Hey let s have some moaning and controversy! As a single hetero bloke in his forties, I am very concious that particularly in the Blairite new age conservate culture what we lives in, single people are discriminated against in subtle and not so subtle ways. Whats your opinion or experiece. Why is everythin g "family friendly" yet families are a matter of lifestyle choice as a blairite new ager might say.
Thi is NOT by the way an atempt to encourage the "I' white and its all in favour of ethnic minorities " kinds whingeing, purleez, there's enough of that elsewehere and much misinofmation .
oink oink

for my dreadful typing. will improve file under "woffling at speed and small new keyboard". oink oink

i think single people probably are discriminated against in some way, for example electricity bills and gas bills won't be that much less for a single person than a couple, but couples can share the bills.
BUT, and this is a bit of a personal rant, in terms of benefits, couples in my opinion are definatly discriminated against - in our case my partner is job seeking and went onto job seekers allowance, they said we had to make a joint claim because we live together. I am a student and am not eligable for any benefits - that's fair enough. But, what they don't tell you is that even though i'm ineligable for benefits, my 'income' is taken into account for my partner's claim - they have taken my student LOAN as income and therefore my partner only gets £!6 a week jsa because they think my student loan should be supporting the pair of us.
rant over, sorry.

oh and also, you say a family is a lifestyle choice, but so is being single!

Perhaps if you gave examples of discrimination you've experienced because I've certainly never experienced any. In fact, the idea seems ridiculous, how is something being "family-friendly" disciminating against single people?

Originally posted by ThePiglit
for my dreadful typing. will improve file under "woffling at speed and small new keyboard". oink oink

try using the edit button then you won't need to make two postings withing one minute of each other ;)

Moved here as it's more a general than a Sheffield topic.

As a gay bloke I can't officially have a "family" of any kind.

Wheres the money with "my name on it" ?

well yeh i think gay people are discriminated against hugely, it's ridiculous! not allowed to marry, or inherit partner's estate after death, its stupid.
But, back to the job seekers allowance, if two gay people are living together, they don't have to make a joint claim, because they are not considered partners, which ethically is discrimination to gay people, but economically it benefits them :)

I suspect you aren't discriminated against as much as you would have been years ago.
"He's a bachelor you know!" "She's a Spinster you know" "Ohh she's divorced, they say...." etc etc. Inferring some oddity or worse.
Today there's housing built for single people, supermarkets stock more for singlesetc It's got to be better today than in the 50's 60's and 70's.
Wish Blairs mother had stayed single.

Originally posted by HarrietStar
well yeh i think gay people are discriminated against hugely, it's ridiculous! not allowed to marry, or inherit partner's estate after death, its stupid.
But, back to the job seekers allowance, if two gay people are living together, they don't have to make a joint claim, because they are not considered partners, which ethically is discrimination to gay people, but economically it benefits them :)

I'm not bothered about getting married, but I would like to be able to say who gets my stuff when I die at least.
It's in pension companies best intrests to keep things the way they are, as if I'm not legaly anyones partner they don't have to give my pension to anyone when I die.
The concil do however consider us partners when it suits them, like if you are claiming housing benefit etc.

And another thing....

When I was a member of Esporta they asked us what improvements should be made to the gym, the winning suggestions were "more mother and baby classes" and "more free childrens memberships".

Great, that improved things for me no end.

what i mean is...
single people pay more tax
we can't get tax credits to subsidise us into low paid work (good!)
the families first policy of many employers particularly the civil service means booking a holiday difficult in school holidays (evidence, one mate who's a copper, the other who works for DWP)

more ugly stuff-

I was once asked to move from a table in a resturant because it was reserved for families. I went bonkers and left.

At a primary school in Devon where my mates dughter goes, parents protested at having a male teacher (single) in charge of very young kids. Disgracefully, the head gave in to this fascist mob. Teacher now teaches big kids. Crazy.

Mate turned away from guest house "we don't take singles"

Female friend hot shot career woman, often not asked to do's and is often quizzed about her marital status.

Village councillor with paedophile paranioa, trawling the voters list for single blokes.

Usual ugly commenst about single women by blokes.

Right?

Also I'm not gay, but think many people assume I am, and may tacitly discriminate .

on wit the debate ....

Hows my typing Mo? Thanks for the advice and the toelarnce I bet your a teacher.

xx

Quick answer to your question. NO!!!
Just because you don't feel you get what you want doesn't make it discrimination. Not everyone can be catered for in exactly the same way. Everyone gets benefits of some kind no matter what their personal circumstances are. The Government has obviously decided at this moment that families need help. As they decide at other times that OAP's need help and so on. It all balances itself out in the long run so jump off the discrimination bandwagon.

I think what p**ses single (or non-traditional family) people off is that we seem to be paying for all these helpfull l things the government is doing, in some cases we are paying towards services we will never use.

discrimination is no bandwagon and feelings are very important and not just personal. I'm not depending on the govt or society to solve my probs either.

I's with you bro Piglit - we gets the sh***y end of the stick all the time.

I did'nt tell anyone to get married. I did'nt tell anyone to shack up together. I certainly did'nt tell anyone to have rug rats.

I get fed up with all the "parent and child parking spaces", parent and child this & that. Parents bleating that they have to wait in the queue with their herd of screaming monsters, that they can't be bothered to control, and that make the simple act of shopping purgatory.

I get fed up with the gridlock outside of any school, because the same bleating parents can't be bothered to park lawfully and walk a few more yards to collect their spawn.

It pi**es me off that I can't go for a walk, in the park, by myself, minding my own business, without be glared at as though I was some kind of child molester.

And why can't I have those 2 weeks leave in July/August...? Because another bleating parent (without any seniority in post) is demanding that they they simply MUST have those/any week cos there baaaybeeeees are having their summer hols....

I work hard, I pay my taxes, I don't get any allowances because I made a concious decision NOT to further burden an already over populated society with feckless progeny that I can't be bothered to control...

A.P.

First thing we do, lets shoot all the lawyers, and then all the politicians...

Originally posted by Provocateur
I's with you bro Piglit - we gets the sh***y end of the stick all the time.

I did'nt tell anyone to get married. I did'nt tell anyone to shack up together. I certainly did'nt tell anyone to have rug rats.

I get fed up with all the "parent and child parking spaces", parent and child this & that. Parents bleating that they have to wait in the queue with their herd of screaming monsters, that they can't be bothered to control, and that make the simple act of shopping purgatory.

I get fed up with the gridlock outside of any school, because the same bleating parents can't be bothered to park lawfully and walk a few more yards to collect their spawn.

It pi**es me off that I can't go for a walk, in the park, by myself, minding my own business, without be glared at as though I was some kind of child molester.

I work hard, I pay my taxes, I don't get any allowances because I made a concious decision NOT to further burden an already over populated society with feckless progeny that I can't be bothered to control...

P.

First thing we do, lets shoot all the lawyers, and then all the politicians...
God help us all. Oh no...some cars parked funny, a few car parking spaces that I can't park in...the world's over..lets all end it now.
Quit your selfish whining :rant:

I think what p**ses single (or non-traditional family) people off is that we seem to be paying for all these helpfull l things the government is doing, in some cases we are paying towards services we will never use.

There will have been single /childless people paying towards the benefits your parents/guardians got when you were a child. Those same people will benefit now (or will in the future) from other people's children (like you) who grow up & contribute to the economy.

So I guess you could say that other people's children become service we all "use" .

I know Maggie said that there's no such thing as society, only individuals & families but she was wrong.

Selfish whining...? Yeah, I know all about that, you get to hear it all the time from these people who seem to think they have more rights than everyone else, simply cos they want to live together/have a family/further overburden an already overpopulated system...

Originally posted by HarrietStar
for example electricity bills and gas bills won't be that much less for a single person than a couple, but couples can share the bills.


That's not discrimination at all, that's called sharing resources. In business it would be referred to as achieving economies of scale. An example would be watching TV. If a couple sit together and watch it then they're sharing the resource and therefore the electricity, but it would cost a single person the same amount to watch the TV. It's called charging by usage, not discrimination.

A single person can have 25% off their Council Tax.

Is that discriminating against couples?

Originally posted by nick2
I'm not bothered about getting married, but I would like to be able to say who gets my stuff when I die at least.


Can't you leave your stuff to your boyfriend if you write a will? :confused:

Originally posted by Patchy
Can't you leave your stuff to your boyfriend if you write a will? :confused:

I don't think wills are legaly binding and I wouldn't be able to specify something that is against the law.
Even though I doubt my family would take anything from my partner you never know how people will act once money becomes involved. I can leave some things in trust, mainly life insurance and that kind of thing but realy my partner has no rights to anything we have bought, including the house.

Originally posted by nick2
I don't think wills are legaly binding and I wouldn't be able to specify something that is against the law.
Even though I doubt my family would take anything from my partner you never know how people will act once money becomes involved. I can leave some things in trust, mainly life insurance and that kind of thing but realy my partner has no rights to anything we have bought, including the house.
Course its legally binding..otherwise whats the point??
You partner has many rights if you choose to name her/him as your benefactor.

Originally posted by wibbles
Course its legally binding..otherwise whats the point??
You partner has many rights if you choose to name her/him as your benefactor.

I can't remember who told me that wills aren't legally binding more a statement of your wishes.

Originally posted by HarrietStar
i think single people probably are discriminated against in some way, for example electricity bills and gas bills won't be that much less for a single person than a couple, but couples can share the bills.
BUT, and this is a bit of a personal rant, in terms of benefits, couples in my opinion are definatly discriminated against - in our case my partner is job seeking and went onto job seekers allowance, they said we had to make a joint claim because we live together. I am a student and am not eligable for any benefits - that's fair enough. But, what they don't tell you is that even though i'm ineligable for benefits, my 'income' is taken into account for my partner's claim - they have taken my student LOAN as income and therefore my partner only gets £!6 a week jsa because they think my student loan should be supporting the pair of us.
rant over, sorry.

oh and also, you say a family is a lifestyle choice, but so is being single!

I have some sympathy with the first part but being single isn't a lifestyle choice its a default condition. Unless babies are being born married these days (which wouldn't suprise me!)

Originally posted by John
A single person can have 25% off their Council Tax.

Is that discriminating against couples?

Not really. You will use twice as much resources as a single person so arguable the dicsount should be 50%.

Originally posted by nick2
I can't remember who told me that wills aren't legally binding more a statement of your wishes.

about the only thing you can't leave to your boyfriend might be the pension that your partner would receive after you died.
Anything else can be willed to whoever you like and the executor of the will act in accordance with your wishes.

What you might be thinking of though is death without a will, normally in this case your partner would receive your entire estate, i'm not sure if a same sex partner would be recognised that way though and it might go to your parents/siblings instead. So just make sure you make a will, and investigate with your pension company if you can declare him your partner for pension purposes.

Originally posted by kilauea
Not really. You will use twice as much resources as a single person so arguable the dicsount should be 50%.

a single person will not use half the resource of two people. Afterall a half empty bin gets emptied once a week just like a full bin, and the bin men don't get paid half salary for the time taken to empty that bin.
The same applies to most services that your council tax pays for, although not all, hence there being any discount.

Originally posted by Cyclone
a single person will not use half the resource of two people. Afterall a half empty bin gets emptied once a week just like a full bin, and the bin men don't get paid half salary for the time taken to empty that bin.
The same applies to most services that your council tax pays for, although not all, hence there being any discount.

Except the council doesn't work out its spending or staffing that way. Police and Fire for example are based on per head (1 bobby per 1billion heads by the look of it). And while a binman may only collect one bin - the rubbish and recycling must be processed - and there is usually twice as much from a couple.

Originally posted by nick2
I can't remember who told me that wills aren't legally binding more a statement of your wishes.

it wasn't your partner was it??

"Are you leaving me anything in your will??"
"erm...well I could but its not..erm...legally binding :rolleyes: "

Originally posted by Cyclone
about the only thing you can't leave to your boyfriend might be the pension that your partner would receive after you died.
Anything else can be willed to whoever you like and the executor of the will act in accordance with your wishes.

What you might be thinking of though is death without a will, normally in this case your partner would receive your entire estate, i'm not sure if a same sex partner would be recognised that way though and it might go to your parents/siblings instead. So just make sure you make a will, and investigate with your pension company if you can declare him your partner for pension purposes.

Thanks, I don't know where I got the will thing from, probably overhead it somewhere. I think I'll go and see a solicitor about it.

Originally posted by kilauea
Except the council doesn't work out its spending or staffing that way. Police and Fire for example are based on per head (1 bobby per 1billion heads by the look of it). And while a binman may only collect one bin - the rubbish and recycling must be processed - and there is usually twice as much from a couple.

i already accepted that, but you can't deny that some services are provided per household and not per person, thus only a 25% discount rather than 50%.

Originally posted by wibbles
it wasn't your partner was it??

"Are you leaving me anything in your will??"
"erm...well I could but its not..erm...legally binding :rolleyes: "

No, but I have been checking the stairs for roller skates and tripwires after he asked me where my life insurance documents were.

Originally posted by HarrietStar
oh and also, you say a family is a lifestyle choice, but so is being single!

How is being single a lifestyle choice? Did the people who lost loved ones in 9:11 have a choice? Did the women who lost husbands in Iraq have a choice? Did the fat ugly guy you went to school with have a choice?

The answer is probably not.


I earned £350 last week for working nights and other unsociable hours. Our wonderful government took £100 of that off me.

I guess they did it to help fund the schools for the kids I don't have!

Consider the can of worms well and truely opened folks:thumbsup:

most people would probably argue that staying single in the long run is a choice and not forced upon anyone, although there may be some unfortunates who just never find a partner.
There is no fair way of proportional taxation though, so short of privatising everything and each person paying for every service they use taxation will always be unbalanced to some extent.

Originally posted by Cyclone
so short of privatising everything and each person paying for every service they use taxation will always be unbalanced to some extent.

Now there's an idea.

Originally posted by t020
Now there's an idea.

But its not a new idea. I think someone tried doing that in the 80s... remember a certain Maggie Thatcher???;)

Originally posted by Patchy
But its not a new idea. I think someone tried doing that in the 80s... remember a certain Maggie Thatcher???;)

Yes, I wasn't claiming it as a new idea..... maybe I should've put "now there's a GOOD idea".