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

wellynever

11K seems on the low side for a couple with two children who also claim DLA,

I'm more than willing to show people what we get as a couple with no children on lower rate DLA, I was put right into the support group of the ESA so get a little extra.

Lifes_Grand_Plan

This article is like a parallel universe where everything is in reverse... inaccurate sensationalism but instead of all benefit claimants being lazy, work shy scroungers... this article is the complete opposite where all benefit claimants are poor and scraping by on pennies a week.

Yes I get annoyed at work shy scroungers i.e. people who make themselves unemployable by being drug addicts, criminals, dressing like tramps for interviews, getting tattoos on their faces, refusing work, single parents popping out kids by different fathers and having huge families that they can't afford to support... but none of the above applies to the guy in the article and the genuine benefits claimants so it truly is a case of "if the cap fits, wear it"...

And the problem is if the cap doesn't fit but people jump up and down stamping their feet claiming they are innocent then it makes them (in general, not specifically the guy in the article) look like they have a guilty conscience, especially when the facts are presented inaccurately....

grannyoftwo

ses6jwg wrote: »

I don't think people who work are just angry at people who are fraudulantly claiming, if they are anything like me they are also getting sick and tired of genuine benefit claimaints - especially those claiming sickness benefits - moaning at how little they recieve and how they "struggle to make ends meet".

I'm a 24 year old single father who has shared care of his daughter.

I do not receive any tax credits. I do not receive child benefit.

I pay for my own council tax, I pay for my own rent.

I earn around 12k per year after tax and work 40 hour weeks. People can "earn" the same amount as me without lifting a finger or doing any work at all. I refuse to believe that most people on disability benefit cannot perform some sort of work such as office work.

And there are people out there who are on even lower incomes than I am.

Why should people on benefit be able to afford to smoke, go on foreign holidays and have Sky TV, at the expense of the state, when those who work for minimum wage struggle to put food on the table.

I think that this post was obviously written by a young person. To quote " I refuse to believe that most people on disability benefit cannot perform some sort of work such as office work."

Do you have any idea at all what it is like to be disabled, have very limited mobility, to be in pain 24/7, to live your life depending on pain relief to see you through the day, to need help in the bathroom, both with toilet needs and bathing, to need help in getting dressed, to always need someone with you if you go outside your home, to never go out socially,.......do you experience any of this? Well I do........and its not nice at all. I have not been out socially for 6 years, I do not go on holiday,I do not smoke or drink and I had to give up a job that I loved because of severe widespread o.a.. Please do not presume to know what it is like and tell me just how the likes of me would cope working in any work place let alone an office, when I need help in the bathroom, would you put off your p.c. and come and help me? No I don't believe you would, not should you.
Walk in a genuinely mobility challenged person's shoes for just one day and then come back and say that you think that they could do some sort of office work. Yes there are scroungers out there, and a lot of them, BUT there are also a lot of people out there ,like myself who do suffer constant chronic pain and would do anything to lead a normal life, once more. The programme Saints and Scroungers makes me angry when I see the amount of fraud that is committed, and yes these people should be named and shamed, but please, we are not all the same.


Can I just add to the man who wrote his story on here, I wish you all the very best. Hope it all works out for you.x

Lifes_Grand_Plan

Incidentally, a couple where one parent works for minimum wage and the other stays at home with two kids, would take home £10,424 a year.... which is LESS than the guy in the article claims to get.

Also one very important bit that is often overlooked is the amount of time parents who work miss out on spending with their kids compared to those who don't work.

timmmers

MSE_Martin wrote: »

I must say Im a little surpised some of the comments above. The whole point of Ross's article (as it clearly states - it is his article not ours - this is a guest comment) is to give a voice to someone who you wouldn't normally hear from.

It isn't about the pounds and the pence its about the attitude and prejudice he has felt about claiming benefit. As for checking through his benefits - this isnt about auditing the man's life - its about a platform to give him his say, in his words, with his view - talking about what it feels like.

We have tried to minimise any editorial influence (the same courtesy we give to other guest contributers including the Prime Minister, or Ed Balls, Ray Boulger) and let him have his say.

He had bravely stuck his head above the parapet - he is a real person - please remember that when you comment.

I'd be a lot less diplomatic than that, but I applaud both the article and the comment....people don't come here to be crucified and many do gt that in several areas of the forum when they least need it. There's a school of thought that says that if you have nothing useful to say it's better to keep your mouth shut...I'd say that also applies to "anything helpful to say" in these forums.
It was a great article, it won't fit everyone on benefits as there are definitely people taking the mickey out there, I remember how long it took me to talk my old mum into claiming the few things she could and how no-one told her for years so she lost out. Like the man in the article she had paid into the system to provide a safety net for rainy days ...and like him she ended up reluctantly using it. Where's the shame in that? If you crashed your car you'd use the insurance you paid for wouldn't you?

I wonder if the pedantic forum trolls who revel in belittling people with problems realise just how much worse they make people's lives when they are already at rock bottom? Seems a pretty pathetic way to get your jollies and puff up your ego to me.

I hope the family fall upon better times soon. Not everyone thinks the way of the trolls here. This could be ANY of us at almost any time these days...especially where health is concerned none of us know our future and should we grateful for what we have while w hav it instead of begrudging those who haven't been as fortunate as us.

Saving4RainyDay

Hi,

Of course there are loads of people who need and should get government support and help, but making the claim he has two children and a partner to support meant all sympathy went right out of the window at that point.

No one has to support their partner. Their partner can work. Even with SLE. And if the SLE prevents his partner from working presumably they are also entitled to benefits and the £11,000 per year pot is not the full total coming in to the household.

If I've missed something I am sure someone will point it out.

I'm surprised MSE published this. It's just hardened my attitude towards welfare. People's attitudes are messed up. No pints, no holidays?! That's how the working poor live.

There's no such thing as a free ride, oh yes there is, it's called the Healthcare Travel Costs Scheme which reimburses travel costs when you have a medical reasons - you can claim for petrol costs.

Garnett_F

The article's very interesting and reaffirms what most people already know: that the vast majority of claimants are decent, honest people, who rightly deserve money our laws state very clearly they are entitled to claim.

I know that most people will say this is completely off topic, but, in other news, did anyone hear that poor old Rangers Football Club has gone into administration? Isn't that sad?

But hang on...

It's for possibly £75m in unpaid taxes. On wages.

While people line up to hammer those on benefits taking money from the pot that's lawfully theirs, the biggest earners don't even bother putting in what they should.

In a document drawn up by the Conservatives to try and sensationalise the level of benefit fraud under Labour it states benefit fraud accounts for £1.1 Billion is lost to fraudulent claims each year.

At that time there were 18.5m claimants.

Now here's a tough question for Daily Mail readers: how many claimants were fraudsters? You see, the higher the percentage, the lower the value of each fraudulent claim.

I have no idea but let's say 1 in a 100 claims are fraud. (Completely arbitrarily if anyone has a better idea for a figure to use, let me know).

This means each fraudster was claiming £5,945.95. Lat's call it £6k.

That would make Rangers' fraud over 12 thousand times more repellent than any benefit fraudster.

Rangers wages would have been mainly players' wages. Their squad is just under 30 players. Assuming they had more, and assuming they had a few more staff on equally high wages (and therefore worth implementing the tax dodge for) we could call it 50 high-wage-individuals.

Each of those 50 then cost the taxpayer £1.5m or 250 times more than the average benefit fraudster.

Now who garners more vitriol in the public eye - a convicted fraudster or someone who has cost the taxpayer 250 times more?

Our focus and views are skewed past anything resembling normality.

jeanmd

Martin and Ross, you can put pen to paper but it's never going to change some people minds. They will continue to do the calculations to see if you are lying. They will never take into account the extra expense that goes with being disabled and they will always, always kick you where it hurts because it will never happen to them. Lets face it to some people, everyone on benefit is a liar, cheat, thief and scum.

Dys_2

Firstly the arm sucks, I can only imagine how hard that is for you, much respect for keeping your chin up.

The article though is the other side of the coin. Nobody in their right mind can have anything but sympathy with regards your situation. It is those who abuse the system, complain, waste their allowances etc who annoy the tax payer who is footing the bill, often with less themselves.

I like the cap idea. Nobody should get more from benefits than allows them to survive and find a job in my view as surely that is what benefits are there for... not to provide a decent standard of living with 2 TV's, some fags and an annual holiday.

Benefits are not a replacement for salaries, they are a safety net.

beanielou

Saving4RainyDay wrote: »

Hi,

Of course there are loads of people who need and should get government support and help, but making the claim he has two children and a partner to support meant all sympathy went right out of the window at that point.

No one has to support their partner. Their partner can work. Even with SLE. And if the SLE prevents his partner from working presumably they are also entitled to benefits and the £11,000 per year pot is not the full total coming in to the household.

If I've missed something I am sure someone will point it out.

I'm surprised MSE published this. It's just hardened my attitude towards welfare. People's attitudes are messed up. No pints, no holidays?! That's how the working poor live.

There's no such thing as a free ride, oh yes there is, it's called the Healthcare Travel Costs Scheme which reimburses travel costs when you have a medical reasons - you can claim for petrol costs.

Nice of you to register for MSE just to share this point of view~not.
I despair, I really do.