Would you like to volunteer to visit the "Happy Room" now, I am sure you would be happier if you were put out of your misery without having to put up with your pain any longer. We wouldn't object!

Les

 

+1 Quite!

 

Woops. No-one has ever been paid because they had children, Stu.
The money was given to the mother, originally, for the upkeep of the child.

 

Why? Do you understand how the welfare state works?

It wasn't started with a fund. Those working at the time recieved all the benefits immediately so National Insurance doesn't actually provide a fund to look after you, it pays for those getting benefits now, pensioners etc.

Now, if those pensioners took the same attitude as you, not wanting to support 'breeders' surely those same children who they refused to support shouldn't be asked to give support they themselves were denied. That's fair isn't it?

5t.

 

A good wheese isn't it?

Our accountant pulled a blinder with regards to a holiday lett of his - can't do it now as rules have changed but using the lett, a small salary to his wife to run the lett, a pension contribution of £5K and the benefits system, the £5K contribution ended up costing him about a £1K in real terms.

Good planning can help you reduce your tax bill AND make these poorly thought out knee jerk reaction austerity plans work for you

 

and lord ashcroft got slated for doing something similar.

 

Sorry I dont see the difference.
Why should my taxes pay for other peoples children? Especially those who are maybe earning more than I am. Its ridiculous.


Its not about being "fair" to others, it is about getting this country back on track before it collapses totally, and stopping all these ridiculous handouts that people dont even need is a pretty good start. There are far too many people out there having kids for no other reason than because "they can" Well if there was no free money available maybe they would think twice.

How many kids are there in the UK? About 20million perhaps, and their mums are all getting £20+ per week for them? Thats the best part of 400 MILLION PER WEEK wasted while the old people you worry about dare not turn their heating on when its cold! Brilliant welfare plan...

 

Avoidance is not a crime, evasion is.

The media bang on about Ashcroft like he's the only one doing it. Heck, if I had several million pounds the first thing I'd do is relocate to Gibraltar, hand over my £30K and no more to pay - job done.

 

Forget to add the girl I mentioned before has had her electric meter "sorted" for free Electric, so the benefit money she is getting is not going on what it's suppose to be.

I only earn between 27k-30k and the benefit for our first child due in about 3 weeks will help us out.but I've worked hard to pay my taxes so I should be entitled to it.

 

No body is saying that free money is wrong but for genuine hard working families something like this is important. I agree the work shy shouldn't be paid to sit still (when i'm in charge i'm bringing back work houses and there will be no benefits you'll get government issues furniture and report to a soup kitchen for food so you can't waste it on tabs and beer but that's by the by).

What you said was it should be withdrawn from everyone and what I did was simply disagree and point out that just doesn't make sense. It punishes people who are working hard even on a small income just because you don't have kids.

The sarcastic note seems to have been missed on Les though.

5t.

 

You have conveniently forgotten that the pensioners you mention paid their National Insurance which included the right to a retired pension from the State. They also supported all those children while they were working and paying tax, as they still do when they pay tax on their pensions.

Les

 

Why should I assume you were being sarcastic? How do you know whether I was or not either?

Les

 

Why would the tax credits be on joint income, and this be on either being over 44k, allowing a couple on a joint income of 80 grand plus keep it but not a single parent/single breadwinner on 45 ?

Your tax is decided on your personal income, not your joint income so a couple on 25k each pay less tax than a couple with one breadwinner on 50k ?

 

Les, stp being daft. I suspect you weren't sarcastic because you have posted this dross.

Just for the record I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TAKE MONEY OFF THE OLD. My point was how can someone who wants to have their money removed from supporting the children of others* expect to be supported by those same children when they reach retirement age?

We need well educated kids to be in work and paying tax. You know as well as I do that National Insurance (as I already explained) is spent now, not saved for you in a pension pot.

5t.


*specifically those from hard woking families who aren't earning a fortune but don't claim - one example my mrs. Now has a job at a respite care centre wiping ***** and as a result is £160 worse off than she would be on benefits but we're not idle around our house. Still, please do take our child benefit away, we're clearly undeserving and selfish as we chose to have a child.

 

You and your family have a had a fair chunk of this ridiculous benefit then havent you?

Did you give much of it back?

 

Good point.

Again, this is another measure that will make the benefits lifestyle all the more comfortable contrary to Tory noises we have heard so far, it wont affect those who live on benefits, they will still get it, those who are outside of PAYE or pay lip service to it like the self employed builder will stil register their 5 grand a year income and the rich dont care, again, like labour this is nailing the cash cow middle earners for a bit more.

 

Do you know how expensive it is to bring up Children these days !!!????

 

So let me get this right.

Even a 50k earning man with a step child loses the payment. Yet the father of said step child with new family can carry on claiming provided he earns less that 44k??

 

This is treated like its the parents who earning being given free money, it isnt, this is a few quid back from wads I pay in every year, year in, year out to help with the expense of kids, and before someone say it was our choice, yes it was but someone has to breed and ours are 99 percent at our expense.

 

I dont follow you there?
If you work hard and dont have kids you get nothing.
If you work hard and DO have kids, you get £1055.60 each for free.

Why? Shouldnt you only have children when you can afford to do so? The same as you only have SKY HD Multiroom if you can afford the extra per month? Why does having kids mean you are entitled to £1000+ per year of my tax money? Even if you dont even have a job, or maybe have never had a job?

 

Yeah designer kids jeans and trainers cost a fortune and boy they grow!

 

+1

Me and the Mrs will be bringing a child into the big bad world next March and our combined earnings are well below £40k combined. But we're not accustomed to the finest things in life, have a big mortgage, fancy car and we budget for what is earn't. Some people on here really need a reality check. Oh what it must be like to look down from ones Ivory tower

For the record £20 a week does make a difference to people like 'me' but if it wasn't there we would just get on with what is in the pot.

 

Yes we have indeed, I have never asked for it and think it should be stopped totally along with many other silly welfare policies.

As for have I paid it back, I am sure my 40% tax has more than paid the state back for anything it has ever given me, whether me or my family requested it otherwise.

 

I have four ranging from 20 yrs old to 2 yrs old, so yes, I do.

 

This subject is so simple I cannot see why so many of you are up in arms about it. There should be no such thing as child benefit. Kids are a luxury, if you can't afford them don't have them. End of.

 

Very very sensible approach. Its exactly the same reason why I don't have a dog.

 

It's not free though it's money they've put in the system themselves

 

So you kept it all then. I see.

 

Cheers for the £2500 Stu, much appreciated, didnt realise it was your personal money that paid for it, must cost you a fortune paying for everyones kids, cheers also for my grandads ongoing care in his old age and paying for the little operation I had so I didnt have any more kids.

Of course the government allow me to keep every last penny of my 50 grand a year or so and I dotn have to contribute to Mrs Patels Cataract surgery, Mary's housing benefit or the raft of new books I will never read, just purchased at the Wythenshawe library.

 

This thread just highlights the problems with a welfare state. If you start, where do you stop and who decides?

My parents were just kind of scraping by when they brought me up. So in order to feed me they'd go without something else, rather than taking out debts to fill the gap and enjoying fancy tvs, cars, etc. They never thought they had the 'right' to any particular quality of life, as it was their decision to have me so they couldn't have expected others to pay for it. If they wanted anything like a holiday they'd just save hard for it. These concepts seem to be lost on folk at the moment.

Fivetide - rather than drawing that link between the elderly and child benefits, surely it would be better to say that those same people couldn't then expect to have their kids funded? Because I guarantee most of the people who enjoy child benefits are only happy as long as they are recieving, rather than giving towards it. If that's not the case, then why is it enforced by government rather than just a charity? If so many people think it's the right thing. I guess they want most of the cash to come from top earners.