End of Child Benefit for All ....
If child benefit is meant to help support the 'upkeep' of the child, why not pay the benefit in vouchers that can only be used for relevant items ?
That way the ******* can't spend the money on ****, booze and betting on the horses.
You might get scumbags trying to sell the vouchers to get around the system but put 'credit' on a smartcard system like phone top ups ?
We a 'childfree' not 'childless' by choice, if you can't afford them, don't have them !
That way the ******* can't spend the money on ****, booze and betting on the horses.
You might get scumbags trying to sell the vouchers to get around the system but put 'credit' on a smartcard system like phone top ups ?
We a 'childfree' not 'childless' by choice, if you can't afford them, don't have them !
I am very disappointed to see this to be honest. I know the Country is in a hole and they have to find money from somewhere, but they do seem to be going for the easiest targets.
What about MPs expenses, are they getting chopped to the bones or better still, scrapped. All these people getting thousands in benefits, fancy houses at 1000 per week rent, etc. Why not go after those.
What about MPs expenses, are they getting chopped to the bones or better still, scrapped. All these people getting thousands in benefits, fancy houses at 1000 per week rent, etc. Why not go after those.
TX.
It's a very fine line though. IMHO the human population is too big already so can do with reducing.
TX.
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 32,398
Likes: 1
From: Old Codgers Home
To be perfectly honest about it all ......... every single person reading this can afford to lose the £20 a week, we are all on pretty good money (or we wouldn't be running Scoobies!).
Oooops, I forgot, I'm not running a Scooby .... wondered why I had all this spare cash each month!
Oooops, I forgot, I'm not running a Scooby .... wondered why I had all this spare cash each month!
To be perfectly honest about it all ......... every single person reading this can afford to lose the £20 a week, we are all on pretty good money (or we wouldn't be running Scoobies!).
Oooops, I forgot, I'm not running a Scooby .... wondered why I had all this spare cash each month!
Oooops, I forgot, I'm not running a Scooby .... wondered why I had all this spare cash each month!
Scooby Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
From: tymbukto
same here house income of £13,000 and had to sell the scooby and run a pug now
SN Fairy Godmother
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
From: Far Far Away
To be perfectly honest about it all ......... every single person reading this can afford to lose the £20 a week, we are all on pretty good money (or we wouldn't be running Scoobies!).
Oooops, I forgot, I'm not running a Scooby .... wondered why I had all this spare cash each month!
Oooops, I forgot, I'm not running a Scooby .... wondered why I had all this spare cash each month!
They are taking something that has been around for years, yet still giving to (sorry about this) Mr Foreigner to send home to his family in God knows where. That's not fair.
Until they get the scroungers, foreign takers and mp expenses fraudsters sorted, they should be leaving the ordinary, tax paying folks alone.
£20 is hardly a dip in the ocean of the mess this Country is in, yet they seem to be, I repeat, looking at the easy options and leaving the major problems well alone. Not good
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 22
From: K
the simple fact is, most people -- the vast vast majority (english and immigrant), just want to work hard earn a decent wage and provide for their familly, but as ever, the narrative is being driven buy a focus on the tiny minority who take the ****
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 38,078
Likes: 310
From: The hell where youth and laughter go
Child benefit should not be used to support an income or the parent's lifestyle.
If the parent's income doesn't cover the cost of their lifestyle, their lifestyle is too wasteful with money. End of.
Child benefit shoul only aid the genuinely needy on the povert line. And in all cases it should only be spent on items directly related tio the child's upbringing (school clothing, educational material, specialist care for the disabled etc).
I heard a women moaning on radio two about it; She's a teacher, her husband in on the cut-off threashold. She paysr for a nanny to care for her child whils she works! A NANNY!? FFS! There she is pleading poverty, I could have slapped her; All that money is doing is funding her cushy middle class lifestyle.
If the parent's income doesn't cover the cost of their lifestyle, their lifestyle is too wasteful with money. End of.
Child benefit shoul only aid the genuinely needy on the povert line. And in all cases it should only be spent on items directly related tio the child's upbringing (school clothing, educational material, specialist care for the disabled etc).
I heard a women moaning on radio two about it; She's a teacher, her husband in on the cut-off threashold. She paysr for a nanny to care for her child whils she works! A NANNY!? FFS! There she is pleading poverty, I could have slapped her; All that money is doing is funding her cushy middle class lifestyle.
Last edited by ALi-B; Oct 5, 2010 at 08:01 AM.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
So like F1 Fan, you are effectively saying that only those people over a certain wage should be allowed to have children.
So I put the same question to you - what do you do with the children born under that wage limit?
I would just say that it wouldn't bother me if we personally didn't get child benefit and we are nowhere near 40K between us. My argument is that you can't just take it away altogether - some children would be at (more) serious risk than they are now.
AND another thing - if you take away child benefit are you also taking away childcare costs? If so, your wage limit for children in certain areas will mean only those in the higher rate bracket could even have children. 20% of the population.
So I put the same question to you - what do you do with the children born under that wage limit?
I would just say that it wouldn't bother me if we personally didn't get child benefit and we are nowhere near 40K between us. My argument is that you can't just take it away altogether - some children would be at (more) serious risk than they are now.
AND another thing - if you take away child benefit are you also taking away childcare costs? If so, your wage limit for children in certain areas will mean only those in the higher rate bracket could even have children. 20% of the population.
In my opinion, I don't see why a married couple with no children should be expected to pay towards another married couple's children.
If you can't afford to have kids, don't have them. All these people moaning about it not being fair, I would love to see how many of them are actually poor, as in can't afford a house or food. I'm not saying don't help these people out, but the rest of them, that still go to the pub, still smoke, still have plasma TVs, still have Sky etc, why should they have all that and expect a handout for their own kids too?
I'd rather work for what I have and be allowed to keep more of it, and make my own mind up as to how I spend it.
My opinion.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ali I think you need to do some research. A nanny can be a damn site cheaper than day care nurseries and in fact the cheapest out of 3 options, a nanny, a child minder and then day nursery.
My wife doesn't work because the cost to put just one child into nursery is extortionate and it would mean that every penny she earnt would be paying for the child care costs meaning she was working for nothing which leaves me as the sole provider for my wife and kids. So whilst I earn an alright amount and pay higher tax we are worse off than a couple earning 20k each. That child tax credit and child allowance money is very much welcome for my wife to have money to spend on the kids. When it goes it will most definitely be missed and changes made (noting we don't have stuff like Sky as it's too expensive yet the council dwellers seem to be able to afford it fine!)
My wife doesn't work because the cost to put just one child into nursery is extortionate and it would mean that every penny she earnt would be paying for the child care costs meaning she was working for nothing which leaves me as the sole provider for my wife and kids. So whilst I earn an alright amount and pay higher tax we are worse off than a couple earning 20k each. That child tax credit and child allowance money is very much welcome for my wife to have money to spend on the kids. When it goes it will most definitely be missed and changes made (noting we don't have stuff like Sky as it's too expensive yet the council dwellers seem to be able to afford it fine!)
Last edited by Bravo2zero_sps; Oct 5, 2010 at 09:29 AM.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 65
From: West Wales
You're not understanding what I actually said. I didn't say remove the benefit and give nothing back, I said remove the benefit and give the total amount saved back, but spread over all wage earners. So rather than pay more tax, to then get some cash back in benefits, just take less tax in the first place.
In my opinion, I don't see why a married couple with no children should be expected to pay towards another married couple's children.
If you can't afford to have kids, don't have them. All these people moaning about it not being fair, I would love to see how many of them are actually poor, as in can't afford a house or food. I'm not saying don't help these people out, but the rest of them, that still go to the pub, still smoke, still have plasma TVs, still have Sky etc, why should they have all that and expect a handout for their own kids too?
I'd rather work for what I have and be allowed to keep more of it, and make my own mind up as to how I spend it.
My opinion.
In my opinion, I don't see why a married couple with no children should be expected to pay towards another married couple's children.
If you can't afford to have kids, don't have them. All these people moaning about it not being fair, I would love to see how many of them are actually poor, as in can't afford a house or food. I'm not saying don't help these people out, but the rest of them, that still go to the pub, still smoke, still have plasma TVs, still have Sky etc, why should they have all that and expect a handout for their own kids too?
I'd rather work for what I have and be allowed to keep more of it, and make my own mind up as to how I spend it.
My opinion.
For those that really need it, there is a genuine need for child benefit.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
So I'd be giving it back to you in the form or lower taxes - so you'd be no worse off..
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 22
From: K
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/1083097.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6078154.stm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...is-413212.html
Last edited by hodgy0_2; Oct 5, 2010 at 09:44 AM.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 65
From: West Wales
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,464
Likes: 0
From: Blackpool, Uk. Destination: Rev Limiter.
What the hell are you on about I pay tax so for each of my 3 young kids I see the child maintenance as money back from all the tax i've paid which the last few years has been a lovely 5 figure sum at the end of every tax year.
So thank you very much I will have some of MY tax money back, not yours or anyone elses
I pay tax so for each of my 3 young kids I see the child maintenance as money back from all the tax i've paid which the last few years has been a lovely 5 figure sum at the end of every tax year.So thank you very much I will have some of MY tax money back, not yours or anyone elses
You may well have paid a five figure tax bill last year, so did many other people so yes, you personally are entitled to think that you are getting back some of your money... great, good on you.
So who's paying the £3166.88 per year to all the single mums with 3 kids out there who have never paid a penny in tax as they were pregnant at 16 because they are getting back their money are they? Yes... you and me are paying some of it, out of our huge five figure tax bills you wanted to slip into conversation. Which incidentally, may not be so huge in the future if we can collectively cut down some of these benefits we keep giving out to slack knickered baby factories.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Sounds harsh then, but in my opinion, people in this situation shouldn't be expecting to have kids until they can afford to look after them.
Guest
Posts: n/a
What the hell am I on about? You need to look at the BIGGER picture here and stop thinking of yourself. The policies are being trialled and put in place to try and turn the country around, not just you!!
You may well have paid a five figure tax bill last year, so did many other people so yes, you personally are entitled to think that you are getting back some of your money... great, good on you.
So who's paying the £3166.88 per year to all the single mums with 3 kids out there who have never paid a penny in tax as they were pregnant at 16 because they are getting back their money are they? Yes... you and me are paying some of it, out of our huge five figure tax bills you wanted to slip into conversation. Which incidentally, may not be so huge in the future if we can collectively cut down some of these benefits we keep giving out to slack knickered baby factories.
You may well have paid a five figure tax bill last year, so did many other people so yes, you personally are entitled to think that you are getting back some of your money... great, good on you.
So who's paying the £3166.88 per year to all the single mums with 3 kids out there who have never paid a penny in tax as they were pregnant at 16 because they are getting back their money are they? Yes... you and me are paying some of it, out of our huge five figure tax bills you wanted to slip into conversation. Which incidentally, may not be so huge in the future if we can collectively cut down some of these benefits we keep giving out to slack knickered baby factories.
Oh and one other thing, i'm only paying the higher rate tax due to all the over time I do which pays nicely but what incentive do I have to do that extra work now when I will be rewarded by my employer on one hand whilst in the other the Government is taking it away faster than I can earn it by way of higher tax and stopping any child benefits. I might as well tell my employer no thanks it's costing me too much for me to do any over time now. Again that is not right, discouraging people from working.
Edit to add the reply to your point on we are all paying for those single teenage mums, yes we are but even with these new rules we will still be paying except the big difference is we will no longer be getting it as well.
So whilst I agree with you saying we shouldn't have to be paying for those single mums that's never going to change so in that case i'd still rather keep my benefits too so at least i'm getting something back from the system and not just the single teenage mums getting it who have never paid into the system!
Last edited by Bravo2zero_sps; Oct 5, 2010 at 10:21 AM.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 65
From: West Wales
Lets hope if you have children they are all planned well in advance.
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 15,029
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in Kent, sniffing some V-Power
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
We waited until we were late 20's, and I had got a good enough job that we could afford them.
We did actually plan it, bought our first house which wasn't suitable for kids, so moved when we decided we would like to start thinking about kids into something bigger. Then waited until we had a big enough income to cover the house and the children.
In my mind, it's like my buying a M5 with every spare penny I have, and then asking for everyone else to contribute to the petrol costs, servicing and insurance because I can't afford it.
People who have children and lose their jobs etc then I do feel very sorry for them, and agree they should be helped out. But the fact there's so many people who think they've got a God given right to be provided for by everyone else annoys me. If you can't afford something yourself, either do something about it (night school, re-train, move jobs etc) or go without.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,575
Likes: 65
From: West Wales
I agree 100% with you there. I think we all agree that its the career unemployed which we are really annoyed about. I just think in some cases (like ours) the child benefit system was essential at the time and was a contributory factor in keeping us out of the town ghetto.
Maybe having a child/children is kind of a job anyway, perhaps the workers subsidise the process of bearing children so that the species can survive, it seems to work for Bees and other animals but us humans are a selfish bunch, I suspect there are a lot of childless couples who have a very nice lifestyle because both can work and they dont have the expense of children, going on two or three foreign holidays a year, expensive wine, nice cars, immaculate house and they begrude parents a few quid extra to help raise the offspring that will look after them in their later years, someone has to breed, it isnt generally a socially irresponsible act.
Sure there are people who rely wholy on the welfare state and cheat the system, there are those who dont pay their fair ammount of tax through either just working for cash at one end or via a clever accountant at the other, there are those that rob, steal, vandalise, abuse and cost endelss resources to chase or keep in prison, these are the villians not a family with a couple of kids getting a few quid extra, if everyone paid their dues and behaved then it wouldnt be an issue, think about it next time you get a few quid off a job "For Cash".
Sure there are people who rely wholy on the welfare state and cheat the system, there are those who dont pay their fair ammount of tax through either just working for cash at one end or via a clever accountant at the other, there are those that rob, steal, vandalise, abuse and cost endelss resources to chase or keep in prison, these are the villians not a family with a couple of kids getting a few quid extra, if everyone paid their dues and behaved then it wouldnt be an issue, think about it next time you get a few quid off a job "For Cash".
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,464
Likes: 0
From: Blackpool, Uk. Destination: Rev Limiter.
Edit to add the reply to your point on we are all paying for those single teenage mums, yes we are but even with these new rules we will still be paying except the big difference is we will no longer be getting it as well.
So whilst I agree with you saying we shouldn't have to be paying for those single mums that's never going to change so in that case i'd still rather keep my benefits too so at least i'm getting something back from the system and not just the single teenage mums getting it who have never paid into the system!
So whilst I agree with you saying we shouldn't have to be paying for those single mums that's never going to change so in that case i'd still rather keep my benefits too so at least i'm getting something back from the system and not just the single teenage mums getting it who have never paid into the system!