimer.

I don't think the guy is looking for sympathy either, like people have suggested, maybe a little empathy.
I think the guy has done something productive so good on him for that.
I hope they're ok.

Also, people are expecting these guys to be perfect - not just about his numbers but in their replies. If he got his numbers wrong, so what. They're not perfect and going through a stressful time right now so any article/ responses will be impacted by that.

It is so true that victim of circumstances could happen to anyone and your plight could change. I feel lucky to have my health, job, security, good network around me, at the moment.

I would love to live in a society where you could leave your bike unlocked, you could leave your sat nav in the windscreen on show instead of having to take time and effort to pack it away when you got in to a servce station for a sandwich, where some of self employed tax dodgers paid what they owe, that benefit cheats didnt claim so taxes could go down and genuine claimers got enough to survive without worry/mental pressures.

Would be an amazing way to live.

What a refereshingly honest and open post. :T Thank you, you have my respect, sir. :beer:

seven-day-weekend

I hope I have in no way added to the OP's distress (I was one of those who questioned the amount he received as it did not make sense). I never for a minute thought he was not entitled to his Benefit and have not said that.

If I have caused him distress, I sincerely apologise.

looby75

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I hope I have in no way added to the OP's distress (I was one of those who questioned the amount he received as it did not make sense). I never for a minute thought he was not entitled to his Benefit and have not said that.

If I have caused him distress, I sincerely apologise.

I doubt that a simple question with a genuine interest (and probably a desire to help) would have upset Ross.

The witch hunt that followed after he and his wife made it clear that they were not willing to go into detail about their finances ( as it would seem they had been advised not to and that it wasn't the point of what he wrote anyway) would upset anyone. If you weren't part of that then you have nothing to apologise for.

mayb_2

First of all Ross I am very sorry to see some of the posts put on here and hope that they have not caused you to regret your action of speaking out. You are right in what you have said and it beggers belief that your circumstances should have produced anything other than support and understanding. However, there are none so blind as those who will not see. Unfortunately we have a culture that brings respect only to those who can pay for it and not for those who have earned it.

I am not writing on here because I am on benefits (which I am) but because of the attitude of some who are fortunate enough not to need them - any one of whom could be disabled in some way tomorrow.

You could be run over, have a heart attack, be diagnosed with Cancer, fall down the stairs, have a stroke and suffer any number of fates that reduce you to relying on benefits. Then you would be in a better position to judge how it affected your life, your ability to work and whether you felt that having paid your taxes and national insurance you might be entitled to the support you are actually paying for when you need it.

In order to qualify not to work under the new rules you have to stop breathing altogether. If you are likely to live for more than 6 months with the condition you are suffering from, you would be expected to spend those 6 months on Job Seekers Allowance - only paid for 6 months
.
Disability benefits do not come automatically when you are officially diagnosed as disabled by things like MS and Epilepsy. You have to fight very hard for them.

Try it for yourself before you judge those around you. This Government is succeeding with you, in its attempt to shift the blame for the woes of the economy onto the shoulders of the unemployed and sick. Yet it has made many people redundant and forced them out of work. Bankers can still have large bonuses as can the fat cats of the MOD, we can afford to pay Police Commissioners but not policemen. Think a little harder about what is really going on here and don't be sucked in by the attempt to distract your attention from the true state of the nation and the reasons for it.

If there is no money in the pockets of the people who are most likely to spend it in the high street, and that does not include the fat cats who are not going to increase their 'spending' no matter how much more they get paid, then more businesses will feel the pinch and more jobs will be lost more people will be unemployed and less sick and disabled people will be able to find a job. Less young people taken on when the old cannot retire.

I do hope all of you able bodied people are still able bodied tomorrow. Sleep well.

Flyboy152

mayb wrote: »

First of all Ross I am very sorry to see some of the posts put on here and hope that they have not caused you to regret your action of speaking out. You are right in what you have said and it beggers belief that your circumstances should have produced anything other than support and understanding. However, there are none so blind as those who will not see. Unfortunately we have a culture that brings respect only to those who can pay for it and not for those who have earned it.

I am not writing on here because I am on benefits (which I am) but because of the attitude of some who are fortunate enough not to need them - any one of whom could be disabled in some way tomorrow.

You could be run over, have a heart attack, be diagnosed with Cancer, fall down the stairs, have a stroke and suffer any number of fates that reduce you to relying on benefits. Then you would be in a better position to judge how it affected your life, your ability to work and whether you felt that having paid your taxes and national insurance you might be entitled to the support you are actually paying for when you need it.

In order to qualify not to work under the new rules you have to stop breathing altogether. If you are likely to live for more than 6 months with the condition you are suffering from, you would be expected to spend those 6 months on Job Seekers Allowance - only paid for 6 months.

<snip>

Even then you would struggle. There a quite a few examples of letters being sent to dead people, turning down their application for assistance.

Wingus

This thread is about anyone, and i mean, absolutely anyone, that claims benefits....must be a cheat, or a scammer, or living the life of luxurary.

The OP, is only highlighting, that being on any benefit, is no luxurary, in fact, not even close.

Over the years, the media has slowly but firmly controlling us all, what we think, say and do. The media, in any way, shape or form, continues to stigmatise and victimise those that are in genuine in need, verses those, that quite frankly, if any normal person tried, would go straight to jail for.

Example, over the last 12 moths or so, i seen no less than 5 front page news, of a popular national paper, and local paper, about benefits in one form or other, and guess what, it's not good news. You see, good news dont sell papers, it's all hyped up to make those not on benefits hate those on benefits.

Basically, the newspapaers are giving you the worst possible scenario of a benefit cheat, and making you angry, so that you tell your family and friends, and that saves the job centre a lot of paperwork, since your doing thier job for them, all be it unvoluntry.

Eventually, that leads to the great divide, the benefits v workers debate, and of course, that will never be resolved, since everyuone has an opinion of something about one or the other. Meanwhile, the government slip in a few rules here and there, while we are still fighting, then tell us it's our fault for not paying attention.

I'm not here to change anyone's opinion, you either got one, or you havent. I'm here to help the OP, and to stop the stigma, the constant fear that benefits has over us.

It is fear for those that claim that are genuine. The reason for that is, they are all still human, and we, as british, are proud. We dont want handouts, we want a system that's fair, and treats those that deserve it with a bit of god damn respect.

We also want fair for those in work too, we dont want extra money because we are disabled, or because some silly mug feels sorry for us, but we do need additional help, to help us do the same job that most take for granted. Mabee wheelchair access, or a lower desk, mabee even one or 2 more 5 min breaks to manage insulin levels, you know, simple things like that, can make a world of difference.

But i think first, we need to squash this stigma of " you claim bebefits, i'm better than you cause i work " and " all those on benefits must be scroungers". Once that is squashed, we can all move on.

Also, we all need to change the attitude of employers, those that can make a difference. " oh your disabled, can't employ you, your a liability". Liability my !!!!, do you have the job or not, if yes, what's the god damn problem. Sorry, that really annoys me sometimes, and i get upset about it.

Wingus

You also might want to consider the following:

Claiming when abroad

You must let your social security office (or Jobcentre or Jobcentre Plus office) know that you are going abroad. If it is only a temporary move, then give the date you are planning to come back.
Your entitlement to benefits abroad also depends on which country you are going to. If you are going to a European Economic Area (EEA) country or one with a social security agreement with the UK, you might get extra UK-based benefits. Or you might be able to get a benefit which that country provides.
For most benefits provided by other countries under these arrangements, you will have to have paid National Insurance (NI) contributions in the UK. Form E301 is a record of UK National Insurance contributions which may help a claim for unemployment benefit in another EU country. You can download an application form for this and other related forms using the link below.

Personally, i think all benefit, should only be paid to those in the UK, but that's a whole different subject altogether.

JimmyTheWig

MSE_Martin wrote: »

The aim of publishing this article was to show people how it FEELS to be on benefits - what its like for those who don't know. It was never aimed at being a dissection of exactly what is available.
...
I refuse to ask this man to divulge more in this bear pit.

Martin,

I don't know if it is possible to edit the original article, but I think it would help matters if the reference to living on £11k a year was removed. If the article isn't about what is available, then I think it is fair to not imply what is available.

The article is a very good piece of writing. It is very emotive and gives an insight into what it must be like to have to live like that. My concern is that something that is seen as an inaccuracy (I, personally, have no idea on the numbers but it seems that others do) detracts from the whole article. Others have the concern that if someone in a similar situation was reading the article they might think that that is all they would be entitled to and not pursue it further.

The general consensus on this thread is pro-Ross. Most people believe that he and his family deserve more than £11k a year. Most people believe that he is entitled to more than £11k a year.
I see three possibilities
(a) Ross is getting more than this but doesn't want to divulge the information. Fine. But I think, then, that the £11k reference should be removed.
(b) Ross is only getting this but is entitled to more. Fair enough if he doesn't want to go into details on the forum, but I do hope that one of your team has offered go through his numbers with him off-line confidentially.
(c) Ross is only entitled to £11k. In which case I believe it would help if we were told this and why, so that we can lobby our MPs, etc, to argue that people in this situation deserve more money.

In any event, I think it would be much clearer all round if what Ross and his family receive was removed from the original article.


Thanks,

Jim

meher

the actual victims imo are those who want to see fairness for all and I'd agree that prejudice against them should end

Derivative

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Martin,

I don't know if it is possible to edit the original article, but I think it would help matters if the reference to living on £11k a year was removed. If the article isn't about what is available, then I think it is fair to not imply what is available.

The article is a very good piece of writing. It is very emotive and gives an insight into what it must be like to have to live like that. My concern is that something that is seen as an inaccuracy (I, personally, have no idea on the numbers but it seems that others do) detracts from the whole article. Others have the concern that if someone in a similar situation was reading the article they might think that that is all they would be entitled to and not pursue it further.

The general consensus on this thread is pro-Ross. Most people believe that he and his family deserve more than £11k a year. Most people believe that he is entitled to more than £11k a year.
I see three possibilities
(a) Ross is getting more than this but doesn't want to divulge the information. Fine. But I think, then, that the £11k reference should be removed.
(b) Ross is only getting this but is entitled to more. Fair enough if he doesn't want to go into details on the forum, but I do hope that one of your team has offered go through his numbers with him off-line confidentially.
(c) Ross is only entitled to £11k. In which case I believe it would help if we were told this and why, so that we can lobby our MPs, etc, to argue that people in this situation deserve more money.

In any event, I think it would be much clearer all round if what Ross and his family receive was removed from the original article.


Thanks,

Jim

I agree with all of the above.
The £11k figure distracts from the tone of the article. Especially the 'challenge'. Challenging people to live on your budget is going to invite discussion - if that's not wanted, why make the request?

Basically, the newspapaers are giving you the worst possible scenario of a benefit cheat, and making you angry, so that you tell your family and friends, and that saves the job centre a lot of paperwork, since your doing thier job for them, all be it unvoluntry.

We're not all Daily Mail readers you know. I don't think 'benefit cheats' really matter. There are probably the odd few people making fraudulent claims, but there always will be. No system is perfect.