End of Child Benefit for All ....
Thats just an example, not my actual outgoings, we dont have a mortgage and more coming in, we arent extravagant and still manage to creep the overdraft up a bit each month, there is allways too much month at the end of the money !
Scooby Regular
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
From: Cardiff. Wales
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes I did and my comment wasn't a dig at you. But I think that average is unfair. If they provided regional figures then it's more of a picture. If I lived up North, say Newcastle for example on what I earn yes i'd live nicely because my mortgage would be a fraction of what it is now and so would council tax and bills generally. The cost of living in the South East is extortionate in comparison. Yes I could move but as i've lived here all my life and it's where my family is and my job then just upping and moving to a different part of the country really isn't feasible. If it was i'd do it as I hate the South East!
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Seems to me there are a lot of people here who feel that rather than child benefit being some kind of bonus, that it is in fact an entitlement.
As an ex-higher-rate taxpayer (I'm now self-employed so who the hell knows what I'm making) and someone who has no kids thankfully, I've paid plenty in and received no handouts of any kind. I've only ever paid into the system. I was brought up to row my own boat and not to expect anyone else to bail me out, and I have made all my choices on that basis.
Given the choice I would like more control over where the tax I pay goes.
The reality with a welfare state is that the haves will always be shelling out for the have-nots; where the have-nots behave themselves I'm generally OK with this, unfortunately nowadays far too many of the have-nots are just feckless imbeciles and in their case I would happily hang them out to dry.
The recent changes to child benefit are certainly unfair as relates to the fact that a household can have a combined income of over £80K and retain benefits whereas a household with a higher-rate taxpayer and a non-earner or low-earner lose the benefits. But neither of these households can claim to be suffering hardship in any real way, and as such why should either of them be entitled to any kind of benefits? The problem here is not the fact that one of those households is no longer entitled to the benefits, it is the fact that one of those households is still entitled to the benefits.
Kevin
As an ex-higher-rate taxpayer (I'm now self-employed so who the hell knows what I'm making) and someone who has no kids thankfully, I've paid plenty in and received no handouts of any kind. I've only ever paid into the system. I was brought up to row my own boat and not to expect anyone else to bail me out, and I have made all my choices on that basis.
Given the choice I would like more control over where the tax I pay goes.
The reality with a welfare state is that the haves will always be shelling out for the have-nots; where the have-nots behave themselves I'm generally OK with this, unfortunately nowadays far too many of the have-nots are just feckless imbeciles and in their case I would happily hang them out to dry.
The recent changes to child benefit are certainly unfair as relates to the fact that a household can have a combined income of over £80K and retain benefits whereas a household with a higher-rate taxpayer and a non-earner or low-earner lose the benefits. But neither of these households can claim to be suffering hardship in any real way, and as such why should either of them be entitled to any kind of benefits? The problem here is not the fact that one of those households is no longer entitled to the benefits, it is the fact that one of those households is still entitled to the benefits.
Kevin
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, good ol' Red Ed thinks everyone should have it, not matter how much they earn .... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...band-says.html
"... Asked whether he would condone handing out Government cash to the super-rich, the new Labour leader said he was against any move towards underminining the universal principal.
"I'm in favour of that yes, and I'm in favour of it because it's a cornerstone of our system to have universal benefits, and frankly there aren't that many millionaires in this country," he told BBC1's The Politics Show. "Families on £45,000 need child benefit in my view and it's a way that society recognises the costs of having kids." ..."
So there you have it. The coalition/alliance/whatever-the-latest-name-for-the-uk-government-is should be ripping Labour apart over this, wanting to give money to so-called 'millionaires' rather than help the country reduce its debt. They shyould also point out the results of a YouGov poll ... http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Pol..._Conservatives
"... YouGov found 83% of voters back Chancellor George Osborne's announcement that child benefit will not be paid to parents to earn more than £44,000 a year from 2013. ..."
Dave
"... Asked whether he would condone handing out Government cash to the super-rich, the new Labour leader said he was against any move towards underminining the universal principal.
"I'm in favour of that yes, and I'm in favour of it because it's a cornerstone of our system to have universal benefits, and frankly there aren't that many millionaires in this country," he told BBC1's The Politics Show. "Families on £45,000 need child benefit in my view and it's a way that society recognises the costs of having kids." ..."
So there you have it. The coalition/alliance/whatever-the-latest-name-for-the-uk-government-is should be ripping Labour apart over this, wanting to give money to so-called 'millionaires' rather than help the country reduce its debt. They shyould also point out the results of a YouGov poll ... http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Pol..._Conservatives
"... YouGov found 83% of voters back Chancellor George Osborne's announcement that child benefit will not be paid to parents to earn more than £44,000 a year from 2013. ..."
Dave
Joking aside the problem isn't the idea it's the execution. Yes most peope are in favour of the well off not receiving child benefit, but the proposal of how that will work made by this government is clearly lacking in any common sense. The Tories - making the simplex complex
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 65
From: West Wales
Whats happening with Working Families Tax Credit then?
If Child Benefit is being based on tax rate because it's cheaper than means testing, what about WFTC? Its means tested so why couldn't the government add CB to the WFTC calculation. I wonder if they really have done cost study?
I can't see how they can stop WFTC being means tested.
If Child Benefit is being based on tax rate because it's cheaper than means testing, what about WFTC? Its means tested so why couldn't the government add CB to the WFTC calculation. I wonder if they really have done cost study?
I can't see how they can stop WFTC being means tested.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 21,366
Likes: 0
From: A big town with sh1t shops: Northampton
Those of you bleating on about "paying for other people's kids", how many of you smoke and drink regularly? I don't want to have to pay for the NHS bill you will no doubt rack up because of your unhealthy ways! 
Seriously though this is what a democratic society is supposed to about. We all pay in for the good of society and some of us will use the services provided more than others.
What makes me laugh on threads like this is the people who say a cut to CB is not fair because such and such a person is still getting such and such a benefit. You can always find a reason why it should be someone else if you look hard enough.
It's like the constant arguing over the private and public sectors. Both sides think the other is better off than them. It's pathetic really.
One thing is for sure.... Thatcher got her dog eat dog society she wanted!
Guest
Posts: n/a
And the other 17% are all contributing on this thread
Joking aside the problem isn't the idea it's the execution. Yes most peope are in favour of the well off not receiving child benefit, but the proposal of how that will work made by this government is clearly lacking in any common sense. The Tories - making the simplex complex
Joking aside the problem isn't the idea it's the execution. Yes most peope are in favour of the well off not receiving child benefit, but the proposal of how that will work made by this government is clearly lacking in any common sense. The Tories - making the simplex complex
Dave
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 65
From: West Wales
Could be wrong, but its what I've heard.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
From: Disco, Disco!
SN Fairy Godmother
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
From: Far Far Away
Yes I did and my comment wasn't a dig at you. But I think that average is unfair. If they provided regional figures then it's more of a picture. If I lived up North, say Newcastle for example on what I earn yes i'd live nicely because my mortgage would be a fraction of what it is now and so would council tax and bills generally. The cost of living in the South East is extortionate in comparison. Yes I could move but as i've lived here all my life and it's where my family is and my job then just upping and moving to a different part of the country really isn't feasible. If it was i'd do it as I hate the South East!
That's a bit of a generalisation. My mortgage isn't small, but neither is the house. And, the council tax is £187 per month
Guest
Posts: n/a
Lee yes it was a generalisation and I was saying on a like for like basis the North is considerably cheaper not that everything is cheap. You only have to look in Autotrader/Pistonheads at cars to see the big difference that exists in car prices for exactly the same model/age/mileage.
So someone on the £44k threshold up North would be considered far better off than someone on the same down here.
So someone on the £44k threshold up North would be considered far better off than someone on the same down here.
for what its worth has anyone mentioned the 22million sent abroad every week in child benefit to kids where thier father is working in this country . because if the father is working here and getting about 1300quid a month and has 3children he will be getting more child benefit than he is paying in tax (perhaps one of the pc gordon brown snott gobling labourites on here could explain to me how that benefits this country , apart from the bankers that transfer the money ????????????????????????????????
for what its worth has anyone mentioned the 22million sent abroad every week in child benefit to kids where thier father is working in this country . because if the father is working here and getting about 1300quid a month and has 3children he will be getting more child benefit than he is paying in tax (perhaps one of the pc gordon brown snott gobling labourites on here could explain to me how that benefits this country , apart from the bankers that transfer the money ????????????????????????????????
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
