Child Benefit Cuts

[fenjer]

I know somebody who basically did just that, 5 kids by three different fathers, kids have never seen their dad(s)

I said to her current partner at the time. Dont you want to get a job, his response. "Why should I", he then totalled up all the benefit they were entitled to claim and were claiming, and it wasnt far off what I was taking home for a 40 hour week job.

Even if you took away their CB it wouldnt convince them to go back to work.

I know there are people out there who do that, but the majority of the cases that we ever get to hear about - the ones in the press etc are not representative of the wider society.

I work in deprived areas with women who have nothing, and aren't getting £40k a year on benefits. They also dont get the support to get back to work, ie affordable childcare, training courses, apprenticeships, and so on. There are so many more barriers to work.

Life on benefits isnt all £40k a year and 3 holidays to Magluf.

/ another derail

[Biker Biggles]

Throughout history all Human societies that lasted(and most higher animal ones)have clubbed together to look after their young.
It says a great deal about how sick our current civilisation is that we even need to debate issues like this.
I blame "theres no such thing as society"Thatcher.

[Specialone]

What does pi55 me off a little bit is my mom didnt have hardly any state help when my dad died in 1978, kids of ages of7 (me), 13,15 and 17 to look after, widows allowance was less than a single parents allowance.

If my mother had access to the financial help that parents have now she would have felt like a millionaire.
We didnt have a pot to piddle in hence my mom held down 3 jobs to go with the £80 a month from my dads leyland widows pension.
So when i here some people complain, i aint got much sympathy tbh.

BTW, Fenjer, you are exactly the type of person who i believe the state should help through your bad times until you get back on your feet, this is what the government is after also, financial help when its needed until your through the tough times.

This should be however, a short term thing not a life long acceptance (not aimed at you btw)
We have a responsiblity to work to finance our way in this world unless your spouse can earn enough for the two of you.

Ive never claimed a penny in any benefit whatsoever, so what i didnt have i dont miss, but i can understand in a way if you have got used to a tasty regular payment from the government and it stops you will miss it.

I'll stop rambling now.

[-Ralph-]

I'm a parent and I bust the 40% tax bracket by a fair margin, so on my salary alone realistically we are going to loose this benefit wherever they draw the line, BUT my wife earns 3 times less than me. So we won't get the benefit, whereas Mr & Mrs Smith earning £43k each, whose overall household income higher than ours, will still get it. I have no objections to loosing the benefit, TBH I won't notice, but Mr & Mrs Smith still getting paid it is wrong. They have fecked up the way they decided to calculate it.

IMO they should have chosen a middle ground based upon household income and said any household over say £50k wouldn't get it. That way I don't get it, neither does Mr & Mrs Smith, and if your over £50k you don't need it, so nobody's really got anything to complain about.

I'm not Tory or Labour, I just approach each policy on merit, so I don't necessarily think those who pay more in should take the same amount out, but I do pay £2200 per month in income tax and NI (higher than you might expect due to taxable benefits such as fuel), then my wife pays another £500 on top of that! Nobody can say that higher earners don't contribute to the system!

[Specialone]

Throughout history all Human societies that lasted(and most higher animal ones)have clubbed together to look after their young.
It says a great deal about how sick our current civilisation is that we even need to debate issues like this.
I blame "theres no such thing as society"Thatcher.


I think your getting confused there through your rose coloured glasses, this country helps the less priviledged a lot more than a large majority of other countries, hence why a lot of residents of these countries try to come here cos they have heard how good it is !!!

I am in favour of helping people but there are too many people intent on taking and taking without giving in return.

In past civilisations do you really think the more wealthy/ better off would keep giving to the poor without anything in return especially if they was fit and well enough for work, no they didnt, they would have them work for them in return for food / lodgings and the people who didnt get off their ass would starve.
So to summarise, in your eyes its ok for some to work hard and do well but they are give it away to the more needy or the lazy in the name of humanity?
Or i have got the wrong idea?

[Specialone]

I'm a parent and I bust the 40% tax bracket by a fair margin, so on my salary alone realistically we are going to loose this benefit wherever they draw the line, BUT my wife earns 3 times less than me. So we won't get the benefit, whereas Mr & Mrs Smith earning £43k each, whose overall household income higher than ours, will still get it. I have no objections to loosing the benefit, TBH I won't notice, but Mr & Mrs Smith still getting paid it is wrong. They have fecked up the way they decided to calculate it.

IMO they should have chosen a middle ground based upon household income and said any household over say £50k wouldn't get it. That way I don't get it, neither does Mr & Mrs Smith, and if your over £50k you don't need it, so nobody's really got anything to complain about.

I'm not Tory or Labour, I just approach each policy on merit, so I don't necessarily think those who pay more in should take the same amount out, but I do pay £2200 per month in income tax and NI (higher than you might expect due to taxable benefits such as fuel), then my wife pays another £500 on top of that! Nobody can say that higher earners don't contribute to the system!

I agree Col and so do the majority of people of this country, it would be more fair this way, especially for decent paid single parents who may earn over £44k but still need the child benefit to help.

[fenjer]

I think your getting confused there through your rose coloured glasses, this country helps the less priviledged a lot more than a large majority of other countries, hence why a lot of residents of these countries try to come here cos they have heard how good it is !!!



This isnt true. I suggest you speak to the Red Cross and ask about asylum seekers before you make sweeping accusations like that. Would you leave a job as a lawyer, doctor, air traffic controller, and so on without the real and present threat of persecution?

I agree not all of them are here for ligitimate reasons, I've seen my fair share being chucked off lorries in lay-bys in europe (my dad was a long distance lorry driver) but if you knew how they had to live - in houses the council have deemed unfit for habitation - you'd not be so quick to jump on that particular band wagon. Go and work with the Red Cross for the day, see for yourself.

In fact BBC3 on Thursday at 9 - Kids With Guns. I'll bet the Red Cross will have a say in that. Bet it's an eye opener for some.

Gosh - I'm very good at jumping on the soap box tonight - sorry.

[yorkie_chris]

Gosh - I'm very good at jumping on the soap box tonight - sorry.

Ey don't apologise for having an opinion

I don't :mrgreen:

[Specialone]

This isnt true. I suggest you speak to the Red Cross and ask about asylum seekers before you make sweeping accusations like that. Would you leave a job as a lawyer, doctor, air traffic controller, and so on without the real and present threat of persecution?

I agree not all of them are here for ligitimate reasons, I've seen my fair share being chucked off lorries in lay-bys in europe (my dad was a long distance lorry driver) but if you knew how they had to live - in houses the council have deemed unfit for habitation - you'd not be so quick to jump on that particular band wagon. Go and work with the Red Cross for the day, see for yourself.

In fact BBC3 on Thursday at 9 - Kids With Guns. I'll bet the Red Cross will have a say in that. Bet it's an eye opener for some.

Gosh - I'm very good at jumping on the soap box tonight - sorry.

I agree there are some genuine cases but there are also a huge amount of economic migraints claiming to be asylum seekers.
Why are we still seeing people turn up in the camps in france from relatively safe non EU countries? Purely for economy reasons.

BTW dont believe everything you hear about the houses these people are offered, some are crap granted but you should see some of houses not too far from me that have been allocated for this purpose, far from unihabitable.
If their countries are so bad why travel to the furthest one away from them to seek asylum, surely the nearest safest country would suffice ??

Anyway, this is about child benefit not asylum so i will get off my bandwagon.

[timwilky]

Ey don't apologise for having an opinion

I don't :mrgreen:

Aye lad, we have noticed.

[lily]

I have no problem with help from the government to people who general need that help. The main problem is that for some people the drive isn't there to do it anything to get of the hand out system because they would be worse off. Admittedly the media make it worse with their headlines of "40k a year benefit salary" and these are extreme case's I understand that. But it is the whole benefits system as a hold that needs a shake up, Drew has quite often said that if you are getting a lot of benefits you should be doing community work in order to "earn" that money.

I'm a firm believe that everybody lives to what they earn. If me and drew had a joint income of 100k a year, I'm sure we would have outgoings to match this. Our CEO got hit with the increase in tax in April this year and saw his april pay drop by 2k net from his march pay, and was talking that it would be a tight month, (and this is somebody on a 6 figure salary close to a 7 figure). When our bonus got cut 2 years ago some surveyors of our company where in uproar as their 40k+ bonus they needed to clear the credit cards and overdrafts etc. I still believe that this cut of child benefit should be on a household income rather than individual.

[Specialone]

Lily i think there lies some of the problem, the £80 or whatever it is, is included in peoples total budget for the month /year and its the same as we would miss this amount as well cos like you say, we live to our means.

[Biker Biggles]

I think your getting confused there through your rose coloured glasses, this country helps the less priviledged a lot more than a large majority of other countries, hence why a lot of residents of these countries try to come here cos they have heard how good it is !!!

I am in favour of helping people but there are too many people intent on taking and taking without giving in return.

In past civilisations do you really think the more wealthy/ better off would keep giving to the poor without anything in return especially if they was fit and well enough for work, no they didnt, they would have them work for them in return for food / lodgings and the people who didnt get off their ass would starve.
So to summarise, in your eyes its ok for some to work hard and do well but they are give it away to the more needy or the lazy in the name of humanity?
Or i have got the wrong idea?

Yes there are some p1ss taking migrants and yes there are some p1ss taking lazy scroats out there and I have no problems with the authorities dealing with them.However,you shouldnt base the nations economic and social policy on a Daily Mail type extract of reality.Most people are good citizens who want a better life just like you and me,and most of us are better off pulling together rather than getting over excited about a few bad apples.That means getting away from the "I put this much in therefore I want that much out"mentality and thinking about what is best for the whole society.That means investing in the young and the more needy if you can afford it.It doesnt have to mean supporting the lazy.

[Specialone]

Yes there are some p1ss taking migrants and yes there are some p1ss taking lazy scroats out there and I have no problems with the authorities dealing with them.However,you shouldnt base the nations economic and social policy on a Daily Mail type extract of reality.Most people are good citizens who want a better life just like you and me,and most of us are better off pulling together rather than getting over excited about a few bad apples.That means getting away from the "I put this much in therefore I want that much out"mentality and thinking about what is best for the whole society.That means investing in the young and the more needy if you can afford it.It doesnt have to mean supporting the lazy.

Fair comment, your previous post didnt come over that way :)

Believe or not im quite a generous person, im always giving to street collections etc so recognise that some people need help.
But its the scotes as you call them that ruin it for everyone else, you think the government would need to make these tough choices if only the people who genuinely need the money claimed it? i doubt it.

But it does sour the taste when you do read in the papers about a couple having 8+ kids and the council having to knock two semi's into one to house them and neither work but still keep banging kids out, it does happen unfortunately.

[Biker Biggles]

Im all for clamping down on the scotes,but I just dont believe there are enough of them to save us all that much money.Its almost like the Daily Mail uses the extreme examples to wind us up to believe most of the country behaves like that.Ive always found "most of the country" to be thoroughy decent people who I would be happy to help out and support if I could and they needed it.
Sentimental old b&stard I may be.

[fenjer]

BTW dont believe everything you hear about the houses these people are offered, some are crap granted but you should see some of houses not too far from me that have been allocated for this purpose, far from unihabitable.

BTW I've been in them. I've seen them. And it is up to each local authority as to where it puts the asylum seekers. Which is then funded by the Government and the Home Office.

I do see and understand the point about seeking asyulm in the first safe country they reach which is why the UK only has less than 3% of the worlds asylum seekers.

[Bibio]

Throughout history all Human societies that lasted(and most higher animal ones)have clubbed together to look after their young.
It says a great deal about how sick our current civilisation is that we even need to debate issues like this.
I blame "theres no such thing as society"Thatcher.

hahahaaaa and thats coming from Maggie Thatcher the school milk snatcher.

[yorkie_chris]

It says a great deal about how sick our current civilisation is that we even need to debate issues like this.

It seems perfectly fair and normal to debate who "the needy" are and how much they need.

[Biker Biggles]

It seems perfectly fair and normal to debate who "the needy" are and how much they need.

Absolutely,but I was referring to our attitudes to the next and future generations with that comment.Kids are the future of any society so we all need to contribute to their development.Ive heard many comments this week around this debate starting with "I dont have kids so why should I pay for----"
Its a symptom of the me me me society and it doesnt work.
Why contribute to the Police budget when Im not being robbed,the NHS when Im not sick,Defence when Im not fighting anyone or the next generation when I dont have kids?All silly questions when you think about them.

[yorkie_chris]

People don't like contributing to squander is the simple answer.

Why contribute to the police budget when they will only prosecute me if I hit a burglar who is robbing me?
Why contribute to the NHS to pay for vain idiots boob jobs and wierdos sex changes when I have to pay privately to get my teeth fixed?
Why contribute to defend a 3rd world sh*thole that isn't even our empire worth keeping any more?

Now none of that may be a true representation of reality... but it's enough to make people bitter if there is any element of truth in it. Which there most certainly is!

[Owenski]

People don't like contributing to squander is the simple answer.

Why contribute to the police budget when they will only prosecute me if I hit a burglar who is robbing me?
Why contribute to the NHS to pay for vain idiots boob jobs and wierdos sex changes when I have to pay privately to get my teeth fixed?
Why contribute to defend a 3rd world sh*thole that isn't even our empire worth keeping any more?

Now none of that may be a true representation of reality... but it's enough to make people bitter if there is any element of truth in it. Which there most certainly is!

That really gets my blood boiling, when I pay my tax etc but then standing at the chemist/dentist counter Im asked if I work or not. "why yes I do, I guess that makes me exempt from paying for treatment/medication"
"No sir, unfortunatly that means you need to pay... again so we can give it to you"
"really? so I pay twice? whats the relevance of if I work or not then?"
"Oh sir, those who dont work get free treatment/medication"
"So they dont work... so dont contribute to the tax fund... then they dont pay for the medication, yet I do contribute and you charge me for it?"
"Nail on the head sir, brilliant isnt it"
"NOT FOR ME ITS F*CKING NOT!!!"

[L3nny]

That really gets my blood boiling, when I pay my tax etc but then standing at the chemist/dentist counter Im asked if I work or not. "why yes I do, I guess that makes me exempt from paying for treatment/medication"
"No sir, unfortunatly that means you need to pay... again so we can give it to you"
"really? so I pay twice? whats the relevance of if I work or not then?"
"Oh sir, those who dont work get free treatment/medication"
"So they dont work... so dont contribute to the tax fund... then they dont pay for the medication, yet I do contribute and you charge me for it?"
"Nail on the head sir, brilliant isnt it"
"NOT FOR ME ITS F*CKING NOT!!!"

And it's not just the lazy scrotes themselves it's their armies of kids, who have a little snivel most likley caused by their poor diet and the unsanitary conditions in which they live. :smt070

[Owenski]

Come to any doctors/A&E etc in Yorkshire and take a look around over out of 10 people in any waiting room, 2 will be OAP (which is fair enough they've done their time paid they're taxes etc they've earnt the free care). 7 will... well they wont be in work gear put it that way. and the remaining 1 is you ;)

[Luckypants]

That really gets my blood boiling, when I pay my tax etc but then standing at the chemist/dentist counter Im asked if I work or not. "why yes I do, I guess that makes me exempt from paying for treatment/medication"
"No sir, unfortunatly that means you need to pay... again so we can give it to you"
"really? so I pay twice? whats the relevance of if I work or not then?"
"Oh sir, those who dont work get free treatment/medication"
"So they dont work... so dont contribute to the tax fund... then they dont pay for the medication, yet I do contribute and you charge me for it?"
"Nail on the head sir, brilliant isnt it"
"NOT FOR ME ITS F*CKING NOT!!!"That's a little rich coming from a bloke expecting a child. Your wife should now benefit from free prescriptions and dentistry (http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/941.aspx?CategoryID=68&SubCategoryID=161) as will your child when it is born. You have completely missed the point of BB's posts that the aim of tax / benefits is for the good of society and seem to have fallen into the trap of 'I pay in, so I should get something out' - well you will be. BB put it better in this post (http://forums.sv650.org/showpost.php?p=2386927&postcount=113) and this post (http://forums.sv650.org/showpost.php?p=2387447&postcount=119) than I can.

Now I agree with the NHS not funding daft stuff like boob jobs, but that is a management issue. The fundamentals of a centrally funded NHS is sound and something we can be justly proud of. The 'management problem' is that they are trying to give everyone what they want and seem to have a problem saying no to weird requests. Boob jobs for cosmetic reasons (NB not all boob jobs are cosmetic) and gastric bands being examples.

[Owenski]

free prescriptions and dentistry for pregnanty women is no more a gimic than those "love film" type cons
Shes pregnant for 9months, if she (which she does) look after her teeth in the first place then she'll recive nothing more than a free check up (£16.50 saving). The prescriptions, currently she has none and (fingers crossed I dont see my ass for this but...) I'd like to think that again because she looks after herself barring any serious illness she'll have no need to see a doctor during her term.

Fair enough the "kids eat free" but give them a chance they havn't even earnt anything yet so how could they contribute? They're like the mirror of the OAP's - they'll pay it back in good time once they're old enough to work. If they like me, have nothing more serious than a burn through out their pre-adult lives then they'll end up paying it back within their first taxed year then happily continue paying for others to recieve free care for the rest of their working lives.

[Owenski]

Just read you're 2 BB posts (no idea how you did that single view thing but I like the reduction of post clutter).

The first of her posts makes some good sense, and Im in the middle ground a sort of "me us everyone" rather than a "me me me", as in I would happily contribute for my own, my family and then everyone who cannot themselves" healthcare/wellfare etc.. but Im still not happy about giving a penny towards the layabouts, of which no joke the majority of people around here seem to be.

I will gladly accomodate anyone who thinks I exagerate, I'll take a day off work and we can take a trip to the local park, the local pubs, the local gp/hospital and in 1 day I can promise you you'll see where Im coming from. (Looking towards other west yorkshire folk here to back me up ;))

[yorkie_chris]

and gastric bands being examples.

Here's another bloody rich one...
Too fat... well you obviously don't need benefits if you can afford to support that girth then...

Few months down the line... "I'm starving!" ... "Oh look, you're thin ... GET A JOB!"

[yorkie_chris]

I will gladly accomodate anyone who thinks I exagerate, I'll take a day off work and we can take a trip to the local park, the local pubs, the local gp/hospital and in 1 day I can promise you you'll see where Im coming from. (Looking towards other west yorkshire folk here to back me up ;))

Yeah I think it's just us who are so bitter about it due to a surplus of dole dossers around here.

[Bibio]

i'm not complaining about the NHS or benefits (my wife and i have cost the tax payer a rather substantial amount) state in this country. but i do object to the 'no gooders' scrounging and making a living out of it. i wish i knew how some of these people make 40k+ on benefits, if truth be told i make half that but i still make ends meat and put a little in a cookie jar each week for larger purchases. its not fun and games having to live out a 'begging bowl' but i have always been a tight git so i manage.

[Owenski]

In fairness Bibio I've said it before an I'm happy to say it again, you're in the situation where you're doing the best for the ones you love and you need support from others to be able to do that. I have no problem been envolved in contributing towards giving people like yourselves that oportunity (obviusly I put my family and myself first but still you're a close 3rd ;)) but when so frequently I see people I wouldnt **** on if they were on fire "living it up" while Im selling off possesions left right and centre just to set up a better life for my family.. well that upsets me mildly.

[Bibio]

i dont think the unemployment figures are that bad to be honest. as YC pointed out earlier the gov are spending a lot more money on other useless things like war and piece and disaster funds to other country's. if you want to blame anyone blame the gov. oooohhhh and i would rather pay the 'low life' to sit on their arzez all day drinking/jabbing than have them committing crime to pay for their habits. there are maybe 4% of the total population that do nothing and sit scrounging. small price to pay in my book. if you dont like where your tax is going then think of it a charity.

[yorkie_chris]

The crackheads commit crime to pay for their habits anyway?

IMO hang drug dealers and have those who use recreational drugs sweep the streets in bright pink uniforms. 2 birds with one stone.

[L3nny]

The crackheads commit crime to pay for their habits anyway?

IMO hang drug dealers and have those who use recreational drugs sweep the streets in bright pink uniforms. 2 birds with one stone.

Or just legalise drugs and tax them like booze and fags (which are just as bad for you)

Problem solved.

Although that's slightly off topic

[yorkie_chris]

I've never robbed your gran to pay for my habit of drinking 15 pints and smoking myself daft on a Friday night.

[Owenski]

no, but you've pulled a few ;)

[Bibio]

no, but you've pulled a few ;)

:winner:

[timwilky]

On the issue of gastric bands.

The wife asked her G.I. consultant about a gastric band as the liver specialist had said she was too obese for a transplant.

His response.

Nobody came out of Belsen obese.

Unfortunately I had to explain that one to her. She was already mad at the hepatologist for calling her a beast.

[punyXpress]

Hey Tim: are all the consultants down your way wannabe comedians or right hard barstewards? Either way it's not how to treat a patient.
Back to thread ( almost )
Are they also going to put a stop to Eastern Europeans claiming for sprogs that are still back home and will never ( hopefully ) come here ?

[beabert]

Why should us rich people pay for the lower classes the breed.


Because someone needs to do the lower paid work and menial jobs to keep the economy ticking over. Same principle as if everyone was rich no one would do anything and everything would collapse, the poor serve the rich.

[neilf]

Because someone needs to do the lower paid work and menial jobs to keep the economy ticking over. Same principle as if everyone was rich no one would do anything and everything would collapse, the poor serve the rich.

But we are paying a large amount of the lazy ones a good living not to work, so well in fact they have no intention or need to find work.

[BigBaddad]

If the unwashed had jobs, they wouldn't have time to breed.

[blue curvy jester]

Some of those who know me Know that my politics are somewhere left of lenin and as such may not be supprised that i think that tax rates are too low in general, if child care was properly funded from this incresed tax take then the low paid would take home more of their cash and working would pay off more than being on benifits ( as would raising the bottom 0 rated tax thresholds but thats for another day) this would reduce the slackers part of benifits bill on its own in a positive feedback loop

But i do come from generally conservative family,with a small c ( which in S-wales makes you have 3 heads )
that belives that if you work hard to beter yourself then the rewards should follow,

In which case can someone please explain to me how its fair that i will now not be able to look at a new job or a promotion to move my carrer on as if i get £300 a yr more i will lose £2500 per annum on top of the £1000 i will lose next year in tax credits.

What this does is say to people in middle /senior roles there is no point you working harder cos we'll **** you over as we need a ceiling to keep most people under


I accept the retoric that says we all have to share the burden and higher earners can afford it but the anomoly in this system is Bigger than a blairs ego ( ie the 80,000 2 earners / 45,000 single earners)

( my belief is that they have got their figures wrong by basing them on the south east where most people are in 2 working people households therefore the anomoly is not so great once one of you gets over the £45,000 threshold , this is not so much the case in other parts of the country where people who fill that catogory also tend to be a bit old fasioned and like to have the primary carer at home till the kids are at least school age )

[TamSV]

points well made...

I can't disagree with a single part of that, and I hadn't considered the people just below the threshold - good point.

I'd be happy to pay more tax..no really. If it takes less well-off people out of tax altogether I'd support that.

I've worked hard for everything I've got but I didn't do it in a bubble. Society has presented opportunities and I've chosen to take them so I "owe" for that. I don't feel I deserve even more back in return and I'll be happy if I never need to claim a single benefit.

BUT, the benefits system is so complex that, unless you live or work in it, you don't have a chance of understanding it. This lack of understanding gets filled with the Daily Mail type stories and then the system risks losing the support of the people.

I don't think anyone is getting rich on benefits but if the system was clearer we would maybe all be able to see that.