Obelix Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 How is it the Labour parties fault for so many single parent families Relationships between couples with children end for all sorts of reasons. Because, as I think it was Dragonfall that said... "Income Support benefit rates for single parent with 3 children: Lone Parent £ 65.45 p/wk Dependant Child #1 £ 57.57 “ Dependant Child #2 £ 57.57 “ Dependant Child #3 £ 57.57 “ Family Premium £ 22.20 “ Total £ 260.36 x 52wks = £ 13,538.72 per year Add in rent & council tax paid in full by local authority = approx. £ 5,500.00 (Plus free dental/optical/prescriptions etc) Yearly NET income = £ 19,038.72 Salary reqd. to earn this net income, approx. £ 25,000 p/year " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 Probably referring to Tony's oh so amusing edit of Wildcat's post. I wonder where/how the ONS got their info from. As you pointed out earlier if people are admitting they are not seeking work then why would the DWP pay them benefits. I can't believe this data has been compiled from responses given by claimants every fortnight when they are asked whether or not they are actively seeking work. Maybe it wasn't anything to do with DWP.Maybe the ONS found out by getting their information another way.Whichever way they found out the fact remains that they managed to find people who are not working from households who havent worked for a period that Labour were in power. Its funny because at my age I look back a lot at times when people just left school( the very clever ones went to Uni!), got a job and carried on in that job until something happened, like for instance a woman left to have a baby,mainly the men just carried on. Some of the men that I worked with when I left school are still actually in that same job! I started work at the age of 16. Nowadays it seems that there are 3 routes that people go down. 1. University/College 2. Maybe being briefly unemployed then getting a job (say) starting at the bottom and working up 3. Unemployed and resigned to the fact. A lot of these choices are down to attitudes that people have. Of course for some the choice is working at minimum wage and learning a skill and moving up eventually in to something better, despite the fact that they would get equally the same on benefits.For others its not worth getting out of bed for. Depends what you want really, but the system isnt tough enough in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Let's try a re-edit: Thanks for correcting my post so it is now factually inaccurate http://www.poverty.org.uk/46/index.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Probably referring to Tony's oh so amusing edit of Wildcat's post. I wonder where/how the ONS got their info from. As you pointed out earlier if people are admitting they are not seeking work then why would the DWP pay them benefits. I can't believe this data has been compiled from responses given by claimants every fortnight when they are asked whether or not they are actively seeking work. Indeed if that is what they said and they didn't have fortnightly evidence of job searching they would get a recorded warning or a referral to a decision maker to consider a sanction... basically stopping benefits for a period of time. Of course they can play the system, apply half heartedly, or maybe they are just reporting on the poll how they have come to feel after 100s of rejections because they don't have the skills employers are looking for. No one can stop that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Tried to copy this from the report.. As can be seen in Table 4 the majority of households where no one has ever worked were one person households followed by lone-parent households (around 39 per cent and 35 per cent of households where no one has ever worked, respectively, increasing to 40 and 44 per cent respectively when student households are excluded). Only 29,000 of the 352,000 households where no one has ever worked were couple households (around 8.2 per cent). Part of the reason might be the increase in single person households. It is not the complete answer, but the number of single person households has been rising which would increase the numbers of workless in single person households. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 This looks to me that those who were forced into unemployment by Tory policies have had children for whom there is still no work and now have their own households. So you're saying that the Labour party is incapable of growing the economy and putting the structures in place to encourage the generation of new jobs Playing the blame game to try and dump all the blame on a single cause is pointless and petty party politics. It's a multivariate problem - loss of jobs with the decline of traditional industries; unwillingness or inability to put in place real alternatives; a culture of unemployment; a movement of economic power away from the west and a failure to respond to it and many,many other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 So you're saying that the Labour party is incapable of growing the economy and putting the structures in place to encourage the generation of new jobs Playing the blame game to try and dump all the blame on a single cause is pointless and petty party politics. It's a multivariate problem - loss of jobs with the decline of traditional industries; unwillingness or inability to put in place real alternatives; a culture of unemployment; a movement of economic power away from the west and a failure to respond to it and many,many other things. Exactly my point, how anyone can blame any government of any hue for the changes and upheavals that society is experiencing is beyond me. That society is changing is beyond doubt, we have a growing population, fewer jobs, a reluctance of successive governments to invest in social housing, jobs and transport infrastructure. We have people marooned on housing estates with escalating transport charges, no local jobs and a media intent on blaming benefit recipients for the ills of the world. You, along with other Labour Party detractors, seem intent on laying the blame at the door of the previous government whereas anyone with a scintilla of intelligence would understand that the causes of the issue raised in the OP are manifold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Exactly my point, how anyone can blame any government of any hue for the changes and upheavals that society is experiencing is beyond me. That society is changing is beyond doubt, we have a growing population, fewer jobs, a reluctance of successive governments to invest in social housing, jobs and transport infrastructure. We have people marooned on housing estates with escalating transport charges, no local jobs and a media intent on blaming benefit recipients for the ills of the world. You, along with other Labour Party detractors, seem intent on laying the blame at the door of the previous government whereas anyone with a scintilla of intelligence would understand that the causes of the issue raised in the OP are manifold. Ermmmm I haven't laid the blame at anyone's door - just pointed out that your claim of basically "it's all the Conservatives fault" has an obvious corollary i.e. "Labour are incapable of doing anything to put it right". And then went on to point out that it's a multi variate problem with both internal and external factors! How that can be laying the blame at the door of the previous government (though they are obviously due a share of the blame) I'm not sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Thanks for correcting my post so it is now factually inaccurate http://www.poverty.org.uk/46/index.shtml Apparently you have a comprehension problem, since what you [didn't] say was I believe Labour was successful in increasing the numbers of single parent families Labour has failed There is no mention of how many are working and this thread is about those receiving benefit, not those recorded as working. As you will be aware, the recording of single parents receiving benefit is a fairly modern thing so the 'statistics' in your link need to be treated with a rather large pinch of salt. I believe that it was Norman Lamont (a Conservative Chancellor) who decided that women should be regarded as individuals rather than the chattels of married men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Exactly my point, how anyone can blame any government of any hue for the changes and upheavals that society is experiencing is beyond me. That society is changing is beyond doubt, we have a growing population, fewer jobs, a reluctance of successive governments to invest in social housing, jobs and transport infrastructure. We have people marooned on housing estates with escalating transport charges, no local jobs and a media intent on blaming benefit recipients for the ills of the world. Quoted for truth. You, along with other Labour Party detractors, seem intent on laying the blame at the door of the previous government whereas anyone with a scintilla of intelligence would understand that the causes of the issue raised in the OP are manifold. No Max, let's be straight here, many people often criticise the previous government. Most of us aren't interested in the fact that they are Labour except for how it informs discussion and opinion. The truth is that the previous government screwed up in so many ways that it will take generations for it to be put right - if it can be put right. You might be able to put food on the table through political affiliation but most of us have to go and earn a living without it. You have a reason to be partisan, we're just interested in what's good, what's bad, and how it affects our lives. I asked a question; the question was "has Labour succeeded" on this issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.