More money working part time than full time? Am I going mad?

MrsE_2

debrag wrote: »

Should be less as they won't be taxed

The net equivalent could easily be calculated & used.

bloolagoon

cattermole wrote: »

Clearly spending a year in the States has had a major influence on you.

I really hope this Country never ends up as uncaring and materialistic as the States although in my life time that has started to become more of a reality.

I too went to the States in my youth, it had the opposite affect on me, so I guess we all draw on our own individual experiences. Through the Thatcher years Americanisms gradually crept in, small things at first but I noticed them. Now they practically own everything in this country from Asda, B&Q to our Power distribution.

I thought I had a successful career ahead of me I was quite a high flyer in my day. But that all changed when my first child was born severely disabled and our lives changed forever.

It took me into a world that I really had little or no experience of before and I've made many friends from all walks of life that I would never have met otherwise but the main thing it taught me was nothing ever can compensate anyone for having a severe disability or live limiting condition, no amount of money can do that. Anything that can make people's lives better makes us a better Society than the US will ever be.

Money also cannot necessarily buy the care you need either, that relies on caring people who work for very little often on NMW.

I do however agree that CTC were a mistake but you cannot force people to take a drop in their standard of living just like that and in particular when there is such a shortage of work.

I believe we value money far more than we do people many of whom do a lot for others for very little and that is very sad

Yes people do very caring jobs, very worthwhile jobs, often physically and emotionally tiring jobs for little pay.

Is it fair to tax them to pay for 2 parents whom want to work part time and for the state to pay them to rear their children. This isn't because there are no jobs in this instance and they are trying to avoid this, it's a choice. A knowing choice to take money from those who often have little left so they can both see more of their children.

That too says a lot about society and its not something I could ever say was fair or correct.

cattermole

bloolagoon wrote: »

Yes people do very caring jobs, very worthwhile jobs, often physically and emotionally tiring jobs for little pay.

Is it fair to tax them to pay for 2 parents whom want to work part time and for the state to pay them to rear their children. This isn't because there are no jobs in this instance and they are trying to avoid this, it's a choice. A knowing choice to take money from those who often have little left so they can both see more of their children.

That too says a lot about society and its not something I could ever say was fair or correct.

One problem with your post is that they could be someone working as a carer and claiming benefits.

I know one lovely lady who is a carer part time and she doesn't want to work full time because of the commitment to her children.
She claims benefits for her Housing and CTC.

In fact the person she is now caring for says she is the best carer she has ever had and has turned her around from feeling suicidal last year.

She is the nicest least judgemental person I know and I'm quite happy for her to claim benefits. Because what she gives back to society is not measured in monetary terms.

tinkledom

Morglin wrote: »

Yes, there is.

When you reach retirement age, whatever that might be, and claim a retirement pension, there is no longer any expectation from government that you should work.

Lin :doh:

When does this magical day happen? It used to be 60 for a woman and 65 for a man. But since the removal of the requirement to give up work and claim your state pension, there is no longer any date when you would not be expected to work. This is unfortunately the effect of removing the age discrimination barrier.


Are you saying that a guy can no longer sign on and claim JSA when he gets to sat 63?

tinkledom

Morglin wrote: »

I think it's perhaps because the government now refer to any publicly funded payment as "benefits", including Retirement Pensions, tax credits, widows pensions etc., etc., The DWP do the same, as if you are retired, they will refer to *you* as a person on benefits.

This has crept over to the media, and gradually, everyone else is lumping everything together.

The only difference in government-speak is "working age benefits" and "non working age benefits".

Not sure why, though.

Lin

I'm really interested in what the next government will be doing to the so called 'non working age benefit recipients' as regards cuts and reductions. It's high time that those in that category had a taste of what those in the 'working age benefits' category have had to endure over the past years.

tinkledom

FBaby wrote: »

So why didn't you spent all those years you were childfree working and saving hard so you could have children at a later stage and be able to stay at home and not have to rely on benefits?

If you think that your children will be grateful that you've stayed home when they are little when you have to tell them when they are in their late teens that you can't help them paying for their transport to go to college, or can't help them pay for them to take their driving test, let alone help them support them when they want to take a year out, help them move to their university accommodation, all this because you are earning a minimum wage and can't afford any of it, do you really think they will say thank you because at least you stayed home with me when I was a child?

I went to childcare from the age of 6 months? Do I wish she'd been home instead with me? No, I never ever felt my life would have been better if she had, however, I will always be so massively grateful that she was able to afford to send me for a year to the States when I was in high school. This experience transformed my life in ways I never would have thought possible.

You really think so?


My children have never missed out. They had everything that they ever needed. One of my daughters said to my wife when she was about 14 'Why can't I be like all of my friends and be poor - they have to save up to buy new clothes'.


They had 5* holidays throughout the world, at age 18 I bought them both a brand new Ford Fiesta which was tied up in pink ribbon, parked on the driveway.
Since then they have had house deposits of us, as well as money for holidays with friends.


In our house I have been the only breadwinner!

bloolagoon

cattermole wrote: »

One problem with your post is that they could be someone working as a carer and claiming benefits.

I know one lovely lady who is a carer part time and she doesn't want to work full time because of the commitment to her children.
She claims benefits for her Housing and CTC.

In fact the person she is now caring for says she is the best carer she has ever had and has turned her around from feeling suicidal last year.

She is the nicest least judgemental person I know and I'm quite happy for her to claim benefits. Because what she gives back to society is not measured in monetary terms.

There is no problem with my post, you are reading what you want to read. As a carer your friend doesn't even have to work and isn't expected. I'm talking about those in low paying jobs paying taxes for people like OP who want 2 parent households to work part time topped up by benefits so they can spend time with their children.

FBaby

Clearly spending a year in the States has had a major influence on you.

I really hope this Country never ends up as uncaring and materialistic as the States although in my life time that has started to become more of a reality.

Because you really think that the experience I gained living in the States for a year when I was sixteen had anything to do with my views on benefits!!! I didn't know anything about benefits until I was way in my 30s. Until then I naively believed that benefits were only available to people who couldn't work through no fault of theirs, not because as a choice when they found out they were better off not working. The experience I gained had nothing to do with money.

In our house I have been the only breadwinner!

And your point is? (beside another reason to boast about how much money you had/have/will have)

Homeagain

As a matter of interest I went on the benefits calculator to see where I stood. I too would receive more on benefits than I would by working - it does seem strange. I understood benefits to be more of a back up than a way of life. Having said that I would love to stay and home, not work etc etc and live pretty much the same life as I do now (financially that is) but that's never going to happen. I just can't do that.

cattermole

bloolagoon wrote: »

There is no problem with my post, you are reading what you want to read. As a carer your friend doesn't even have to work and isn't expected. I'm talking about those in low paying jobs paying taxes for people like OP who want 2 parent households to work part time topped up by benefits so they can spend time with their children.

Perhaps I didn't make my point clear then, she is a paid carer and works 16 hours a week not in receipt of Carer's allowance. So she is a low paid worker doing the same but happens to be a carer as a job, so she can spend more time with her children and not have to work full time, so she claims tax credits but she could work full time.

What is the difference between the state paying for childcare so they can work full time or paying someone to stay at home and look after their children? And they then work part time?

Isn't the issue once a system is created it is difficult to turn the clock back overnight?

I don't believe that CTC was a good idea in the first place.

But I also don't believe there are enough jobs to sustain people's current standard of living or even a bit less if all these people suddenly had to work full time. In fact I know there are not the jobs there, probably are in care work though