In defence of large one parent families on benefits.
A lot of people in recent years have branded single mothers with multiple children as benefit scroungers. This could be the case but a good majority of single parents have been left destitute when their partner leaves them.
Ever since Christendom fell apart and we adopted Secular Darwinism as our national belief marriage has became rarer and rarer. There has to be a pattern associated with this. Regardless the children of broken family's are the ones who face the real punishment.
Here is an article written last year by the Daily Mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339340/Dont-cut-32-000-benefits-Unemployed-mother-seven-says-living-just-2-000-month-leave-family-homeless.html
This one parent and 6 children are paid the sum below per month by the state.
Housing Benefit £715
Child Benefit £377
Child Tax Credit £1252
Income Support £303
Total equals £2647
This is a amount of £31764. For a working person to get this much they would have to earn £43,000 per year.
Some people think people on benefits get to much. Okay well lets break down these benefits so people can see what each family member lives on per week.
Housing Benefit is paid to rent a six Bedroom house.
Child Benefit + Child Tax Credit = £1629 per month.
£1629 times 12 equals £19548
£19548 divided by 6 children equals £3258
£3258 divided by 52 weeks equals £62.65 per child.
Income support = £303 per month.
£303 times 12 equals £3636
£3636 divided by 52 equals £69.92 per week.
I will now tell you why these benefits are reasonable.
People over 25 who are Job seekers, Disabled people, Single Parents or Low hour workers get paid a rate of £71.70. This is called a personal allowance in DWP terms. It is the standard rate of benefit for able bodied adult.
This single mum in question is getting no more than anyone else over the age of 25.
As for her children they get a similar amount and a little extra to take into consideration their clothing needs because we when human beings are born we don't remain the size of a football for our entire lives. We grow and we get though different sizes of shoes and clothes.
Single mum = £69.92 pw
Child = £62.65 pw
Landlord = £165 pw.
Could anyone tell me the biggest cost? Its housing isn't it. You know the left wing argument where we blame profiteering landlords actually applies here.
However out of experimental curiosity let us apply the benefit cap and see what percentage of money the family will lose.
Benefit cap equals £500 per week.
6 children * £62.65 = £375.90
1 mum = £69.92
Housing benefit = £165.
total = £609.92
£609.92 - £500 = £109.92
£109.92/609.92 * 100 = 18%
The family lose £476 a month.
Wait a minute didn't the single mother say she would struggle without this money?
Let us apply a 18% cut onto all of the single family's benefits.
Single mum = £69.92/100 * 82 = £57.33
Child = £62.65/100 * 82 = £51.37
Housing Benefit = £165/100 * 82 = £135.30
Now what you need to understand here is that the rent must be paid for the house. This means the loss of £29.70 has to come from the other benefits. This is around £4.24
These are the rates which the family will live on per week.
Single Mum = £53.09
Children = £47.13
Landlord = £165.
So what does the benefit cap and reduction to welfare do?
It reduces the living standards for unemployed people while not effecting the amount which the landlord receives in rent.
And I haven't even applied the bedroom tax yet or to appease Conservatives the spare room subsidy.
And what is worse is George Osborne wants to cap welfare even further so expect this family to lose another £12 per person per week.
Could anyone live on £40 a week?
Ask yourself that!
Because not only have the Conservatives pushed the unemployed into worse poverty levels than the working poor but they want to increase the misery!
I say enough is enough!
We stop this!
We need to spread the truth and educate people!
We need to stop the class war!
We need a better Government.
This is my case against the current Government.
Remember that Benefit street single parent say how are we suppose to live on £50 a week? He will be saying how can he live on £40 a week, then £30, then £20 and after all this class war society has inflicted on its self he won't even be alive to tell you how much hes been living on per week because your ignorance killed him.
Ever since Christendom fell apart and we adopted Secular Darwinism as our national belief marriage has became rarer and rarer. There has to be a pattern associated with this. Regardless the children of broken family's are the ones who face the real punishment.
Here is an article written last year by the Daily Mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339340/Dont-cut-32-000-benefits-Unemployed-mother-seven-says-living-just-2-000-month-leave-family-homeless.html
This one parent and 6 children are paid the sum below per month by the state.
Housing Benefit £715
Child Benefit £377
Child Tax Credit £1252
Income Support £303
Total equals £2647
This is a amount of £31764. For a working person to get this much they would have to earn £43,000 per year.
Some people think people on benefits get to much. Okay well lets break down these benefits so people can see what each family member lives on per week.
Housing Benefit is paid to rent a six Bedroom house.
Child Benefit + Child Tax Credit = £1629 per month.
£1629 times 12 equals £19548
£19548 divided by 6 children equals £3258
£3258 divided by 52 weeks equals £62.65 per child.
Income support = £303 per month.
£303 times 12 equals £3636
£3636 divided by 52 equals £69.92 per week.
I will now tell you why these benefits are reasonable.
People over 25 who are Job seekers, Disabled people, Single Parents or Low hour workers get paid a rate of £71.70. This is called a personal allowance in DWP terms. It is the standard rate of benefit for able bodied adult.
This single mum in question is getting no more than anyone else over the age of 25.
As for her children they get a similar amount and a little extra to take into consideration their clothing needs because we when human beings are born we don't remain the size of a football for our entire lives. We grow and we get though different sizes of shoes and clothes.
Single mum = £69.92 pw
Child = £62.65 pw
Landlord = £165 pw.
Could anyone tell me the biggest cost? Its housing isn't it. You know the left wing argument where we blame profiteering landlords actually applies here.
However out of experimental curiosity let us apply the benefit cap and see what percentage of money the family will lose.
Benefit cap equals £500 per week.
6 children * £62.65 = £375.90
1 mum = £69.92
Housing benefit = £165.
total = £609.92
£609.92 - £500 = £109.92
£109.92/609.92 * 100 = 18%
The family lose £476 a month.
Wait a minute didn't the single mother say she would struggle without this money?
Let us apply a 18% cut onto all of the single family's benefits.
Single mum = £69.92/100 * 82 = £57.33
Child = £62.65/100 * 82 = £51.37
Housing Benefit = £165/100 * 82 = £135.30
Now what you need to understand here is that the rent must be paid for the house. This means the loss of £29.70 has to come from the other benefits. This is around £4.24
These are the rates which the family will live on per week.
Single Mum = £53.09
Children = £47.13
Landlord = £165.
So what does the benefit cap and reduction to welfare do?
It reduces the living standards for unemployed people while not effecting the amount which the landlord receives in rent.
And I haven't even applied the bedroom tax yet or to appease Conservatives the spare room subsidy.
And what is worse is George Osborne wants to cap welfare even further so expect this family to lose another £12 per person per week.
Could anyone live on £40 a week?
Ask yourself that!
Because not only have the Conservatives pushed the unemployed into worse poverty levels than the working poor but they want to increase the misery!
I say enough is enough!
We stop this!
We need to spread the truth and educate people!
We need to stop the class war!
We need a better Government.
This is my case against the current Government.
Remember that Benefit street single parent say how are we suppose to live on £50 a week? He will be saying how can he live on £40 a week, then £30, then £20 and after all this class war society has inflicted on its self he won't even be alive to tell you how much hes been living on per week because your ignorance killed him.
(edited 10 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
LOOOOOOONG post!
In all honesty I don't trust anything the Daily Mail writes...
In all honesty I don't trust anything the Daily Mail writes...
I would have thought there were considerable economies of scale to be had with 6 kids. While I'm sure there are plenty of hidden expenses I can't think of, I think any family with 6 kids must expect that they will have to share bedrooms, toys and hand-me-down clothes. That's always been the case even for financially secure families on salaried incomes.
The full facts: cost of raising a child 2003-2014
*Does not include private school fees, but does include associated day-to-day costs (eg school trips, text books, uniform and school lunch) and university fees. Table: LV=" height="392" width="460">
Here is the cost breakdown for raising a child. Now, this is oversold on each point.
1. Childcare. A non-working mother needs no childcare. That's £66,000 wiped off right there.
2. Education. Nobody pays out of their own pocket for university fees, and the kids will be loaned £6000 maintenance due to their poverty. Schools provide textbooks. Trips are optional. Lunch is free for poor people.
3. Food. This implies spending about £1000 per year per child or £20 per week, so this seems a reasonable figure.
4. Clothing. Due to hand-me-downs you only need one set of clothes. I've got by perfectly well only being bought clothes about twice a year at the most. I've never understood how clothing is thought of as a significant cost of living in our post-Primark age.
5. Holidays. I'll ignore this as I know nothing about it.
6. Toys. The buggers can share them.
7. Leisure and recreation. I wasn't taken to many places.
8. Pocket money. This equates to £250 pocket money per year or £5 per week. I never got any pocket money, but this doesn't seem unreasonable.
I can't be bothered to cost out what it really costs to raise a child but I really can't see it being £60 a week every week. £60 a week comes out at £50,000 in total which is 1/4 of this figure and 1/3 of other figures I saw when I Googled.
I have a lot of patience for benefit claimants, but I do think we ought to be a bit more Chairman Mao when it comes to children. A family of 6 kids on two salaried wages would certainly not be able to keep them all in different bedrooms and all the rest of it and everyone must cut their cloth accordingly.
The full facts: cost of raising a child 2003-2014*Does not include private school fees, but does include associated day-to-day costs (eg school trips, text books, uniform and school lunch) and university fees. Table: LV=" height="392" width="460">
Here is the cost breakdown for raising a child. Now, this is oversold on each point.
1. Childcare. A non-working mother needs no childcare. That's £66,000 wiped off right there.
2. Education. Nobody pays out of their own pocket for university fees, and the kids will be loaned £6000 maintenance due to their poverty. Schools provide textbooks. Trips are optional. Lunch is free for poor people.
3. Food. This implies spending about £1000 per year per child or £20 per week, so this seems a reasonable figure.
4. Clothing. Due to hand-me-downs you only need one set of clothes. I've got by perfectly well only being bought clothes about twice a year at the most. I've never understood how clothing is thought of as a significant cost of living in our post-Primark age.
5. Holidays. I'll ignore this as I know nothing about it.
6. Toys. The buggers can share them.
7. Leisure and recreation. I wasn't taken to many places.
8. Pocket money. This equates to £250 pocket money per year or £5 per week. I never got any pocket money, but this doesn't seem unreasonable.
I can't be bothered to cost out what it really costs to raise a child but I really can't see it being £60 a week every week. £60 a week comes out at £50,000 in total which is 1/4 of this figure and 1/3 of other figures I saw when I Googled.
I have a lot of patience for benefit claimants, but I do think we ought to be a bit more Chairman Mao when it comes to children. A family of 6 kids on two salaried wages would certainly not be able to keep them all in different bedrooms and all the rest of it and everyone must cut their cloth accordingly.
Original post by scrotgrot
I would have thought there were considerable economies of scale to be had with 6 kids. While I'm sure there are plenty of hidden expenses I can't think of, I think any family with 6 kids must expect that they will have to share bedrooms, toys and hand-me-down clothes. That's always been the case even for financially secure families on salaried incomes.
The full facts: cost of raising a child 2003-2014
*Does not include private school fees, but does include associated day-to-day costs (eg school trips, text books, uniform and school lunch) and university fees. Table: LV=" height="392" width="460">
Here is the cost breakdown for raising a child. Now, this is oversold on each point.
1. Childcare. A non-working mother needs no childcare. That's £66,000 wiped off right there.
2. Education. Nobody pays out of their own pocket for university fees, and the kids will be loaned £6000 maintenance due to their poverty. Schools provide textbooks. Trips are optional. Lunch is free for poor people.
3. Food. This implies spending about £1000 per year per child or £20 per week, so this seems a reasonable figure.
4. Clothing. Due to hand-me-downs you only need one set of clothes. I've got by perfectly well only being bought clothes about twice a year at the most. I've never understood how clothing is thought of as a significant cost of living in our post-Primark age.
5. Holidays. I'll ignore this as I know nothing about it.
6. Toys. The buggers can share them.
7. Leisure and recreation. I wasn't taken to many places.
8. Pocket money. This equates to £250 pocket money per year or £5 per week. I never got any pocket money, but this doesn't seem unreasonable.
I can't be bothered to cost out what it really costs to raise a child but I really can't see it being £60 a week every week. £60 a week comes out at £50,000 in total which is 1/4 of this figure and 1/3 of other figures I saw when I Googled.
I have a lot of patience for benefit claimants, but I do think we ought to be a bit more Chairman Mao when it comes to children. A family of 6 kids on two salaried wages would certainly not be able to keep them all in different bedrooms and all the rest of it and everyone must cut their cloth accordingly.
The full facts: cost of raising a child 2003-2014*Does not include private school fees, but does include associated day-to-day costs (eg school trips, text books, uniform and school lunch) and university fees. Table: LV=" height="392" width="460">
Here is the cost breakdown for raising a child. Now, this is oversold on each point.
1. Childcare. A non-working mother needs no childcare. That's £66,000 wiped off right there.
2. Education. Nobody pays out of their own pocket for university fees, and the kids will be loaned £6000 maintenance due to their poverty. Schools provide textbooks. Trips are optional. Lunch is free for poor people.
3. Food. This implies spending about £1000 per year per child or £20 per week, so this seems a reasonable figure.
4. Clothing. Due to hand-me-downs you only need one set of clothes. I've got by perfectly well only being bought clothes about twice a year at the most. I've never understood how clothing is thought of as a significant cost of living in our post-Primark age.
5. Holidays. I'll ignore this as I know nothing about it.
6. Toys. The buggers can share them.
7. Leisure and recreation. I wasn't taken to many places.
8. Pocket money. This equates to £250 pocket money per year or £5 per week. I never got any pocket money, but this doesn't seem unreasonable.
I can't be bothered to cost out what it really costs to raise a child but I really can't see it being £60 a week every week. £60 a week comes out at £50,000 in total which is 1/4 of this figure and 1/3 of other figures I saw when I Googled.
I have a lot of patience for benefit claimants, but I do think we ought to be a bit more Chairman Mao when it comes to children. A family of 6 kids on two salaried wages would certainly not be able to keep them all in different bedrooms and all the rest of it and everyone must cut their cloth accordingly.
True you do raise some informed points.
Original post by Josh_B
The Govt ought to stop all Child Benefit after the second child IMO.
The Govt ought to stop all Child Benefit after the second child IMO.
This. Totally this.
Original post by meenu89
This. Totally this.
PRSOM.
Original post by illegaltobepoor
This one parent and 6 children are paid the sum below per month by the state.
I won't have a single child until I have a stable home, a solid financial safety net and a job which provides me with enough money for school fees. I think that's perfectly reasonable.
Yet there are people in this country who clearly have no compunction about having six children when they can barely afford one. That is irresponsible, and it's harmful to both the children and the community. The idea of having six bloody children, unless you are enormously wealthy, is ludicrous - and that's not even considering the time out of the workplace it will essentially force one of the parents to have.
So while I believe we unfortunately do have to clean up the mess these parents leave and ensure a basic but decent standard of living for every one of those children (who are, of course, innocent in all this), I don't believe you can have a 'defence' of this sort of thing. It's wrong.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by scrotgrot
I would have thought there were considerable economies of scale to be had with 6 kids. While I'm sure there are plenty of hidden expenses I can't think of, I think any family with 6 kids must expect that they will have to share bedrooms, toys and hand-me-down clothes. That's always been the case even for financially secure families on salaried incomes.
The full facts: cost of raising a child 2003-2014
*Does not include private school fees, but does include associated day-to-day costs (eg school trips, text books, uniform and school lunch) and university fees. Table: LV=" height="392" width="460">
Here is the cost breakdown for raising a child. Now, this is oversold on each point.
1. Childcare. A non-working mother needs no childcare. That's £66,000 wiped off right there.
2. Education. Nobody pays out of their own pocket for university fees, and the kids will be loaned £6000 maintenance due to their poverty. Schools provide textbooks. Trips are optional. Lunch is free for poor people.
3. Food. This implies spending about £1000 per year per child or £20 per week, so this seems a reasonable figure.
4. Clothing. Due to hand-me-downs you only need one set of clothes. I've got by perfectly well only being bought clothes about twice a year at the most. I've never understood how clothing is thought of as a significant cost of living in our post-Primark age.
5. Holidays. I'll ignore this as I know nothing about it.
6. Toys. The buggers can share them.
7. Leisure and recreation. I wasn't taken to many places.
8. Pocket money. This equates to £250 pocket money per year or £5 per week. I never got any pocket money, but this doesn't seem unreasonable.
I can't be bothered to cost out what it really costs to raise a child but I really can't see it being £60 a week every week. £60 a week comes out at £50,000 in total which is 1/4 of this figure and 1/3 of other figures I saw when I Googled.
I have a lot of patience for benefit claimants, but I do think we ought to be a bit more Chairman Mao when it comes to children. A family of 6 kids on two salaried wages would certainly not be able to keep them all in different bedrooms and all the rest of it and everyone must cut their cloth accordingly.
The full facts: cost of raising a child 2003-2014*Does not include private school fees, but does include associated day-to-day costs (eg school trips, text books, uniform and school lunch) and university fees. Table: LV=" height="392" width="460">
Here is the cost breakdown for raising a child. Now, this is oversold on each point.
1. Childcare. A non-working mother needs no childcare. That's £66,000 wiped off right there.
2. Education. Nobody pays out of their own pocket for university fees, and the kids will be loaned £6000 maintenance due to their poverty. Schools provide textbooks. Trips are optional. Lunch is free for poor people.
3. Food. This implies spending about £1000 per year per child or £20 per week, so this seems a reasonable figure.
4. Clothing. Due to hand-me-downs you only need one set of clothes. I've got by perfectly well only being bought clothes about twice a year at the most. I've never understood how clothing is thought of as a significant cost of living in our post-Primark age.
5. Holidays. I'll ignore this as I know nothing about it.
6. Toys. The buggers can share them.
7. Leisure and recreation. I wasn't taken to many places.
8. Pocket money. This equates to £250 pocket money per year or £5 per week. I never got any pocket money, but this doesn't seem unreasonable.
I can't be bothered to cost out what it really costs to raise a child but I really can't see it being £60 a week every week. £60 a week comes out at £50,000 in total which is 1/4 of this figure and 1/3 of other figures I saw when I Googled.
I have a lot of patience for benefit claimants, but I do think we ought to be a bit more Chairman Mao when it comes to children. A family of 6 kids on two salaried wages would certainly not be able to keep them all in different bedrooms and all the rest of it and everyone must cut their cloth accordingly.
On Holidays, the level of holiday I got would cost in the area of £560 a week for accomodation for the family, maybe another £1440 on food and things to do if you were being extravagant. That's still a £14k saving right there. For reference, that's a camping holiday in North wales. Both my parents work and we went once a year, every year. It was awesome.
Original post by chrisawhitmore
On Holidays, the level of holiday I got would cost in the area of £560 a week for accomodation for the family, maybe another £1440 on food and things to do if you were being extravagant. That's still a £14k saving right there. For reference, that's a camping holiday in North wales. Both my parents work and we went once a year, every year. It was awesome.
Call me a Scrooge but I would never pay anything past £200 for a holiday in the UK. I find the whole tourism industry laughable. Its the biggest con going.
It is best to wait till September when the vendors cut their prices between 75% to 90%.
Original post by L i b
I won't have a single child until I have a stable home, a solid financial safety net and a job which provides me with enough money for school fees. I think that's perfectly reasonable.
Yet there are people in this country who clearly have no compunction about having six children when they can barely afford one. That is irresponsible, and it's harmful to both the children and the community. The idea of having six bloody children, unless you are enormously wealthy, is ludicrous - and that's not even considering the time out of the workplace it will essentially force one of the parents to have.
So while I believe we unfortunately do have to clean up the mess these parents leave and ensure a basic but decent standard of living for every one of those children (who are, of course, innocent in all this), I don't believe you can have a 'defence' of this sort of thing. It's wrong.
Yet there are people in this country who clearly have no compunction about having six children when they can barely afford one. That is irresponsible, and it's harmful to both the children and the community. The idea of having six bloody children, unless you are enormously wealthy, is ludicrous - and that's not even considering the time out of the workplace it will essentially force one of the parents to have.
So while I believe we unfortunately do have to clean up the mess these parents leave and ensure a basic but decent standard of living for every one of those children (who are, of course, innocent in all this), I don't believe you can have a 'defence' of this sort of thing. It's wrong.
There is no such thing as a secure job any more. Most middle class workers thought the same as you, they got to the high up positions and then had kids. Then they got made redundant for not performing at 100% efficiency.
There is no such thing as job security any more. What you need is leverage over your boss. You need something which makes you stand out where you cannot be replaced.
If you want a fool proof plan I am afraid your going to have to create your own business and take some big risks because in the job market there is always a younger more efficient worker looking to make you redundant.
Anyway you tell them unemployed workers with 6 kids. You give them a piece of your mind and how your so better than them. ....... Chuckles. I'd wonder what they'd say back to you.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by illegaltobepoor
Call me a Scrooge but I would never pay anything past £200 for a holiday in the UK. I find the whole tourism industry laughable. Its the biggest con going.
It is best to wait till September when the vendors cut their prices between 75% to 90%.
It is best to wait till September when the vendors cut their prices between 75% to 90%.
I agree (in fact I'm paying around a hundred quid for a nice house with a pool in wales with my friends this september), but I was pricing for a parent and 6 kids and going a bit upmarket even then. Also, I was working on the basis that at least some of the kids were school aged, meaning that they couldn't be taken out of season (they fine parents for doing so).
Even so, £16k a year on holidays is absurd, benefits or not.
The question of whether holidays and such are a necessity to the degree that the state should be expected to support them is a whole other debate. (I'm in two minds as to whether benefits should be cash or some form of card which has usage restrictions (eg. the money identified as housing benefit can only pay rent, the money for children can't be spent on cigarettes or alcohol and so on.)
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Josh_B
There's another solution - don't have 6 kids.
The Govt ought to stop all Child Benefit after the second child IMO.
The Govt ought to stop all Child Benefit after the second child IMO.
Agree with this. OP I support a lot of those on welfare, but there's no need to have 6 kids
Original post by illegaltobepoor
Call me a Scrooge but I would never pay anything past £200 for a holiday in the UK. I find the whole tourism industry laughable. Its the biggest con going.
It is best to wait till September when the vendors cut their prices between 75% to 90%.
It is best to wait till September when the vendors cut their prices between 75% to 90%.
Wtf
Guess you don't go to many nice places/stay for very long then
Original post by Josh_B
There's another solution - don't have 6 kids.
The Govt ought to stop all Child Benefit after the second child IMO.
The Govt ought to stop all Child Benefit after the second child IMO.
Agreed, why on earth would you have 6 kids in this economy unless you were very well off?
Original post by Mickey O'Neil
PRSOM.
Likewise
All the evidence suggests that 6 kids gives enough benefit for sky tv subscriptions incl sport channels, takeaways, throwaway nappies and copious amounts of booze and fags for the mother. If her bf helps out a bit with a new computer whatever every now and then she is laughing. In the meantime the kids are eating chicken nuggets and pasta.
Original post by CallMeBatwoman
Agreed, why on earth would you have 6 kids in this economy unless you were very well off?
Oh my goodness no. It is women's "rights" to do whatever they want at the taxpayers expense.
Original post by chrisawhitmore
I agree (in fact I'm paying around a hundred quid for a nice house with a pool in wales with my friends this september), but I was pricing for a parent and 6 kids and going a bit upmarket even then. Also, I was working on the basis that at least some of the kids were school aged, meaning that they couldn't be taken out of season (they fine parents for doing so).
Even so, £16k a year on holidays is absurd, benefits or not.
The question of whether holidays and such are a necessity to the degree that the state should be expected to support them is a whole other debate. (I'm in two minds as to whether benefits should be cash or some form of card which has usage restrictions (eg. the money identified as housing benefit can only pay rent, the money for children can't be spent on cigarettes or alcohol and so on.)
Even so, £16k a year on holidays is absurd, benefits or not.
The question of whether holidays and such are a necessity to the degree that the state should be expected to support them is a whole other debate. (I'm in two minds as to whether benefits should be cash or some form of card which has usage restrictions (eg. the money identified as housing benefit can only pay rent, the money for children can't be spent on cigarettes or alcohol and so on.)
I'd rather calculate benefits based on a individual basis. Its easy to finger point and go look that family is getting £30,000. However if you do the maths you will find a unemployed adult will get £71.70 and the kids will get £50-60 something.
I personally find the benefit cap is a way to punish children who belong to big families. The bigger the family is the personal allowances for the children will get lower and lower.
This is why I can't support the benefit cap. Its not about cutting the deficit its about winning votes by punishing the children of feckless parents.
(edited 10 years ago)
How is people on benefits being worse off than the working poor a bad thing?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- My degree apprenticeship dilemma
- Mature Student.
- Parents are upset I've not found a bf and had a baby yet at 19
- Full time student or not?
- Labour plans to add 20% VAT to Private School fees.
- Less maintenance loan
- Do my parent have to inform the council I am taking a gap year?
- good universities for any computer related course with no a-level maths
- Will i ever be married/loved?
- Housing crisis
- How to tell my parents I may have ADHD?
- Why do people leave their front door unlocked???????
- Shamima Begum was made a scapegoat – we would welcome her back, say Bethnal Green res
- White people culture s brown people culture
- Increasing salary in the post-BPTC pre-pupillage offer stage
- Learning how to socialise
- AQA A-level Law Paper 2 (7162/2) - 6th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Private school and Russell group university
- I am the end of my family.
- Hiding my gap year from my parent?
Latest
Posted 2 minutes ago
Is MathsFM French Alevels good for a CS degree at top uni (OX, UCL, Durham etc)Last reply 2 minutes ago
Medical doctor degree apprenticeship 2024Last reply 2 minutes ago
Official: Queen's University Belfast A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 3 minutes ago
Official Dental Hygiene and Therapy (Oral Health Science) 2024 Entry ThreadDentistry
2843
Last reply 4 minutes ago
Standard Chartered Apprenticeships 2024Last reply 5 minutes ago
Jaguar (JLR) Degree apprenticeships 2024Last reply 5 minutes ago
Official Lancaster University Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 6 minutes ago
Official LSE Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 7 minutes ago
Temporary Withdrawl/Suspension of studies and Student Fianance.Last reply 9 minutes ago
Civil Service Fast Stream 2024 - Applicants threadLast reply 9 minutes ago
yet to receive a woodhouse interviewTrending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
How did John Major become PM with barely any qualifications?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
How did John Major become PM with barely any qualifications?
