# Child benefit cuts:



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

One million households will receive letters from the UK tax authority this week about losing child benefit.

Households where at least one person earns more than £50,000 will have the benefit effectively reduced or stopped.

*Sorry but i had to add this thread as well.*


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> One million households will receive letters from the UK tax authority this week about losing child benefit.
> 
> Households where at least one person earns more than £50,000 will have the benefit effectively reduced or stopped.
> 
> *Sorry but i had to add this thread as well.*


Well much as I hate to agree with the government on *anything* If you are on over 50k will you really miss the child benefit?


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

you are on top form this morning Janice


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Not sure how I feel about this TBH, £50,000 is quite a high threshold so I don't see how they would really miss it


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

I'd be quite happy to be affected


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

Luz said:


> Well much as I hate to agree with the government on *anything* If you are on over 50k will you really miss the child benefit?


That was my initila thought but then it does say if ONE parent is earning more than £50,000 if two parents earn £25,000 they each pay less tax so would be better off if that makes sense than one person earning 50k and getting taxed greatly. Whilst I would agree that someone on 50k doesn't need it as much when Child Benefit was brought out I thought it was available to EVERYONE regardless of earnings and some may rely on that regular income.

I don't have kids so I have no idea of amounts but I know my parents made great use of it and often when the money came in mum took us shopping for school clothes or shoes as during the month they'd struggle.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

About time too!!!

And roll on the new amendments to only paying benefit for the first 2 kids -that one can't come in quick enough either!!!!!


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Trouble with this idea is if both work and earn just under 50k each I dont think they will lose it,that sounds unfair to me,correct me if I am wrong:001_smile:


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

I'd also say that if the wage earner needs to travel on motorways to get to work they aren't going to be best pleased when the cost of living jumps up 

Seriously though the cost of food, petrol, taxes and general living costs are rising I don't think its fair to take that benefit parents rely on so heavily for their children. Even someone in a well paid job will find that finances are tight and if they are earning that much they are working hard for it and deserve that much.


----------



## skip (Sep 25, 2011)

Well i dont think people making 50k will really miss it,i think there's something sadly wrong if you cannot live on 50 k, but then the other voice in my head is asking if they pay their taxes etc why shouldnt they get it too


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

MoggyBaby said:


> About time too!!!
> 
> And roll on the new amendments to only paying benefit for the first 2 kids -that one can't come in quick enough either!!!!!


Agreed on that one


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

They shouldnt be getting any benefits period if they earn fifty grand a yr even if its just one person, and thats the familys only income, hardly a pittance..


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

BeyondReach said:


> They shouldnt be getting any benefits period if they earn fifty grand a yr even if its just one person, and thats the familys only income, hardly a pittance..


Many families with BOTH parents working hardly manage £50k jointly a year so there is no need for anyone on £50k & above to require assistance from the state.


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

MoggyBaby said:


> Many families with BOTH parents working hardly manage £50k jointly a year so there is no need for anyone on £50k & above to require assistance from the state.


yea, and if they are handing out cash to those people, no wonder they "cant" afford to pay elderly and disabled properly.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

I still can't believe as many as 1 million people will get letters. 

Where are all these over 50k jobs people are on about?  links to jobs please


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

only problem is , if both parents earn 49K so a joint income of 98K ..they still get it..now that is unfair !!

where as if only one person is working and earning 50k it stops


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

How much is family benefit?:001_smile:


----------



## Waterlily (Apr 18, 2010)

x PIXIE x said:


> I still can't believe as many as 1 million people will get letters.
> 
> Where are all these over 50k jobs people are on about?  links to jobs please


And if you times a million by the benefits amounts, thats a sh1t load of money, wasted to those that do not need it.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

paddyjulie said:


> only problem is , if both parents earn 49K so a joint income of 98K ..they still get it..now that is unfair !!
> 
> where as if only one person is working and earning 50k it stops


That the thing! If I were on 50k right about now I'd be taking an extra long lunch break and asking the boss to deduct it from my wages


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

suewhite said:


> How much is family benefit?:001_smile:


"For the eldest child who qualifies 16.50

(Lone parents with protected rights may continue to get 17.55 for the eldest child.)

For each other child who qualifies 11.05"

HM Revenue and Customs: How much Child Benefit do I get?


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

x PIXIE x said:


> I still can't believe as many as 1 million people will get letters.
> 
> Where are all these over 50k jobs people are on about?  links to jobs please


It does seem like a lot of people doesn't? I wonder what they do?



paddyjulie said:


> only problem is , if both parents earn 49K so a joint income of 98K ..they still get it..now that is unfair !!
> 
> where as if only one person is working and earning 50k it stops


That's a good point


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

x PIXIE x said:


> I still can't believe as many as 1 million people will get letters.
> 
> Where are all these over 50k jobs people are on about?  links to jobs please


*Well they do say all women are sitting on a gold mine.:lol::lol:*


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> "For the eldest child who qualifies 16.50
> 
> (Lone parents with protected rights may continue to get 17.55 for the eldest child.)
> 
> ...


Is that a week? wow thats worth starting a family for  I can't believe that an amount as small as that could make any difference to someone earning 50k a year!


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

suewhite said:


> How much is family benefit?:001_smile:


20.30 for first or only child. 13.40 for each subsequent child. 
'The measure will affect people earning more than £42,475 a year. That means people in the 40% income tax bracket, and those whose taxable earnings are above £150,000, who therefore pay the new 50% additional rate of income tax.

The proposal means that if both parents earn less than £42,475, they will continue to receive child benefit. But families with one main earner on, for example, £43,000, will see their benefit stopped.'
BBC News - Q&A: Child benefit changes

This is from BBC news but it's January 2012 so may be out of date.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *Well they do say all women are sitting on a gold mine.:lol::lol:*


The only gold under my bed just drains the batteries and costs money


----------



## grumpy goby (Jan 18, 2012)

x PIXIE x said:


> I still can't believe as many as 1 million people will get letters.
> 
> Where are all these over 50k jobs people are on about?  links to jobs please


Id say most are in or around London where cost of living is alot higher and so wages get london weighting to even out. Earning 50k but working in london could lose you £3k to £5k on commuting expenses, not to mention higher rent costs, house prices etc.

50k in the midlands is a much higher wage compared to 50k in London/surrounding areas.

(I know people who will very much suffer from this, earning 50k, 3 young kids - wife doesnt work cos they couldnt afford childcare costs for 3 youngsters, lose £3.5k to commuting costs, a modest 3 bed house at a ridiculous price due to the area he lives)


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Blimey if you have 3 kids thats £146.40 a month and people moan about pensioners getting £200 heating allowance a year


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

When we were young and the kids were small we relied on Child Benefit sometimes. When youngest was at 6th form he didn't get EMA because we were on over 30k between us, so he got the Child Benefit to pay for his transport/lunches etc.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

JANICE199 said:


> "For the eldest child who qualifies 16.50
> 
> (Lone parents with protected rights may continue to get 17.55 for the eldest child.)
> 
> ...


If these figures are correct then it works out at £167.27 a month for 3 kids.



Luz said:


> 20.30 for first or only child. 13.40 for each subsequent child.
> 
> This is from BBC news but it's January 2012 so may be out of date.


If these are correct then it is £201.10 a month for three kids.



suewhite said:


> Blimey if you have 3 kids thats £146.40 a month and people moan about pensioners getting £200 heating allowance a year


Both of the above values almost equal in a month what pensioners get for their winter fuel allowance.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

This will affect us, yes we will survive without it but it will affect what we can spend.

Remember over 40k is taxed at 40%. We are the younger generation where our first 2 bed flat cost us 140k. Where we had our son young we never had the chance to save a large deposit so had to have a 100% mortgage. We have debts from that time we are only just catching up on. Student loan had to be paid back, car was needed for hubs to be able to work and at one stage he was doing up to 500miles a week so it needed to be reliable, so car loan. Our 2nd place we now own is a 3 bed terrace ex council house that had seen 50 years worth of chain smoking, had old metal windows, god knows how old the boiler was  yet this is what we can afford in the SE with hubs wages. Home improvements have been done slowly and we have needed to take loans for these. 

I have only recently given up work as i was still needed to help pay for these things. My hubs leaves at 7am and may not walk in until after 10pm, after 9 years of not seeing each other and having no family time we thought enough is enough we need to see each other! 

I really hate the attitude of why on earth should they get anything, when "they" contribute a hell of a lot to the system  

I do not have designer hand bags, i do not get my nails done. We are a normal family who has a lot of out goings like my car needs £900 work done this month. Living these days is expensive, why we might not need to count every penny we still have to watch the pounds !


----------



## dexter (Nov 29, 2008)

MoggyBaby said:


> About time too!!!
> 
> And roll on the new amendments to only paying benefit for the first 2 kids -that one can't come in quick enough either!!!!!


here here!


----------



## grumpy goby (Jan 18, 2012)

Is this also for single parents cos if so thats grossly unfair....

Personally, as one without kids, i think its unfair purely cos of "actual" earnings... A couple earning 25k each earns more than a single parent, say, who earns 50k - just due to the tax brackets which wouldnt be considered. The couple on 25k a year each earns 4k a yr more after tax than the individual...


----------



## chichi (Apr 22, 2012)

Luz said:


> When we were young and the kids were small we relied on Child Benefit sometimes. When youngest was at 6th form he didn't get EMA because we were on over 30k between us, so he got the Child Benefit to pay for his transport/lunches etc.


Same here......I think they have stopped EMA now too.....well there was talk of it at the college last year. That was another unfair benefit......more surprising was that only 3 out of 20 odd young people on the course DIDNT get EMA at some level. Those on EMA also got bus passes...... help with kit.....uniform and educational visits. We got NOTHING ...seems very wrong. We struggled too as the kit and uniform was nearly 300 pound.


----------



## skip (Sep 25, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> About time too!!!
> 
> And roll on the new amendments to only paying benefit for the first 2 kids -that one can't come in quick enough either!!!!!


That might make the lazy breeding machines actually think!! 
Actually the government could make them work as pensioners instead of the pensioners who have worked and brought up their children without scrounging because some of them will never be able to pay back anything near what they have taken from the hard working honest people


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> This will affect us, yes we will survive without it but it will affect what we can spend.
> 
> Remember over 40k is taxed at 40%. We are the younger generation where our first 2 bed flat cost us 140k. Where we had our son young we never had the chance to save a large deposit so had to have a 100% mortgage. We have debts from that time we are only just catching up on. Student loan had to be paid back, car was needed for hubs to be able to work and at one stage he was doing up to 500miles a week so it needed to be reliable, so car loan. Our 2nd place we now own is a 3 bed terrace ex council house that had seen 50 years worth of chain smoking, had old metal windows, god knows how old the boiler was  yet this is what we can afford in the SE with hubs wages. Home improvements have been done slowly and we have needed to take loans for these.
> 
> ...


I agree with this.
50K before tax is not that much in places like London where rent can be a lot of money a month. There are 2 bedroom flats around here going for £1200 pcm. Also with being taxed at 40%, you're only really getting just over half of your wage a month. Factor in fuel, food, life neccessaties and you're not really left with much. I think child benefit should be paid to any parent whatever the wage and I do think it's unfair to stop paying out to someone because they earn 50k. What I do think should come into place is stopping the benefit after a certain number of children, say over 3.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

skip said:


> That might make the lazy breeding machines actually think!!
> Actually the government could make them work as pensioners instead of the pensioners who have worked and brought up their children without scrounging because some of them will never be able to pay back anything near what they have taken from the hard working honest people


Make them work when they're pensioners???? :lol: :lol:

We can't get the lazy feckers to work now so there's no bl**dy chance of them doing it in 40 yrs time!!!!!!! 

But I like the way you think!!! :thumbsup:

.


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> One million households will receive letters from the UK tax authority this week about losing child benefit.
> 
> Households where at least one person earns more than £50,000 will have the benefit effectively reduced or stopped.
> 
> *Sorry but i had to add this thread as well.*


I should think so too!

I hear day after day from really well paid people who use their child benefit for their hair, their nails, their spa day!!!

Even in my days the benefit went straight into the kids accounts and they learnt to budget with it!


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

la468 said:


> I agree with this.
> 50K before tax is not that much in places like London where rent can be a lot of money a month. There are 2 bedroom flats around here going for £1200 pcm. *Also with being taxed at 40%, you're only really getting just over half of your wage a month*. Factor in fuel, food, life neccessaties and you're not really left with much. I think child benefit should be paid to any parent whatever the wage and I do think it's unfair to stop paying out to someone because they earn 50k. What I do think should come into place is stopping the benefit after a certain number of children, say over 3.


Technically that's not true (I know as I am in the 40% tax bracket). You pay standard tax on anything up to £35k, anything after £35k is taxed at 40%. I am not saying its great, as it annoys me too (my bonus always gets hit with this).

I recall reading (but this may be wrong) that they are phasing in two things, first the no/reduced child benefit for households where someone earns over £50k (so like has been said, wouldnt affect a household where two people earn less yet the combined is more). I think they were then talking about phasing in where the household income is more than £60k, which will affect more people.

Not sure though as it was a few months ago i read that.

I always thought we had child benefit to ensure a mother had some money for the kids when in the days of it mainly being the man earning he may not have always given her money - but I could be very wrong there!


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

WelshOneEmma said:


> Technically that's not true (I know as I am in the 40% tax bracket). You pay standard tax on anything up to £35k, anything after £35k is taxed at 40%. I am not saying its great, as it annoys me too (my bonus always gets hit with this).
> 
> I recall reading (but this may be wrong) that they are phasing in two things, first the no/reduced child benefit for households where someone earns over £50k (so like has been said, wouldnt affect a household where two people earn less yet the combined is more). I think they were then talking about phasing in where the household income is more than £60k, which will affect more people.
> 
> ...


That'll be the same as the NHS being there for SICK people, once upon a time, whereas now it also provides breast implants, plastic surgery and many other non-life threatening treatments because it is 'my human rights to have this......'!!!


----------



## grumpy goby (Jan 18, 2012)

northnsouth said:


> I should think so too!
> 
> I hear day after day from really well paid people who use their child benefit for their hair, their nails, their spa day!!!
> 
> Even in my days the benefit went straight into the kids accounts and they learnt to budget with it!


to be fair, i know plenty of people on low wages/not working at all, with kids, having these things done. I also know plenty of people on better wages who cant afford it. Im on OK money (i hit the 40% barrier) and even without kids i couldnt afford it! I only get my hair done every 6-8 months or so! And dont get my nails done at all as an un necessary expense. Again, its probably a location thing...


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

People on that much money shouldnt need child benefit anyway. 
Are they cutting the child benefit to 2 kids? I havent heard that, i have heard they will be cutting tax credits? 

I dont see why people are so against others getting child benefit for more than 2 kids..ESP the people who actually WORK for a living, dont claim childcare off the state or any other costs. That little help goes along way imo. 
I do agree to cutting benefits for the people who laze about and do jack all day. 

I think this government have got things so badly wrong, cant wait until they are voted OUT!


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

People on benefits don`t get Child Benefit. On paper they do - then this amount is taken from their benefit. 
Not a lot of people know that.


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

grumpy goby said:


> to be fair, i know plenty of people on low wages/not working at all, with kids, having these things done. I also know plenty of people on better wages who cant afford it. Im on OK money (i hit the 40% barrier) and even without kids i couldnt afford it! I only get my hair done every 6-8 months or so! And dont get my nails done at all as an un necessary expense. Again, its probably a location thing...


I'm the same. Me and hubby are on a joint income of £66k and we still struggle each month. The pet insurance etc are always paid and some months we may have things with the cars etc (we are lucky we have 2 cars and a motorbike), yet my neighbours next door where only he works (and when he feels like it at that) are ALWAYS buying new things. OK, some may be on ebay and second hand but not long ago they spent £300 on a 'pedigree' puppy he suddenly decided he wanted. I have no idea how they do it!


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

harley bear said:


> People on that much money shouldnt need child benefit anyway.
> Are they cutting the child benefit to 2 kids? I havent heard that, i have heard they will be cutting tax credits?
> 
> I dont see why people are so against others getting child benefit for more than 2 kids..ESP the people who actually WORK for a living, dont claim childcare off the state or any other costs. That little help goes along way imo.
> ...


Your against the higher wage earners getting CB even though it still does make a difference , yet think its ok for them to fund you wanting a larger family 

We won't have anymore than the two we have as we wouldn't afford it!


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

Maybe the SE should be except


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Pointermum said:


> Your against the higher wage earners getting CB even though it still does make a difference , yet think its ok for them to fund you wanting a larger family
> 
> We won't have anymore than the two we have as we wouldn't afford it!


It still makes a difference to higher earners? Umm Im sure it does you could get a nice holiday from that couple of grand.
Fund me wanting a larger family? My husband works damn hard to support his family, we dont take money from any government pot to help look after our kids etc ..i seriously dont see how we are being 'funded' to have a larger family.

I dont agree with loads of kids being paid for if the family are on benefits but considering there are hundreds of thousands of families who work damn hard and are barely making more than people on benefits..then no i dont think they should lose the child benefit..after all these people are actually working for a living.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> Households where at least one person earns more than £50,000 will have the benefit effectively reduced or stopped


Good!!!


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

Bout time too, OH and I would LOVE to be affected by this!

And yes i think it should be cut for more than 2 children as well, children are a choice nowadays.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

harley bear said:


> It still makes a difference to higher earners? Umm Im sure it does you could get a nice holiday from that couple of grand.
> Fund me wanting a larger family? My husband works damn hard to support his family, we dont take money from any government pot to help look after our kids etc ..i seriously dont see how we are being 'funded' to have a larger family.
> 
> I dont agree with loads of kids being paid for if the family are on benefits but considering there are hundreds of thousands of families who work damn hard and are barely making more than people on benefits..then no i dont think they should lose the child benefit..after all these people are actually working for a living.


My husband works darn hard also  yet it's fine for more and more to be taken from us  He works at LEAST 11hr days very often much more, as well as being tied to his blackberry when his not there. Even on his day off he had to go on a conference call. Never mind it took him 6 years and tens of thousands of pounds to be able to train to be in his profession !


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

50K is a lot, but tbh I don't like the thought of child benefit anyway. It doesn't sit right with me that even if you are back working fulltime you get money towards the care of your kids 

Realistically I can understand to top up maternity pay etc, lets face it from working full time to whatever maternity pay is can be a huge drop for people so I think child benefit or some substitute there would be great in the first 6 months-1 year off with baby.

I prefer the things like free nursery hours etc I think that's way better. I don't see really why people should get £20 a week to help bring up their kid unless they've fallen on hard times. Kids are a choice, no?


----------



## chichi (Apr 22, 2012)

The tax payers are just getting a bit of extra tax back to help support their kids... is the way I look at it. Its those that dont pay tax.....never have and unlikely to for the foreseeable I have a problem with....why should they get CB in abundance and the likes of HB get begrudged CB by some when her OH works and pays tax.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Pointermum said:


> My husband works darn hard also  yet it's fine for more and more to be taken from us  He works at LEAST 11hr days very often much more, as well as being tied to his blackberry when his not there. Even on his day off he had to go on a conference call. Never mind it took him 6 years and tens of thousands of pounds to be able to train to be in his profession !


What about all those families who work long hours who are earning minimum wage? Are they not deserving of a little extra?..considering they could sit on their @rse all day and probably be better off for doing so!

I can see both sides of the argument..but i dont see why the people who work but are in jobs that dont pay particularly well should have what little extra help they do get taken away from them. I hate to see families working all the hours god sends and still be worse off than dole dossers!


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

chichi said:


> The tax payers are just getting a bit of extra tax back to help support their kids... is the way I look at it. Its those that dont pay tax.....never have and unlikely to for the foreseeable I have a problem with....why should they get CB in abundance and the likes of HB get begrudged CB by some when her OH works and pays tax.


And thats how i should have worded my original post


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

What about all those people who work long and difficult hours, go on call, have dangerous jobs that ensure other people are safe, pay loads of tax and don't get anything back because we haven't got kids, or we're not old enough for heating allowances etc, etc. I hope I use the NHS a helluva lot when I get older, because I've been to the doctors once in nearly four years for a persistent and painful cough, I detest the doctors or hospital so avoid them as much as possible. I've never claimed benefits except for 13 weeks before I started my first job. What about rebates for those who pull their weight and cost nothing, or do we just have to see other people squabble over their cut of the pot from contributions made from those earning??


----------



## grumpy goby (Jan 18, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> What about all those people who work long and difficult hours, go on call, have dangerous jobs that ensure other people are safe, pay loads of tax and don't get anything back because we haven't got kids, or we're not old enough for heating allowances etc, etc. I hope I use the NHS a helluva lot when I get older, because I've been to the doctors once in nearly four years for a persistent and painful cough, I detest the doctors or hospital so avoid them as much as possible. I've never claimed benefits except for 13 weeks before I started my first job. What about rebates for those who pull their weight and cost nothing, or do we just have to see other people squabble over their cut of the pot from contributions made from those earning??


Sorry, we are entitled to diddly squat 

My OH isnt even earning an income atm as he is self employed and starting up on his own, he pays himself enough to buy our months food and thats it. After the clinic costs, insurances and license to practice he earns less than minimum wage, but entitled to nothing from the government. I have paid NI and Income tax since I left school, without a single month off, but dont get to see any of it come back.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

grumpy goby said:


> Sorry, we are entitled to diddly squat


Probably not even entitled to an opinion, never mind eh


----------



## chichi (Apr 22, 2012)

And what about those that do keep their kids by working.....if they stop getting assistance....as in CB. ....they might stop having kids....that will just leave those on benefits able to "afford" to have families

I rarely use the NHS because I have private insurance but I dont expect a rebate for NI contributions paid.

We all need to put in the pot and I certainly dont begrudge young working families a bit of CB.....in fact thats one place I am happy to see our taxes being spent......along with anything that helps the elderly and disabled to have a better quality of life.


----------



## maisey (Oct 26, 2010)

Shouldn't this really be the same with dogs if you can't afford a child don't have one? 
I know there are a lot of nice people out there who want a family and to provide everything but there are way to many people who have a child for the money rather than the love of the child. 
I am 21 years old earning minimum wage doing stupid hours and personally wouldn't want a child till I could provide everything for it. Half of the people I went to school with have children and still manage to go out drinking every weekend??? I can't afford that


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

harley bear said:


> What about all those families who work long hours who are earning minimum wage? Are they not deserving of a little extra?..considering they could sit on their @rse all day and probably be better off for doing so!
> 
> I can see both sides of the argument..but i dont see why the people who work but are in jobs that dont pay particularly well should have what little extra help they do get taken away from them. I hate to see families working all the hours god sends and still be worse off than dole dossers!


Those who have children, who work but on a low wage i don't begrudge them getting extra help and the gap between them and those on benefit should be widened .But i also don't see why tax payers should have to support people lifestyles in wanting large families, so after 2 children that's it.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

They seem to have worked it out in an illogical manner. If two parents work on 30k each they will be on 60k (ie more than the family with one 50k salary). Will they be penalised? Why not just means test them? Take into account that where the mother works too there is more than likely a lot of money going out in child care etc...


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

chichi said:


> And what about those that do keep their kids by working.....if they stop getting assistance....as in CB. ....they might stop having kids....that will just leave those on benefits able to "afford" to have families
> 
> I rarely use the NHS because I have private insurance but I dont expect a rebate for NI contributions paid.
> 
> We all need to put in the pot and I certainly dont begrudge young working families a bit of CB.....in fact thats one place I am happy to see our taxes being spent......along with anything that helps the elderly and disabled to have a better quality of life.


I'm sure the Private healthcare my husband gets through his work is a taxable benefit, yet surely the more people who have it saves the NHS money , yet your taxed to try and not use the NHS


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

I personally think the benefits system is a disgrace, people who rely on benefits rather than working should be given food/clothing/energy vouchers only. Far too often the money gets spent on other things, not what it's meant for. Yes it's demeaning for people to have to spend vouchers rather than money, but it's demeaning for people who contribute quite a lot to the pot to then see people boasting about what they've bought, knowing full well that person relies 100% on benefits. 

The thing that gets me wound up about paying loads of tax is the thought that someone who can't be bothered to get off their @rse, maybe pops out a few kids, and yet they manage to fund their lifestyle, how? That's not a sweeping generalisation of everyone who claims benefits, or even anyone who relies solely on benefits, but there are too many cheats who leave a sour taste in the mouth for those who pay their taxes and don't claim a penny back, and for those I'd imagine who claim what they need to and spend it on what it's meant to go on.


----------



## chichi (Apr 22, 2012)

maisey said:


> Shouldn't this really be the same with dogs if you can't afford a child don't have one?
> I know there are a lot of nice people out there who want a family and to provide everything but there are way to many people who have a child for the money rather than the love of the child.
> I am 21 years old earning minimum wage doing stupid hours and personally wouldn't want a child till I could provide everything for it. Half of the people I went to school with have children and still manage to go out drinking every weekend??? I can't afford that


Sadly having kids is a "career choice" for some young people.....I see it a lot. Some get caught out and make the best of the situation but others clearly choose to be single mothers by not preventing pregnancy. I dont understand it at all.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Maybe the government should take a leaf out the Chinese governments book when it comes to kids and only allow 1 child per family. Lets face it NO ONE can truly 'afford' a child. 
These kids will grow up to be the next generation who will be paying into the pot when were old and unable to do so..they will be our doctors, nursers, cleaners, shop assistants etc etc If people stopped having kids and there were less people in the next generation to put in the pot then maybe the government will only allow 1 elderly person per household to receive medical treatment :blink: Then there would be something to moan about :tongue_smilie:


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Pointermum said:


> I'm sure the Private healthcare my husband gets through his work is a taxable benefit, yet surely the more people who have it saves the NHS money , yet your taxed to try and not use the NHS


Yet if your OH were to have an accident he could still walk into ANY hospital in the uk and receive free treatment.


----------



## loubyfrog (Feb 29, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> My husband works darn hard also  yet it's fine for more and more to be taken from us  He works at LEAST 11hr days very often much more, as well as being tied to his blackberry when his not there. Even on his day off he had to go on a conference call. Never mind it took him 6 years and tens of thousands of pounds to be able to train to be in his profession !


Are you sure we're not married to the same man Pointermum....your oh sounds just like mine

We will probably be one of those households recieving a letter in the next few weeks...my hubby is in the wage bracket to cut the C.B that we get for our daughter.

Was a bit shocked to read all the comments...My husband has worked his nuts off for the last 10 yrs to get where he is today and all those yrs ago he started on a measly salary but knew with hard work that it would pay off.
I have only ever worked part time as i didnt want anyone caring for my Daughter apart from us as she's our responsibility so ive always worked in school time as hubby works away a lot.

With our wages combined....especially with all the tax that comes off no way do we live a live of luxury!!!

We do not live above our means at all ( unless you call having takeaway once a week living the highlife) but still find times hard...we only have one car and live in a small house.We are like every other family that are struggling along with everyone else because of the rising costs of everything and anything.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

harley bear said:


> Maybe the government should take a leaf out the Chinese governments book when it comes to kids and only allow 1 child per family. Lets face it NO ONE can truly 'afford' a child.
> These kids will grow up to be the next generation who will be paying into the pot when were old and unable to do so..they will be our doctors, nursers, cleaners, shop assistants etc etc If people stopped having kids and there were less people in the next generation to put in the pot then maybe the government will only allow 1 elderly person per household to receive medical treatment :blink: Then there would be something to moan about :tongue_smilie:


The trouble now i think is we are getting to the 2/3rd generation of kids having kids willing to sit on benefit never adding anything to the system only taking. While this continues things can only get worse. So going off topic i think the government has to cap the amount of children allowed under benefits.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> This will affect us, yes we will survive without it but it will affect what we can spend.
> 
> Remember over 40k is taxed at 40%.


*£6500 is tax free
THEN upto £37,000 is 20%
ABOVE £37,000 to £150,000 is 40%*

A £50,000/year earner will take home £35,656 (71%)

But someone on £50K will also use pensions and ISA's to pay into to reduce their tax burden, someone on £15K cant do that....


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Pointermum said:


> The trouble now i think is we are getting to the 2/3rd generation of kids having kids willing to sit on benefit never adding anything to the system only taking. While this continues things can only get worse. So going off topic i think the government has to cap the amount of children allowed under benefits.


I totally agree with you! 100% This is why work needs to 'pay' for people so people who work are actually better off working! Until the benefit system goes through a major overhaul the lazy feckers will choose to sit on benefits!

There is a family of 5 not far from us who are on benefits, they smoke and drink and they have the biggest telly i have ever seen, touch screen pc the works...the kids go to school like they have been dragged through a hedge and filthy! They are getting £1300 per month plus heating rebates in the winter.
The amount of money they get is a hell of alot more than someone working minimum wage to support a family! Its disgusting!


----------



## lily74 (Jan 13, 2012)

I think 50k a year isnt alot especially if a family have a high mortgage. Food, petrol, etc are so high in this country that 50k isnt the wage it once was.

I think anyone earning over 100k a year should get the CB cut would be a fairer thing.

But then you have the arguement that people who earn more pay more tax therefore why should they not have a share of the pot?

Its all unfair and will continue to be unfair.

If wages were not so poor in this country, good jobs scarce and living costs so high we wouldnt have the need for CB we all could afford to support ourselves and our children without benefits.

My daughters at uni but hasnt yet got a job so we dont get child benefit for her now but she costs more now than she did as a child!


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

lily74 said:


> I think 50k a year isnt alot especially if a family *have a high mortgage*. Food, petrol, etc are so high in this country that 50k isnt the wage it once was.


If they chose to have a big mortgage thats their choice, what you suggest is them getting CB to subsidise their house purchase, which is almost housing benefit for the rich(er)!


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

Colliebarmy said:


> If they chose to have a big mortgage thats their choice, what you suggest is them getting CB to subsidise their house purchase, which is almost housing benefit for the rich(er)!


EXCUSE ME  we will be affected by this , we live in the SE so we don't have much option on house prices. Seen as we are suppose to be rich according to half of you why do we live in a terrace ex council house bought at full market value privately not of the council. We couldn't get a cheap rent council house years ago when when we lived 3 of us in a one bed flat and market rent was only about £100 cheaper than getting a mortgage but we could be asked to move on every 6 months !


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> EXCUSE ME  we will be affected by this , we live in the SE so we don't have much option on house prices. Seen as we are suppose to be rich according to half of you why do we live in a terrace ex council house bought at full market value privately not of the council.
> 
> *We couldn't get a cheap rent council house years ago *.......when when we lived 3 of us in a one bed flat and market rent was only about £100 cheaper than getting a mortgage but we could be asked to move on every 6 months !


So you had the money for a deposit and sufficient income to qualify for a mortgage, which will fall over its term and end....council rents only ever rise*....and never end.....

** 7% last april *


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Plebob said:


> Both me and my oh earn a "decent" wage but I can assure you that the £135 a month we receive for our two would be very much missed. Childcare, uniforms, trips etc... It all adds up. My child benefit certainly does not go on hair and nails.


and is one of you on over £40,000 a year?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

personally i think they should stop ALL family allowance But give the money back to those who work in way of a tax allowance, say so much per child, they used to do that in the 60's and 70's if my memory serves me correct..

Now aint that just made me popular?  NOT


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

Colliebarmy said:


> So you had the money for a deposit and sufficient income to qualify for a mortgage, which will fall over its term and end....council rents only ever rise*....and never end.....
> 
> ** 7% last april *


We managed a 5% one due to the sale of our flat but our house is now worth at least 10k less than what we paid for it and we have spent 20k doing it up to make it liveable (new windows, boiler, kitchen as it had NO units bar the one with the sink in ) SO i'll take your 7% rent rise over losing 30K in 5 years 

3 Bed private rent in my area is around £800+ a month and my sisters 4 bed council is 97 a week .... poor council tenants


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Pointermum said:


> We managed a 5% one due to the sale of our flat but our house is now worth at least 10k less than what we paid for it and we have spent 20k doing it up to make it liveable (new windows, boiler, kitchen as it had NO units bar the one with the sink in ) SO i'll take your 7% rent rise over losing 30K in 5 years


And thats no forgeting that council houses or social housing come with NO repair bills! You central heating breaks down, you roof springs a leak or your ceilings collapse and you are faced with massive bills if you own your home


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

grumpy goby said:


> to be fair, i know plenty of people on low wages/not working at all, with kids, having these things done. I also know plenty of people on better wages who cant afford it. Im on OK money (i hit the 40% barrier) and even without kids i couldnt afford it! I only get my hair done every 6-8 months or so! And dont get my nails done at all as an un necessary expense. Again, its probably a location thing...


 Berkshire is such a cheap area to live in and of course the recession is having no effect on us at all...


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> We managed a 5% one due to the sale of our flat but our house is now worth at least 10k less than what we paid for it and we have spent 20k doing it up to make it liveable (new windows, boiler, kitchen as it had NO units bar the one with the sink in ) SO i'll take your 7% rent rise over losing 30K in 5 years
> 
> 3 Bed private rent in my area is around £800+ a month and my sisters 4 bed council is 97 a week .... poor council tenants


Nothing like some good old real statistics. Lets be honest the further south you get the worse it gets generally  people are seemingly luckier to be in a position to get a mortgage now but it's because most like you work their arse off and go without to do so. My mum pays 1.5K a month on a two bed bungalow mortgage wise here. Rent is pretty similar to yours too and it doesn't get you something with that decent a garden or parking either 

Anyone wanting a mortgage is likely to be crippled, we're aiming to save about 20K in three years to try and get on the ladder but its frightening just how much mortgages can fluctuate. Our current tax brackets suck IMO and should be on more of a sliding scale with incentives to make it worthwhile bringing in and spending extra money with the economy how it is.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

suewhite said:


> Trouble with this idea is if both work and earn just under 50k each I dont think they will lose it,that sounds unfair to me,correct me if I am wrong:001_smile:


I can remember this being discussed some time ago, and yes, I think you are right - if both parents earned say £48K they would keep it - but one parent earning more than £50K and they would lose it.

If this is the case, then the situation most definitely needs to be looked at again.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

I must admit I am always shocked and saddened by the blatent disrespect for those on a good income. 

i do take my hat off to those parents who do earn so much to provide for their children. They work every hour they can and bring home a wage I truly believe they deserve. if we are talking about fairness why is it fair that someone who works 8 hours behind a checkout at sainsburys for minimum wage is more entitled to support than a solicitor who has a huge student loan, debts relating to qualification and registration working 12 hours a day on high pressure caseloads and stressful day to day activities. 

The only difference i can see is that people begrudge the solicitor for earning that amount of money yet they are unwilling to see how long it took that solicitor to get to that wage or how much stress is involved or even that they never see their kids as they consider earning money is crucial to their childrens upbringing. Neither parent is in the wrong they both work for a living but each have different financial committments. A solicitor may pay a higher mortgage but why shouldnt they have that reward for working hard? why should we feel it neccessary to penalise them for wanting a good life?  anyone is capable of earning £50,000 but not everyone can be bothered to push themselves. I am certain that if I wanted the stress and hassle I could get a £50,000 a year job but I choose to take the easy life and be a secretary to someone who earns that kind of money instead. 

Sadly in this country people would rather those who can't be arsed to work get every single hand out whilst those who realise their potential, work for it and strive for the very best are penalised.

I do believe a lot of it is jealousy. My ex used to really resent my dad as he could afford holidays, new cars, nice furniture. He said to me "Its not fair we both work 9-5 yet he earns more than me and can afford more than we can" I couldn't believe with such a stress-free job he could compare my dads job/stress and lifestyle to his. Its jealousy pure and simple. If you want to earn £50,000 a year you must accept the responsibility, stress and pressure that goes with it. I feel that as CB is not means tested as such it should be fair to all. Its not fair to say that because one family earns this much they can afford to forfeit it, there are many other factors to be considered.

I echo GoldenShadows opinion and Sleeping Lion, why should thsoe of us who don't have kids fund those who CHOOSE to have kids and KNOW the cost involved? CB should consist of clothing vouchers and credits for afterschool clubs or activities that will benefit the kids not as a buffer to the parents bank accounts. benefits are benefits but at some point people have to accept there isn't a bottomless pit of support and we need to take responsibility for ourselves. If any of us rely so much on £20 a week then should be be knocking kids out left right and centre? children are a privaledge not a right and therefore should be the responsibilty of the parents to fund them not the taxpayer.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> We managed a 5% one due to the sale of our flat but *our house is now worth at least 10k less* than what we paid for it and we have spent 20k doing it up to make it liveable (new windows, boiler, kitchen as it had NO units bar the one with the sink in ) SO i'll take your 7% rent rise over losing 30K in 5 years


but would you be moaning if the value had risen 10%?....course not, at least you had the choice.....

It could be argued that council house rents generate a profit (either short or long term), that profit goes into council funds for the benefit of all, including private home owners, mum and dad must have paid £100,000 in rent over the 50 years they rented, where did that go cos it wasnt spent on the house...(a 1950's build, by 2010 it had had only new windows and central heating).


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> but would you be moaning if the value had risen 10%?....course not, at least you had the choice.....
> 
> It could be argued that council house rents generate a profit (either short or long term), that profit goes into council funds for the benefit of all, including private home owners, mum and dad must have paid £100,000 in rent over the 50 years they rented, where did that go cos it wasnt spent on the house...


Some families, hard working ones on low incomes don't stand a cat in hell's chance of ever getting a council house!

Because
1. They have been sold off in the seventies and eigthes and never rebuilt!
or
2. Those that are left are offered on a points system, leave school drop a baby a year, don't bother working make yourself homeless and you are guaranteed to get near to the top of the list!

Mortgage and interest repayments , upkeep repairs and keeping any private home in order would cost five times the 100k you speak of!

For some people buying IS the ONLY option!


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

> The only difference i can see is that people begrudge the solicitor for earning that amount of money yet they are unwilling to see how long it took that solicitor to get to that wage or *how much stress is involved or even that they never see their kids as they consider earning money is crucial* to their childrens upbringing


My dad was a long distance lorry driver in the 50's and 60's "tramping" the UK, if he got home once every three weeks we were lucky, he never achieved a solicitors wage....


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

DT said:


> Some families, hard working ones on low incomes don't stand a cat in hell's chance of ever getting a council house!
> 
> Because
> 1. They have been sold off in the seventies and eigthes and never rebuilt!
> ...


Many councils, seeing the right to buy erode stocks and not generate income for them, took the step of setting up Housing associations, and handing over their housing stock (and tenants) simply because tenants then couldnt buy, so your 1st point is irrelevant, and HA's DO build.

As for the allocation system, anyone making themselves homeless MAY be offered a hostel or B&B but local authorities are not legally obliged to help.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

Colliebarmy said:


> but would you be moaning if the value had risen 10%?....course not, at least you had the choice.....
> 
> It could be argued that council house rents generate a profit (either short or long term), that profit goes into council funds for the benefit of all, including private home owners, mum and dad must have paid £100,000 inrent over the 50 years they rented, where did that go cos it wasnt spent on the house...(a 1950's build, by 2010 it had had only new windows and central heating).


It's always a huge risk buying we are lucky interests rates are now lower than when we bought but the could have easily of been higher who's to know ! My mum lost her house when the interest rates went stupid last time to 15% odd! Plus if we need care when we are elderly our homes will be sold to pay for it. So will we really be better off .


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Pointermum said:


> It's always a huge risk buying we are lucky interests rates are now lower than when we bought but the could have easily of been higher who's to know ! My mum lost her house when the interest rates went stupid last time to 15% odd! Plus if we need care when we are elderly our homes will be sold to pay for it. So will we really be better off .


*I intend to put my house into trust.That way they won't be able to get their hands on it.*


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> Many councils, seeing the right to buy erode stocks and not generate income for them, took the step of setting up Housing associations, and handing over their housing stock (and tenants) simply because tenants then couldnt buy, so your 1st point is irrelevant, and HA's DO build.
> 
> As for the allocation system, anyone making themselves homeless MAY be offered a hostel or B&B but local authorities are not legally obliged to help.


I don't see my 1st point as being irrelevant, the sale of houses shrank the (then- prior to HA) greatly, and the income (albeit meagre due to hefty discounts) was untouchable by the councils - by the time they were allowed to use it it had depreaciated due to inflation. I take it you parents, working hard as they did back then were well able to purchase their house at a huge discount? That single one act , right or wrong, put more people on the housing ladder back then then could have ever dreamed of being able to buy a house! And NO ONE who was wearning a wage was exempt, it you were paying rent the councils were obliged to give you a mortgage, albeit at a higher rate then the building societys!

And on your second point the Hostels and the B&B's that these families are put into are nothing more that a 'legal' way up the housing ladder! And they will get a council house a lot faster then a hard working family on minimum wage with no or few children!


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

I dont think it should be cut at all, why should it? why not cut it off people on full benefits who have never bloody worked?! 

We private rent and will never ever get a council house, even when we were very nearly homeless (thank god my mum found this place) they werent interested as we both worked, they would put me in hostal (19 and pregnant at the time) but it would cost me £600 a month! seeing as i only got £609 a month working 45hrs a week then i couldnt afford to go to work or eat! as they wouldnt pay the costs toward it or even help as i worked. 

I would miss my child benefit, it pays school shoes/clothes/pays for school trips/ dinner money sometimes It shouldnt be in the form of vouchers at all. People will abuse whatever they are given, they will sell them for cash instead As many people sell milk vouchers instead of using them


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

For those who don't know the history of child benefit this is quite interesting

The Cabinet Papers | The Beveridge Report and child benefit

It was originally started just after the II World War to ease poverty and encourage more births. Ok people can struggle financially but is there really genuine poverty anymore? Should child benefit simply be scrapped all together?


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

DoodlesRule said:


> For those who don't know the history of child benefit this is quite interesting
> 
> The Cabinet Papers | The Beveridge Report and child benefit
> 
> It was originally started just after the II World War to ease poverty and encourage more births. Ok people can struggle financially but is there really genuine poverty anymore? Should child benefit simply be scrapped all together?


I *really* like the free nursery hours kids get. I think its fab to get them socialising with kiddies their own age before school age etc. It helps parents out and its not compulsory, but optional. I would far rather see more of those types of things and have CB scrapped completely. Even making more use of things like Healthy Start vouchers.


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

i think child benifit should be cut to all  not just some.
and if it is kept it should go into kids accounts for their future.
not to parents accounts,its not for parents to pay for sundries.
they choose how many kids to have therefore they can afford them 
we are expecting to lose my youngest sons.
but we have put his into a account for his future he is autistic


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

Colliebarmy said:


> My dad was a long distance lorrydad did driver in the 50's and 60's "tramping" the UK, if he got home once every three weeks we were lucky, he never achieved a solicitors wage....


No because he CHOSE that job the same way pointermum CHOSE to have a mortgage you so want to argue about. Some of these people affected by the cuts CHOSE to go to law school, med school and chose the career path and why shouldn't they? They worked hard who are we to begrudge them for that?


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

noogsy said:


> i think child benifit should be cut to all  not just some.
> and if it is kept it should go into kids accounts for their future.
> not to parents accounts,its not for parents to pay for sundries.
> they choose how many kids to have therefore they can afford them
> ...


I agree going to college/university, learning to drive or moving into a first home is all very expensive. I think if CB was put into an account for the first 18 years of life it would help, but it should also be controlled, so they don't waste it as soon as they are out. It may even help cut those on benefits later if restrictions were placed on it


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

DoodlesRule said:


> For those who don't know the history of child benefit this is quite interesting
> 
> The Cabinet Papers | The Beveridge Report and child benefit
> 
> It was originally started just after the II World War to ease poverty and encourage more births. Ok people can struggle financially but is there really genuine poverty anymore? Should child benefit simply be scrapped all together?


Just because _you_don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!

■The proportion of children living in poverty has risen considerably in the last 30 years. In 1968 one in ten children lived in poverty (1.4 million children). By 1995 it was one in three (4.3 million children).
■The UK has proportionally more children in poverty than most rich countries.
■All political parties have signed up to the goal of ending child poverty by 2020 and to the 2010 Child Poverty Act enshrining this in law.
■In 2010/11, 2.3 million children were living in poverty in the UK.
taken from
Child poverty in the UK | Joseph Rowntree Foundation


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

x PIXIE x said:


> No because he CHOSE that job the same way pointermum CHOSE to have a mortgage you so want to argue about. Some of these people affected by the cuts CHOSE to go to law school, med school and chose the career path and why shouldn't they? They worked hard who are we to begrudge them for that?


Don't worry no one will chose to do those jobs soon as it's going to cost them at least 60k to do 3 years at uni but that's a whole another thread  and for most jobs that 3 years at uni is a stepping stone to another 3 years of training to get qualified like my hubs. To then have it all thrown in their faces and told they are lucky to have a mortgage and dare to have kids that are expensive to keep


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> Don't worry no one will chose to do those jobs soon as it's going to cost them at least 60k to do 3 years at uni but that's a whole another thread  and for most jobs that 3 years at uni is a stepping stone to another 3 years of training to get qualified like my hubs. To then have it all thrown in their faces and told they are lucky to have a mortgage and dare to have kids that are expensive to keep


Way to make me feel enthusiastic about my life, lol


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

LostGirl said:


> I dont think it should be cut at all, why should it? ............ (19 and pregnant at the time).................I would miss my child benefit, it pays school shoes/clothes/pays for school trips/ dinner money sometimes


Your signature:


> Owner to-
> zeb and Bear the muttfaces
> foxy the pussycat
> and just a few ratties and one hammy
> new to the zoo- Olive, Theo and Pudding the ferrets


Here's a thought - if you didn't have so many pets then you wouldn't need child benefit. You decided to get pregnant (pregnancy is always avoidable). Why should I pay for your children when you are perfectly capable of spending money on a menagerie? I paid for my kids. I paid for them to go to private schools. I paid for private health care. They were my choice to have and my responsibility to look after - nobody else's. If you can't afford to have kids then don't have them - and certainly don't expect anyone else to subsidise you. :mad5:


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Firstly I would LOVE to kknow where exactly all these 50k jobs are...secondly i would love to know how everyone could have them 

High earners work hard yes, and they may have taken out student loans...which may i ad most of these student loans hardly ever get paid back in full also the loan payments are taken out before tax so there would be less tax paid on the wage. 

These high earners will more than likely have a whacking great pension when they retire..a doctor for example will retire on no less than 80k so im sorry but i have no sympathy for them losing cb. How about the families who have worked their fingers to the bone doing all hours god sends and they cant even afford to pay a pension so will end up with a big fat fcuk all when they retire. 

Why should child benefit be paid into an account for a kid of 18 to get his/her hands on and blow on booze and rubbish? Its best spent on what they need why they are growing up. SOME parents abuse the cb yes, but there are a hell of alot of families that use it for its actual purpose.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> Your signature:
> 
> Here's a thought - if you didn't have so many pets then you wouldn't need child benefit. You decided to get pregnant (pregnancy is always avoidable). Why should I pay for your children when you are perfectly capable of spending money on a menagerie? I paid for my kids. I paid for them to go to private schools. I paid for private health care. They were my choice to have and my responsibility to look after - nobody else's. If you can't afford to have kids then don't have them - and certainly don't expect anyone else to subsidise you. :mad5:


Your snobbery astounds me :blink:


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

I would actually like to apologise for my comment about people on over 50k not needing child benefit. It was a gut reaction and I didn't take into account the fact that life is a lot more expensive in the London/Home Counties radius. My niece earns 90k a year and her husband is probably on a similar wage. They are quite well off but nothing compared to what they would be if they were on the same wage up here. They pay a fortune in mortgage, travel and childcare. OK they maybe wouldn't miss the £100 a month or whatever but they have paid a lot of money into the pot!
As for council houses, I'm sorry but having bought an ex council house (from a private seller so at the going rate) and looking at neighbours who rent - a council house is a gift! It means you can afford to spend the money you save on all sorts of luxuries that those who 'chose' to buy can't. And in my region, as in so many areas in the UK, those of us who work, are married and not on benefits have no hope of getting a council or housing association house as they go to single mums, families on benefits, ex cons and the like.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Your snobbery astounds me :blink:


What is snobbish about expecting people to take responsibility for themselves?


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> What is snobbish about expecting people to take responsibility for themselves?


Private this, private that! If people work to pay for their kids then whats your problem? You dont have to have private schooling and healthcare to have the right to have a family.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Firstly I would LOVE to kknow where exactly all these 50k jobs are...secondly i would love to know how everyone could have them
> 
> High earners work hard yes, and they may have taken out student loans...*which may i ad most of these student loans hardly ever get paid back in full also the loan payments are taken out before tax so there would be less tax paid on the wage. *
> 
> ...


I just think it should be scrapped. Healthy start vouchers are there for those who need them. Not that it stops trillions of people coming into where I work and attempting to buy chocolate etc with them.

My Mum earns nearly 50K. And actually she will get a state pension when she retires nothing special. She was a stay at home Mum to us three kids and worked her way up to where she is.

As for the bolded bit you can't have it both ways..! It gets taken out before tax, so that they get MORE money to pay off the loan. If its after tax the loan is paid back slower and the money goes into the tax pot. Either way the earner loses the money, its just which pot it goes into.

And if you remember correctly, it is only in the last decade or so that tuition fees have actually come into place. My brother earns 45K aged 26, I think its pretty safe to say that he will pay off his 18K loan at some point in his life.

You either want your kids to have a degree and be capable of a higher paid job, or you don't. If you do then seriously you are going to have to quit the whinging about student loans because your kids are gonna need a hell of a bigger loan than I do (triple price tuition fees for a start). Maybe you should ban your kids from going to uni, we obviously can't afford to have such debts which are never going to be paid back can we? Lead by example, Harley Bear


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

harley bear said:


> Firstly I would LOVE to kknow where exactly all these 50k jobs are...secondly i would love to know how everyone could have them
> 
> *High earners work hard yes, and they may have taken out student loans...which may i ad most of these student loans hardly ever get paid back in full also the loan payments are taken out before tax so there would be less tax paid on the wage. *
> 
> ...


I'm not sure where you got that from as it's untrue 


> Student loan repayment deductions are made from the net pay after tax and national insurance has been calculated and deducted but the calculation of the deduction is based on the gross pay (before tax and NI) for the pay period. No deduction will be made if the statutory threshold is not exceeded.


AND they are not interest free like they way sold, i'm sure my husbands worked out at around 7% interest !

Also they only don't pay it back if they never get a good enough job from it , most likely the "mickey mouse" degrees some do :tongue_smilie: Although today's graduates are having a very though time 

My husbands company have only just bought in a pension scheme in the last year only because the government are making it compulsory next year anyway and it won't be anything like what people think the private pensions suck !


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

GoldenShadow said:


> I just think it should be scrapped. Healthy start vouchers are there for those who need them. Not that it stops trillions of people coming into where I work and attempting to buy chocolate etc with them.
> 
> My Mum earns nearly 50K. And actually she will get a state pension when she retires nothing special. She was a stay at home Mum to us three kids and worked her way up to where she is.
> 
> ...


Get down from your high horse! i have no problem with student loans just pointing out a fact! The loan payments come out before tax so the over all tax on the wage is lower so you are taxed less. FACT.

And ill have you know we have already started saving for our kids to go to uni if they wish...so stick that in your pipe


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> I'm not sure where you got that from as it's untrue
> 
> AND they are not interest free like they way sold, i'm sure my husbands worked out at around 7% interest !
> 
> ...


Yeah I believe the interest rate fluctuates too, I don't think it stays at whatever it was when you took the loan out like they were talking about when contemplating bringing in grad tax..!! I don't really know how paying back works as I'm still a student, I know I need to earn over 15K before anything happens and I certainly don't now.

I feel like I'm pretty much on the same page as you here PM, and I feel like we could be wasting our time a bit?


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Get down from your high horse! i have no problem with student loans just pointing out a fact! The loan payments come out before tax so the over all tax on the wage is lower so you are taxed less. FACT.
> 
> And ill have you know we have already started saving for our kids to go to uni if they wish...so stick that in your pipe


I don't smoke love, bad for your health and costs a bomb 

As Pointermum has just found out for us, student loan repayments actually come out AFTER tax, so your research there was kinda flawed huh?

I quite like the view from my high horse. Think I'll sit tight


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Private this, private that! If people work to pay for their kids then whats your problem? You dont have to have private schooling and healthcare to have the right to have a family.


No - you just rely on other people paying for them. I didn't - I think it was my choice to have kids so I paid for them. Child benefit is a subsidy. No more, no less. If you can't afford to have kids without it then don't have kids. Is that simple enough?

Nobody has a "RIGHT" to have a family without the "RESPONSIBILITY" of looking after them. Sadly, it's people with your attitude who think that everyone has 'rights' but doesn't want to accept the responsibilities that go with it. It's why loads of teenagers get pregnant - to get jumped up the housing queue for subsidized accommodation. Yet people who actually work and try to do it for themselves and who actually are responsible for their own way of life can't get places to live.

That's not snobbery - it's realism.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Its patently obvious that not every family needs CB ( royalty, film stars. etc?) and also, CB is counted for some other benefits, so in effect its lost

it should be done away with and the personal tax allowances should be increased to take wage earners below £20K out of paying tax, wage earners over £60k should pay 45%....


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> No - you just rely on other people paying for them. I didn't - I think it was my choice to have kids so I paid for them. Child benefit is a subsidy. No more, no less. If you can't afford to have kids without it then don't have kids. Is that simple enough?
> 
> Nobody has a "RIGHT" to have a family without the "RESPONSIBILITY" of looking after them. Sadly, it's people with your attitude who think that everyone has 'rights' but doesn't want to accept the responsibilities that go with it. It's why loads of teenagers get pregnant - to get jumped up the housing queue for subsidized accommodation. Yet people who actually work and try to do it for themselves and who actually are responsible for their own way of life can't get places to live.
> 
> That's not snobbery - it's realism.


Hate to agree with you 

I don't think CB should exist after this thread. You want a baby? Go make one and pay for it yourself. I have no intention of having kids before I've been in a grad job a couple of years. 1) I'd need decent savings to even successfully have a family, 2) that's how long it will take me to get a mortgage and 3) I would like to have a decent job before the whole maternity leave thing, do not want to be looking for grad employment with no experience because I was having kids instead, seriously don't need that to hold me back when its dog eat dog like it is now.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> No - you just rely on other people paying for them. I didn't - I think it was my choice to have kids so I paid for them. Child benefit is a subsidy. No more, no less. If you can't afford to have kids without it then don't have kids. Is that simple enough?
> 
> Nobody has a "RIGHT" to have a family without the "RESPONSIBILITY" of looking after them. Sadly, it's people with your attitude who think that everyone has 'rights' but doesn't want to accept the responsibilities that go with it. It's why loads of teenagers get pregnant - to get jumped up the housing queue for subsidized accommodation. Yet people who actually work and try to do it for themselves and who actually are responsible for their own way of life can't get places to live.
> 
> That's not snobbery - it's realism.


Actually my husband works his @rse off to support his family so yes this household does work!
If people only had kids who were on a good enough wage to send the kids to private school and private healthcare etc etc then there would just be a nation of inbreds.....:blink:


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Colliebarmy said:


> Its patently obvious that not every family needs CB ( royalty, film stars. etc?) and also, CB is counted for some other benefits, so in effect its lost
> 
> it should be done away with and the personal tax allowances should be increased to take wage earners below £20K out of paying tax, wage earners over £60k should pay 45%....


And then all the 60K earners **** off abroad and we are left with mostly manual workers. In case you hadn't noticed here in the UK, we are now a luxury good/service industry, we cannot afford to lose the high earners, we need to keep them here.

I had a lecture from the CEO of Talk Talk yesterday, she said they intend to keep call centres out of the UK because it is 1/3 the cost, and it means they can offer jobs in the UK that people WANT to do, and which are more highly skilled, ie. can make use of all the grads we are churning out and have no jobs for.


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

We have a joint salary of more than £40k (less than 50k, it changes depending on my work as i am self employed)

I would never *ever *say we are hard up or poor but we certainly aren't rich, work just as hard as anyone else for what we have, living in the South East my mortgage would make your hair curl and neither of us have much of a pension to speak off.

I love the inference that if you are on more than £40k you have the life of riley  I really sympathise with hard working people struggling on less especially those living in expensive parts of the country but with tax and increased costs of living in some parts there could very well be people moaning about how well off the over 40kers are and in reality they could have more disposable income when you look at additional benefits, location etc.

I would happily give my child benefit up if i really thought it was going to support the less vulnerable or less fortunate members of society but in reality i don't believe thats the case and yes i could live without it but i am by no means rolling in it.


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

what a bigoted forum this really is.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Actually my husband works his @rse off to support his family so yes this household does work!
> If people only had kids who were on a good enough wage to send the kids to private school and private healthcare etc etc then there would just be a nation of inbreds.....:blink:


I'd quite like a nation of private school inbreds compared to a lot of other inbreds you see bumbling along in life.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> No - you just rely on other people paying for them. I didn't - I think it was my choice to have kids so I paid for them. Child benefit is a subsidy. No more, no less. If you can't afford to have kids without it then don't have kids. Is that simple enough?
> 
> *Nobody has a "RIGHT" to have a family without the "RESPONSIBILITY" of looking after them*. Sadly, it's people with your attitude who think that everyone has 'rights' but doesn't want to accept the responsibilities that go with it. It's why loads of teenagers get pregnant - to get jumped up the housing queue for subsidized accommodation. Yet people who actually work and try to do it for themselves and who actually are responsible for their own way of life can't get places to live.
> 
> That's not snobbery - it's realism.


I do agree with the bold bit *BUT* surly if everyone went by your standard only the super rich could afford to have children  We couldn't afford to put both of ours through private school, yet my husband pays 40% tax. As things are at the moment my son wants to be a Pilot and is more than capable with his academic record, so he will contribute to society, yet your saying we shouldn't of had him as we rely on state school, which hubs helps to pay for with his tax 

We do need people to work "working" class jobs , do you think privately educated children are going to want to to them


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> I'd quite like a nation of private school inbreds compared to a lot of other inbreds you see bumbling along in life.


Yes so would David Cameron probably - it would be just like parliament! But who would empty the bins, run the shops, fix your boiler, work in factories?

Society does need the working classes too you know and sometimes, just sometimes, the offspring of families who needed benefits actually rise in status and end up educating children, curing the sick and (perhaps one day again ) being in positions of power!


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Luz said:


> Yes so would David Cameron probably - it would be just like parliament! But who would empty the bins, run the shops, fix your boiler, work in factories?
> 
> Society does need the working classes too you know and sometimes, just sometimes, the offspring of families who needed benefits actually rise in status and end up educating children, curing the sick and (perhaps one day again ) being in positions of power!


Lol, I'm not talking about working class 

I'm talking about the estate a few miles from where I live where people try and buy bags of crisps and sweets with Healthy Start vouchers and have a go when you say they don't work on those products. Where they come in the shop stinking of weed and get chucked out for swearing and violent behaviour. That's the kind of inbred I'm on about, some of the people that end up on Jeremy Kyle. I would rather have David Cameron than some of the people on Jeremy Kyle, and I hate David Cameron 

I don't believe a lot of them even work, hence, they really are not the working class..!


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> I'd quite like a nation of private school inbreds compared to a lot of other inbreds you see bumbling along in life.


Oh god no!! Jeremy Kyle is the only good bit of entertainment on the TV during the week


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

x PIXIE x said:


> Oh god no!! Jeremy Kyle is the only good bit of entertainment on the TV during the week


Hmmm I believe freak shows have always been a popular form of entertainment! :sneaky2:


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> Lol, I'm not talking about working class
> 
> I'm talking about the estate a few miles from where I live where people try and buy bags of crisps and sweets with Healthy Start vouchers and have a go when you say they don't work on those products. Where they come in the shop stinking of weed and get chucked out for swearing and violent behaviour. That's the kind of inbred I'm on about, some of the people that end up on Jeremy Kyle. I would rather have David Cameron than some of the people on Jeremy Kyle, and I hate David Cameron
> 
> I don't believe a lot of them even work, hence, they really are not the working class..!


Yes I come across a lot of these too. I have found that they are the ones most likely to complain about Poles etc. coming over here and taking our jobs. I think we should reciprocate by sending these types to Poland etc to work! :wink:


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> Lol, I'm not talking about working class
> 
> I'm talking about the estate a few miles from where I live where people try and buy bags of crisps and sweets with Healthy Start vouchers and have a go when you say they don't work on those products. Where they come in the shop stinking of weed and get chucked out for swearing and violent behaviour. That's the kind of inbred I'm on about, some of the people that end up on Jeremy Kyle. I would rather have David Cameron than some of the people on Jeremy Kyle, and I hate David Cameron
> 
> I don't believe a lot of them even work, hence, they really are not the working class..!


Was just about to say the same thing, theres a distinct difference between those who keep the country going e.g. bin collectors, shop assistants, street cleaners and admin staff and a scrounger with no intention of ever working.

I am really not sure though how someone could prefer the latter over a well educated graduate who has worked hard to get to where they are  I am a graduate and I am working class but know that with a bit more drive and determination I could be a 50k a year earner BUT I don't want the stress or hassle that goes with it and likewise I don't have kids to support. I pay my student loan off each month and yes it's after tax  I also pay my pension contribution, you don't have to be on £50,000 a year to have a pension or pay off a student loan. If someone works hard and keeps pushing for promotion or to progress in life then good on them. More people should have that drive and determination and should strive to achieve. I am actually one of those lazy people who although I work hard I can't be arsed with the stress or pressure of a well paid job but then I am not one of those sitting here moaning that the government or society is doing me a diservice, if I ever felt aggrieved by the correlation between my work effort and pay packet I'd do something about it rather than moaning on a pet forum.

HB when your children are old enough to go to school do you plan to go to work and work as hard as your husband does or do you still hope that CB will help you stay as a SAHM?


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

Luz said:


> Hmmm I believe freak shows have always been a popular form of entertainment! :sneaky2:


I always thought the shows were staged. I was so naieve and thought there was NO WAY whatsoever that anyone was that bad  and then a mate told me he knew people who had been on there. Then I just got scared it beggars belief that I work my socks off to fund these scum? :nonod:


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Luz said:


> Just because _you_don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!
> 
> ■The proportion of children living in poverty has risen considerably in the last 30 years. In 1968 one in ten children lived in poverty (1.4 million children). By 1995 it was one in three (4.3 million children).
> ■The UK has proportionally more children in poverty than most rich countries.
> ...


With the benefit system we have though why are there still children in poverty - or are they from families who work but are in low paid jobs? Also what is the classification for poverty?


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

Pointermum said:


> We do need people to work "working" class jobs , do you think privately educated children are going to want to to them


In a nutshell, society couldn't function if no-one did "working class" jobs.

When I finished Uni, my first job was at a senior manager at a pharmaceutical company - which members of staff did we miss most if they were on holiday / off sick?


The cleaners
Catering staff
those staff who get up religiously to be in work at 445am and get the business kickstarted 
The staff who assembled the much needed orders for pharmacies and hospitals
The staff who checked in the deliveries and the delivery drivers that brought them to us

The functional elements of the business could continue quite effectively without the management; I was more hands on than a lot of managers - but in a nutshell - without these staff, the business wouldn't have functioned, the patients wouldn't have got their much needed drugs in time, and the consequences could have been rather serious.

As a single parent, the first years of my daughters life we lived pretty much like paupers, I was fortunate I had my parents to help out as many of the benefits available to working parents these days weren't around then.

I worked until I was 38 weeks pregnant because maternity benefits weren't what they are now for people working on an agency basis.

By the time my daughter was 6 weeks old, I had spent nearly 3 weeks in hospital, had surgery, seen my "no hope" daughter come out of in incubator and shock everyone by thriving, left her father, moved 200 miles away, secured a private nursery place for her and got myself a job.

I earned around £100 a week and nearly half of that went on nursery fees.

During Uni I worked three jobs alongside my studies and when I got my first job after my degree, moved my daughter to private school and bought us a little house.

My OH and I then sold our houses and moved across town so my daughter could go to my old comprehensive school.

Had I stayed put and kept my daughter in private school - I would have been quids in and cleared my mortgage on my first house by now (which trebled in value not long after we moved)

Moving to get her into the best comp in the area actually cost us MORE than staying put and using the private school system because houses on the "other side of town" were nearly three times that of where we lived at the time.

There was no supplemental income for keeping your pre-school child in nursery and no additional support for a long time on top of a very basic wage - by the time there was - I'd gone through Uni and got myself a job which put me above the limits for additional benefits (and of course had to pay back my student loan which admittedly weren't at the levels they are now).

Some of my single parent staff were taking home MORE than me through top-ups, as were many of the warehouse staff thanks to overtime.

Child Benefit was more than a godsend - it was vital - but I would defy ANYONE to say I didn't take responsibility for my daughter working ridiculous hours whilst also acquiring a HND, Degree, Masters Degree and teaching qualification.

She's nearly 24 now, has a degree and is a qualified nurse - I'm glad she saw what I went through because it made her all the more determined to succeed.

I think we have to be VERY careful not to pre-judge people on this topic.

It would be grossly unfair if it was stopped to households where one parent earned £50K and still allowed in another where both parents earn say £45K - but I also know this topic is far from new, it was being bandied about quite a long time ago, and although I am no longer eligible for CB - I don't think much has changed since the time when it was original suggested.


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

x PIXIE x said:


> I must admit I am always shocked and saddened by the blatent disrespect for those on a good income.
> 
> i do take my hat off to those parents who do earn so much to provide for their children. They work every hour they can and bring home a wage I truly believe they deserve. if we are talking about fairness why is it fair that someone who works 8 hours behind a checkout at sainsburys for minimum wage is more entitled to support than a solicitor who has a huge student loan, debts relating to qualification and registration working 12 hours a day on high pressure caseloads and stressful day to day activities.
> 
> ...


I agree with this.

Most people don't just walk into a 60, 70, 80k job... it can take years and years (depending on the career) before you can reach that type of wage. A friend of mine is a doctor, he earns a great wage but he works every hour under the sun and has no social life whatsoever. His life consists around his career which is fair enough as he enjoys the job.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

DoodlesRule said:


> With the benefit system we have though why are there still children in poverty - or are they from families who work but are in low paid jobs? Also what is the classification for poverty?


I think the saddest thing I ever saw whilst teaching was a little boy who asked to go to the toilet throughout the day and would walk down the corridor and eat things out of childrens lunchboxes on each class dinner trolley. We would get to lunchtime and some of the kids had no lunch. We soon worked out who was doing it and he was so hungry. He had free school dinners but was stealing the food to eat in the morning and anything leftover to take home in his backpack so that he had food at home.

He told us that him and his little sister never ate breakfast or tea, only had school dinners. After talking to his little sister in the foundation class we realised that mother never fed them, she didn't work but was rarely home. It was the most heartbreaking thing I had to deal with. I wanted to give him a hug and take him home with me for a bloody good meal. His mother received HB, CT, CB and DLA she always had designer clothes whilst the children were in school uniform two sizes two small. But as long as she had her hair dyed, tattoos, new clothes, new phone, new handbags, drink, **** and cannabis she was OK. He was always dirty and had some big behavioural problems by the time he got to year 6. I think what hurt me most was knowing he'd go to secondary school and be bullied. The poor little mite didn't stand a chance.

I can't say that all children living in poverty are because of this but a good proportion are and it sickens me. I'd imagine however that a fair few parents who work every hour they can are also living in poverty because as well as working they need to provide childcare, school dinners, school uniform as unlike those who don't work for a living they don't get many handouts. I honestly think because children are a privaledge and not a god given right then there should be a lot less children living in poverty. If the government wants to prevent the amount of children in poverty they should prevent irresponsible breeding.

We hate the idea of irresponsible breeding of livestock and pets yet it's OK when humans do it? rediculous


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Maybe the government should take a leaf out the Chinese governments book when it comes to kids and only allow 1 child per family. Lets face it NO ONE can truly 'afford' a child.
> These kids will grow up to be the next generation who will be paying into the pot when were old and unable to do so..they will be our doctors, nursers, cleaners, shop assistants etc etc If people stopped having kids and there were less people in the next generation to put in the pot then maybe the government will only allow 1 elderly person per household to receive medical treatment :blink: Then there would be something to moan about :tongue_smilie:


you cant garantee your children will be producative members of society, Id love Anton to become a doctor but what are the odds, seriously? Saying your kids "could" be the next PM, a lawyer, cure cancer doesnt justify having a football team of them, or is that to increase the odds of at least one doing something procuctive? Not aimed at you directly just a general musing!

I dont work for the simple reason that my 4 12hr shifts in a care home came to round £870 a month, my nursery fees would be roughly £1000. You want to sort out the real injustice here sort out why we have the highest childcare costs in Europe, its killing most families.


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

la468 said:


> I agree with this.
> 
> Most people don't just walk into a 60, 70, 80k job... it can take years and years (depending on the career) before you can reach that type of wage. A friend of mine is a doctor, he earns a great wage but he works every hour under the sun and has no social life whatsoever. His life consists around his career which is fair enough as he enjoys the job.


I agree. My husband is a grafter, true working class. He has grafted since the day he left school starting on the factory floor and working his way up. He earns a decent wage because he deserves a decent wage. IMO it is families like us that are the backbone of this country. Honest, hardworking, taxpaying, bringing our kids up the best we can so they become fully functioning and contributing members of society. Noone will pay for my daughter to become the vet she wants to be and we can't afford to save that sort of money in the current climate which means we will probably have to downsize our house when it comes to it to put the kids through Uni or help them pursue the careers they want to. I don't begrudge that tbh but like i said previously i do get pissed off at being moaned about like i am doing something wrong or have some sort of "priviledged" existence


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

RAINYBOW said:


> I agree. My husband is a grafter, true working class. He has grafted since the day he left school starting on the factory floor and working his way up. He earns a decent wage because he deserves a decent wage. IMO it is families like us that are the backbone of this country. Honest, hardworking, taxpaying, bringing our kids up the best we can so they become fully functioning and contributing members of society. *Noone will pay for my daughter to become the vet she wants to be and we can't afford to save that sort of money in the current climate which means we will probably have to downsize our house when it comes to it to put the kids through Uni* or help them pursue the careers they want to. I don't begrudge that tbh but like i said previously i do get pissed off at being moaned about like i am doing something wrong or have some sort of "priviledged" existence


Not picking at you directly Rainy, but in regard to the bolded bit are you forseeing additional costs to the tuition fees and maintenance loan or do you think the government will not do the lending? I hear a lot people say they wont/can't afford to send the kids to uni but the government really do fund a good bit of it via the loan


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

If people are just happy to move along in life with no cares then thats fine but please dont criticise those who wish to progress and do well. 

My dad started as an apprentice at his company, he was on a crap wage often dreaming that one day he'd manage a department. He has had one set back after another but always supported us through our childhood. I remember some days dad not getting home until 6am after a nightshift he went to work at 3 in the afternoon. His job was tiring and it was hard he was often so worn out. But in the 35+ years hes been at the company he has progressed to management. Now I am older I see him under a different strain. He has a whole department, workforce and reponsibility. A lot rests on his shoulders. He attends meetings and training nationwide. Sometimes we don't see him for 4-5 days. 

He has worked his way into this position but I'd much rather see my dad coming home after 12 hours of grind and graft than see my dad haggard with stress, not sleeping and under pressure from directors above him. He may only work from 7am - 5pm and may be one of these people on a 40% taxable wage but with another 15 years until retirement at this pace I fear he won't be seeing retirement... why does he work hard? because unfortunately life is so hard for us young people to get a start in life. Mortgages are rediculous, council houses are non existant and rental places are so highly priced. My dad would rather his we moved out when they can afford it. I am so lucky I have a mum and dad who work hard to ensure that one day we will be OK.

I love my parents dearly and admire my dads drive and determination and get so angry when people bang on about the unfairness of people earning a decent wage. My dad grew up on a council estate in what would be classed today as poverty. He is now wheer he is because of who he is and the values my nan and grandad instilled in him. He lost both his parents young and he is an inspiration and I am sure his parents would be very proud.

who are we to criticise those who want a better life for themselves? we should be focussing on those at the other end of the spectrum who are happy for the state to keep them and shy away from the jobs they class as 'demeaning'.


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

Starlite said:


> you cant garantee your children will be producative members of society, Id love Anton to become a doctor but what are the odds, seriously? Saying your kids "could" be the next PM, a lawyer, cure cancer doesnt justify having a football team of them, or is that to increase the odds of at least one doing something procuctive? Not aimed at you directly just a general musing!
> 
> I dont work for the simple reason that my 4 12hr shifts in a care home came to round £870 a month, my nursery fees would be roughly £1000. You want to sort out the real injustice here sort out why we have the highest childcare costs in Europe, its killing most families.


We have the highest childcare costs in europe because the Government keep insisting on ever increasing qualifications within childcare and keep on upping the requirements even for childminders.

Previously childcare providers like nurseries could run with a large proportion of lower qualified, minimum wage staff. Now with an insistance in qualifications understandably people want higher wages. The care is no better IMO, just different.

Non profit making nurseries are being squeezed out of existence by these increased costs and constant upping of standards leaving commercial nurseries (who can afford all the bells and whistles Ofsted insist on) as the primary option. This has also happened with childminders to a degree. More and more regulation has led to higher costs because tbh there is no way anyone would be prepared to do what i have to do, plus the responsibility and the graft of looking after kids for much less than a nursery when there is no difference in the quality of care :crazy:

What is crazy with Childminders though is Childminders dont want all this additional EYFS (Early years foundation stage) work and neither do parents because they chose HOME BASE care and had the Governing bodies recognised that and worked WITH childminders to simply improve standards generally it is likely it would have remained (along with local pre schools) a much more affordable option.

(((sorry rant over xx)))


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

GoldenShadow said:


> Not picking at you directly Rainy, but in regard to the bolded bit are you forseeing additional costs to the tuition fees and maintenance loan or do you think the government will not do the lending? I hear a lot people say they wont/can't afford to send the kids to uni but the government really do fund a good bit of it via the loan


TBH GS i think Government will continue to squeeze "middle england" so i have to consider that i will need to support my children financially to some extent through Uni. If not then great but i think for a long and specific degree some financial support from us will be necessary . It isn't like there are loads of decent student jobs out there to help people through financially but we are a long way off my kids going so i dont have to worry yet


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

x PIXIE x said:


> I've e just happy to move along in life with no cares then thats fine but PLEASE don't ever criticise those who wish to progress and do well.
> 
> My dad started as an apprentice at his company, he was on a crap wage often dreaming that one day he'd manage a department. He has had one set back after another but always supported us through our childhood. I remember some days dad not getting home until 6am after a nightshift he went to work at 3 in the afternoon. His job was tiring and it was hard he was often so worn out. But in the 35+ years hes been at the company he has progressed to management. Now I am older I see him under a different strain. He has a whole department, workforce and reponsibility. A lot rests on his shoulders. He attends meetings and training nationwide. Sometimes we don't see him for 4-5 days.
> 
> ...


I don't know if your first sentence in this was aimed at me (I'm guessing not) but I wasn't criticising anyone who wants to do well in life. 

Good on your dad though. Mine has a similar story, he started working for a company at 21 and 30 years later is in management having worked his way from the bottom to the top.

I admire people who have the perserverence and are willing to work hard to get where they want in life.


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

x PIXIE x said:


> I always thought the shows were staged. I was so naieve and thought there was NO WAY whatsoever that anyone was that bad  and then a mate told me he knew people who had been on there. Then I just got scared it beggars belief that I work my socks off to fund these scum? :nonod:


A girl I know of went on the Jezza Kyle show so I'm pretty sure it's not staged.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

RAINYBOW said:


> TBH GS i think Government will continue to squeeze "middle england" so i have to consider that i will need to support my children financially to some extent through Uni. If not then great but i think for a long and specific degree some financial support from us will be necessary . It isn't like there are loads of decent student jobs out there to help people through financially but we are a long way off my kids going so i dont have to worry yet


Fair enough  My parents helped my brothers out in terms of paying their accommodation for them so they had it quite comfortably at uni, neither of them had a job :laugh: Living at home I get about 4K to live off and a loan to completely cover my tuition fees. The basic loan if you don't even get your parents income tested is around £3800 I believe and everyone is eligible for that. So certainly now at least the vast majority of people should be in a position to consider going *if* they want to.

This is not aimed at you, but so many people seem to still think your parents need a lot of money for you to go to uni, in reality there are tonnes of bursaries and additional government funding (that does not need to be paid back) available for those who are really low on the income scale. My student loan is bigger than all of my friends, because my Mum earns more I have to pay back £3800 and only get £200 grant. Some of my friends get £2000 grant and £2000 loan, they only have to pay back £2000 when I must pay back £3800, just because their parents earn less than mine :blink:


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

RAINYBOW said:


> TBH GS i think Government will continue to squeeze "middle england" so i have to consider that i will need to support my children financially to some extent through Uni. If not then great but i think for a long and specific degree some financial support from us will be necessary . It isn't like there are loads of decent student jobs out there to help people through financially but we are a long way off my kids going so i dont have to worry yet


My son wants to be a Pilot and after his Maths test from last week where he got level 7c (Level 7 Above average for typical 14 yr old ) at the age of 11 i would say he can do it, but it petrifies me to think of the cost of his ambition


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

la468 said:


> I don't know if your first sentence in this was aimed at me (I'm guessing not) but I wasn't criticising anyone who wants to do well in life.
> 
> Good on your dad though. Mine has a similar story, he started working for a company at 21 and 30 years later is in management having worked his way from the bottom to the top.
> 
> I admire people who have the perserverence and are willing to work hard to get where they want in life.


not sure what happened with the quoting there but I was agreeing with ya 

I will re-edit to make it look more understandable. My phone is difficult to type on


----------



## ella (Jan 1, 2009)

One thing I heard this morning really amazed me.

If, say, X earned £60k and Y had 2 kids (i.e. not X's) and earned £30k, X would be liable for the tax increase due to Y's kids!

If they kept finances/mortgage etc separate (it may be X's house and Y pays nothing towards it), there should be no child benefit liability to X, surely?

I'm guessing, that if it is by _*household*_, then if a grandparent is earning over £50k, but has children/grandchildren at home, they could be similarly affected?

I agree there should be some limit (say on number of children) but this seems very complex, and could be very awkward.


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

x PIXIE x said:


> not sure what happened with the quoting there but I was agreeing with ya
> 
> I will re-edit to make it look more understandable. My phone is difficult to type on


No it's fine don't worry, I guessed it wasn't aimed at me.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

GoldenShadow said:


> Fair enough  My parents helped my brothers out in terms of paying their accommodation for them so they had it quite comfortably at uni, neither of them had a job :laugh: Living at home I get about 4K to live off and a loan to completely cover my tuition fees. The basic loan if you don't even get your parents income tested is around £3800 I believe and everyone is eligible for that. So certainly now at least the vast majority of people should be in a position to consider going *if* they want to.
> 
> This is not aimed at you, but so many people seem to still think your parents need a lot of money for you to go to uni, in reality there are tonnes of bursaries and additional government funding (that does not need to be paid back) available for those who are really low on the income scale. My student loan is bigger than all of my friends, because my Mum earns more I have to pay back £3800 and only get £200 grant. Some of my friends get £2000 grant and £2000 loan, they only have to pay back £2000 when I must pay back £3800, just because their parents earn less than mine :blink:


But our "middle class" rolleyes kids won't get a thing to help them , so they are going to have to leave uni with 40-60+k debt, how on earth are they ever going to be able to leave home. Seen us the middle England should have everything taken away from us and be taxed more , so we can't even save for the kids future


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> But our "middle class" rolleyes kids won't get a thing to help them , so they are going to have to leave uni with 40-60+k debt, how on earth are they ever going to be able to leave home. Seen us the middle England should have everything taken away from us and be taxed more , so we can't even save for the kids future


What do you mean wont get a thing, PM? Can you elaborate for me? Everyone gets the loans if they apply and to be eligible to have to live in the UK and have done so for 3 years or something!


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> My student loan is bigger than all of my friends, because my Mum earns more I have to pay back £3800 and only get £200 grant. Some of my friends get £2000 grant and £2000 loan, they only have to pay back £2000 when I must pay back £3800, just because their parents earn less than mine :blink:


Again if your parents don't work at all you get everything free  I just hope that if the person is going to uni they will break the cycle at some point  but then there are so many graduates who think because they have a degree that gives them a 'get out of jail free' card for the jobs they class as 'demeaning'


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

GoldenShadow said:


> Fair enough  My parents helped my brothers out in terms of paying their accommodation for them so they had it quite comfortably at uni, neither of them had a job :laugh: Living at home I get about 4K to live off and a loan to completely cover my tuition fees. The basic loan if you don't even get your parents income tested is around £3800 I believe and everyone is eligible for that. So certainly now at least the vast majority of people should be in a position to consider going *if* they want to.
> 
> This is not aimed at you, but so many people seem to still think your parents need a lot of money for you to go to uni, in reality there are tonnes of bursaries and additional government funding (that does not need to be paid back) available for those who are really low on the income scale. My student loan is bigger than all of my friends, because my Mum earns more I have to pay back £3800 and only get £200 grant. Some of my friends get £2000 grant and £2000 loan, they only have to pay back £2000 when I must pay back £3800, just because their parents earn less than mine :blink:


See that is my point really. Those on low income get more financial support, those on very high incomes can afford it without too much bother but the middle income bracket gets squeezed again  I am not saying it isnt doable but it's a good example of why being on a certain "level" of wage can sometimes make you worse off 

I just kissed goodbye to my Tax credits too which were introduced to replace the working mans tax allowance which used to give a small tax break to working families in recognition of the additional costs of bringing up a family and working hard to do it  No wonder some people chose not to work when you look at the sort of actual working income needed to provide the same lifestyle if no benefits are recieved.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

ella said:


> One thing I heard this morning really amazed me.
> 
> If, say, X earned £60k and Y had 2 kids (i.e. not X's) and earned £30k, X would be liable for the tax increase due to Y's kids!
> 
> ...


I got confused 

Its hard to picture a little x and a y walking down the street :blush: my mind is so random


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

RAINYBOW said:


> See that is my point really. Those on low income get more financial support, those on very high incomes can afford it without too much bother but the middle income bracket gets squeezed again  I am not saying it isnt doable but it's a good example of why being on a certain "level" of wage can sometimes make you worse off
> 
> I just kissed goodbye to my Tax credits too which were introduced to replace the working mans tax allowance which used to give a small tax break to working families in recognition of the additional costs of bringing up a family and working hard to do it  No wonder some people chose not to work when you look at the sort of actual working income needed to provide the same lifestyle if no benefits are recieved.


Yeah I agree. I suppose technically I am part of the middle class you mention. My Dad hasn't been around since I was 14 so its just been my Mum's income, 50K from one parent sounds great but she was the only parent, lol.

Reason I dropped out of uni 140 miles away and came to one from home was because I was going to financially cripple myself if I wasn't careful and couldn't hack that and degree stress. I don't get on with my Dad so he wasn't going to pay my uni accommodation


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> But our "middle class" rolleyes kids won't get a thing to help them , so they are going to have to leave uni with 40-60+k debt, how on earth are they ever going to be able to leave home. Seen us the middle England should have everything taken away from us and be taxed more , so we can't even save for the kids future


And that is what I was saying about my dad he is working his arse off when he should be winding down and starting to relax now his mortgage is paid off and his kids are grown up but he isn't as both my sister and I live at home. We both work but neither of us can afford to buy or rent a place as they are so expensive and mum and dad cannot afford to help us. For my parents its easier to have us living at home with them where we pay rent as its the only way either of us can survive on our wages.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> My son wants to be a Pilot and after his Maths test from last week where he got level 7c (Level 7 Above average for typical 14 yr old ) at the age of 11 i would say he can do it, but it petrifies me to think of the cost of his ambition


RAF?

are there RAF cadets that maybe he could join and get a bursary from?


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

GoldenShadow said:


> What do you mean wont get a thing, PM? Can you elaborate for me? Everyone gets the loans if they apply and to be eligible to have to live in the UK and have done so for 3 years or something!


I mean they won't get any reduced rate student fees or bursaries, they will get a loan but that's not for free and will get charged interest like any other loan only the repayment details are different. It's still going to cost them 40-60k plus interest ,maybe more depending on course and if living away from home 

What a depressing way to start life at 21 with that hanging over their heads.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

x PIXIE x said:


> I always thought the shows were staged. I was so naieve and thought there was NO WAY whatsoever that anyone was that bad  and then a mate told me he knew people who had been on there. Then I just got scared it beggars belief that I work my socks off to fund these scum? :nonod:


Don't you believe it (i do hope these threads are not open to the general public).

Our family structure is so complex (with elements that would sit very comfortably on a JK show). I won't go into both sides of it because it isn't all my story to tell.

I left my daughters father (for the last time) when she was three weeks old - he was an aggressive, self-centred alcoholic.

I met my current (divorced) partner when my daughter was 5.

My daughters biological father "found her" when she was 19 - she discovered she had a younger brother and sister.

My parents went ballistic when they found out she was in contact with him, but I told them to trust her to make her own judgements.

Within weeks - he was throwing his alcoholic incoherent toys out of the pram because all the kids got on like a house on fire - she goes to stay with them and his ex-wife and I've also met (and got on well with her).

My daughter is close to her step-brother (my partners son) and adores her brother and sister (and new niece).

I also get on well with my partners ex-wife and have even been on holiday with her.

The only person who isn't happy in all this is the father of three gorgeous well mannered respectful children who thinks he has some devine right to slip in and out of his childrens (and now granddaughters) life as and when he feels like it - and makes all sorts of threats like suicide etc to the kids when he is p*ssed and feels sorry for himself because everyone else gets on, and no-one wants anything to do with him.

Believe me - it would be a blinder for JK - and after supporting my daughter meeting him because I felt it was the right thing to do - I would now quite willingly punch his lights out for the way he has behaved to all three of his children


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> I mean they won't get any reduced rate student fees or bursaries, they will get a loan but that's not for free and will get charged interest like any other loan only the repayment details are different. It's still going to cost them 40-60k plus interest ,maybe more depending on course and if living away from home
> 
> What a depressing way to start life at 21 with that hanging over their heads.


Indeed. That is basically my situation, but being the age I am I was lucky to get in when fees were 3K not 9K!! My brother who is five years older than me only paid £1200 in fees per year, they have increased dramatically :nonod:


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

x PIXIE x said:


> RAF?
> 
> are there RAF cadets that maybe he could join and get a bursary from?


He wasn't keen on that route as i don't think he felt comfortable with maybe having to kill people  but we have had words with him and he may have to go that route. He would still stand a better chance of doing that with a degree behind him. He will start air cadets when he is 13 , only 1 yr and 2 weeks :lol:


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> Your signature:
> 
> Here's a thought - if you didn't have so many pets then you wouldn't need child benefit. You decided to get pregnant (pregnancy is always avoidable). Why should I pay for your children when you are perfectly capable of spending money on a menagerie? I paid for my kids. I paid for them to go to private schools. I paid for private health care. They were my choice to have and my responsibility to look after - nobody else's. If you can't afford to have kids then don't have them - and certainly don't expect anyone else to subsidise you. :mad5:


Excuse me i work and so does my Oh, so remove your arse from your high horse  My pregnancy was actually caught while on the coil so again put that in your pipe and smoke it. Having got a 7yr old as my youngest we didnt want anymore the coil had other ideas. Should i have an abortion or get rid of my pets (when nearly everyone on here would then kick up a fuss when people do that)

what did you want a pat on the back that you have gone private? shall i bow down to you? No we are a working family we pay in to the system and always have.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

swarthy said:


> Don't you believe it (i do hope these threads are not open to the general public).


I think general is


----------



## WelshOneEmma (Apr 11, 2009)

Colliebarmy said:


> Its patently obvious that not every family needs CB ( royalty, film stars. etc?) and also, CB is counted for some other benefits, so in effect its lost
> 
> it should be done away with and the personal tax allowances should be increased to take wage earners below £20K out of paying tax, wage earners over £60k should pay 45%....


Why? This really gets my goat - even if you are on a higher wage you are paying more money in tax, even at 20%, than someone earning a lower wage. I really disagree with a higher tax bracket. Why should people work hard but have to pay more tax because they are lucky enough to have a higher wage.

It would be interesting to see if your opinion would change if you were in the higher tax bracket. I think most people's would.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Actually my husband works his @rse off to support his family so yes this household does work!
> If people only had kids who were on a good enough wage to send the kids to private school and private healthcare etc etc then there would just be a nation of inbreds.....:blink:


Bullshit. One of my kids won a scholarship for most of his fees - but I paid the rest. The other was dyslexic and the amount of help he'd get through the public system was laughable. I was told, by the Education Head of my county council, that their sole responsibility was to get a child to the age of 16 with the ability in the 3 Rs of an 11 year old. I didn't think that was good enough. So, I gave up a lot of things I would rather have spent money on to give my children an education. When one of them needed an operation that he'd need to wait months for - in pain - on the NHS, I paid for it. That's responsibility.

My background - I was born and lived in rented council property until I was old enough to get my own place. The difference being that I worked for it and didn't expect to hold my hand out for other people to pay for me.



Pointermum said:


> I do agree with the bold bit *BUT* surly if everyone went by your standard only the super rich could afford to have children  We couldn't afford to put both of ours through private school, yet my husband pays 40% tax. As things are at the moment my son wants to be a Pilot and is more than capable with his academic record, so he will contribute to society, yet your saying we shouldn't of had him as we rely on state school, which hubs helps to pay for with his tax


No - I didn't say that at all. What I said was that Child Benefit was a subsidy. Quite rightly if you pay into the system then you should be able to draw out of it. And if your husband pays 40% tax then you ought to be able to afford quite a lot more than those who don't pay tax at that level. And I really can't see any justification for you claiming child benefit. But I have a fundamental objection to the idea that just because your child wants to do something (and at his age is almost certainly going to change his mind) that I - or anybody else - should have to pay for it. I'd like to take a two monthly break to the Caribbean each year. Shouldn't you pay for that too?



> We do need people to work "working" class jobs , do you think privately educated children are going to want to to them


I'm working class. I work. My kids work - both of them. But I see lots of lads about the same age as my kids drawing benefits because they won't take a job. Mine have worked in shops, in McDonalds, as cleaners, etc. - they did so to earn money rather than sit on their backsides bleating about how the system ought to support them.



LostGirl said:


> Excuse me i work and so does my Oh, so remove your arse from your high horse  My pregnancy was actually caught while on the coil so again put that in your pipe and smoke it. Having got a 7yr old as my youngest we didnt want anymore the coil had other ideas. Should i have an abortion or get rid of my pets (when nearly everyone on here would then kick up a fuss when people do that)
> 
> what did you want a pat on the back that you have gone private? shall i bow down to you? No we are a working family we pay in to the system and always have.


A nice moan. But the fact remains that you are wanting to hold on to your child benefits whilst you spend money on your large collection of pets. If you hadn't had the child benefit could you have afforded the pets? Probably not as, according to your previous post you needed the child benefit even to pay for school meals. So, in effect your 'child' benefit has become your 'pet benefit'. Can I have 'pet benefit' too, so I don't have to pay out for my dogs?


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

AlbertRoss said:


> Bullshit. One of my kids won a scholarship for most of his fees - but I paid the rest. The other was dyslexic and the amount of help he'd get through the public system was laughable. I was told, by the Education Head of my county council, that their sole responsibility was to get a child to the age of 16 with the ability in the 3 Rs of an 11 year old. I didn't think that was good enough. So, I gave up a lot of things I would rather have spent money on to give my children an education. *When one of them needed an operation that he'd need to wait months for - in pain - on the NHS, I paid for it. That's responsibility.
> *
> My background - I was born and lived in rented council property until I was old enough to get my own place. The difference being that I worked for it and didn't expect to hold my hand out for other people to pay for me.
> 
> ...


ur the sort of person i have to put up with on a daily basis. Can you ignore people on this site.

You will say people don't deserve disability next.

As for that ******** you say u where a working class parent yet went private for health care sorry but thats crap. What would you class as a working class wage?


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> Bullshit. One of my kids won a scholarship for most of his fees - but I paid the rest. The other was dyslexic and the amount of help he'd get through the public system was laughable. I was told, by the Education Head of my county council, that their sole responsibility was to get a child to the age of 16 with the ability in the 3 Rs of an 11 year old. I didn't think that was good enough. So, I gave up a lot of things I would rather have spent money on to give my children an education. When one of them needed an operation that he'd need to wait months for - in pain - on the NHS, I paid for it. That's responsibility.
> 
> My background - I was born and lived in rented council property until I was old enough to get my own place. The difference being that I worked for it and didn't expect to hold my hand out for other people to pay for me.
> 
> ...


I have to say having just looked at the reduced vets fees on the local RSPCA site for people on benefits which obviously i am not entitled to and the price of Insuring my 2 dogs because i have no choice not to (wont get any help if they are ill and dont have the cash to be able to find thousands in an emergency) I have to agree with you


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> No - I didn't say that at all. What I said was that Child Benefit was a subsidy. Quite rightly if you pay into the system then you should be able to draw out of it. And if your husband pays 40% tax then you ought to be able to afford quite a lot more than those who don't pay tax at that level. And I really can't see any justification for you claiming child benefit. But I have a fundamental objection to the idea that just because your child wants to do something (and at his age is almost certainly going to change his mind) that I - or anybody else - should have to pay for it. I'd like to take a two monthly break to the Caribbean each year. Shouldn't you pay for that too?


This is soo very narrow minded, up north someone paying 40% tax may well afford it but in the SE where everything soo much more expensive it's not soo easy. I've not asked you to pay for my kids school I can assure you my OH pays more than enough in tax to cover it  And if my son wants to be a pilot then he will ultimately pay for with uni fees and paying to have flying lessons it won't be you  And i do hope he does change his mind as being a Pilot is meant to be one of the most stressful jobs :glare: and i'm sure he could earn a hell of a lot more doing something else


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

seanmac said:


> ur the sort of person i have to put up with on a daily basis. Can you ignore people on this site.
> 
> You will say people don't deserve disability next.
> 
> As for that ******** you say u where a working class parent yet went private for health care sorry but thats crap. What would you class as a working class wage?


I fully agree with paying disability benefits - because it's not their choice to be disabled. Further, I think the current Government has been dreadful in the way in which has treated disabled people. But people have a choice about having children and I don't see why I, or anybody else, should subsidise someone else's choice.

And, no it wasn't 'crap' that I paid privately. Part of it came out of savings. It's just that I didn't pay for a lot of stuff for myself that others do. Like holidays, smoking, a night at the pub, coffee in Starbucks and so many other things that some people see as part of their lives. It's all about priority.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> This is soo very narrow minded, up north someone paying 40% tax may well afford it but in the SE where everything soo much more expensive it's not soo easy. I've not asked you to pay for my kids school I can assure you my OH pays more than enough in tax to cover it  And if my son wants to be a pilot then he will ultimately pay for with uni fees and paying to have flying lessons it won't be you  And i do hope he does change his mind as being a Pilot is meant to be one of the most stressful jobs :glare: and i'm sure he could earn a hell of a lot more doing something else


Sorry - but this is all about your choice. I've known 3 people who wanted to become pilots. 2 worked to raise the fees to pay for their own training. The third went into the forces. Not one relied on their parents for money.

BTW I live in the SE too. I know how expensive it is - but the issue is simply about whether or not you should be subsidised to have children through Child Benefit. My take is that if you can't afford to do it without the benefit then you shouldn't do it. Simple.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> When one of them needed an operation that he'd need to wait months for - in pain - on the NHS, I paid for it. That's responsibility.


There are many elements to this thread, but private medical care is on another level for many people, even many of those in the upper echalances of maximum tax brackets, unless they are fortunate enough for their employers to pay for it.

There will be some who are able to lay their hands on the funds to pay for surgery whether it be through financing, savings, family support, or, as in my parents case, they took out a private medical policy which they did make good use of (ironic really when my mother was a senior sister, and all the women bar me are nurses - and even I did my training).

On a number of occasions, I've made private consultant appointments because waiting lists have been too long - that's a cool £140 for frequently less than half an hour before you start.


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> Bullshit. One of my kids won a scholarship for most of his fees - but I paid the rest. The other was dyslexic and the amount of help he'd get through the public system was laughable. I was told, by the Education Head of my county council, that their sole responsibility was to get a child to the age of 16 with the ability in the 3 Rs of an 11 year old. I didn't think that was good enough. So, I gave up a lot of things I would rather have spent money on to give my children an education. When one of them needed an operation that he'd need to wait months for - in pain - on the NHS, I paid for it. That's responsibility.
> 
> My background - I was born and lived in rented council property until I was old enough to get my own place. The difference being that I worked for it and didn't expect to hold my hand out for other people to pay for me.
> 
> ...


I actually said it helps, Big difference. Nope My child benefit goes on my children hence the name of it. We as adults go without to buy things or the animals and children. And yes we had pets before we had children so another one of Your "higher mighty" views out the window there  Oh we have insurance and dont use "free" services not even sure we'd would be able so dont worry your taxes (aswell as our own) dont pay for any care for them.

Oh i dont need to pay for help for my dyslexic child, I actually did some research, gone out and got the things he needs, and am trying to find somewhere were he can actually go for the proper testing (to help with school getting funds for him although he prob wont use it) that will be coming out of my pocket aswell and do it with him myself which costs no one anything.

Honestly you are no better then anyone else as much as you seem to think you are. You must be one of these people who thinks the world owes them. I pay tax's have done since i was 16, my oh the same. Yes i would like to keep hold of it, we are a lower wage family everything helps Is it wrong to be honest and say yes? No its not its being truthful.


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

AlbertRoss said:


> I fully agree with paying disability benefits - because it's not their choice to be disabled. Further, I think the current Government has been dreadful in the way in which has treated disabled people. But people have a choice about having children and I don't see why I, or anybody else, should subsidise someone else's choice.
> 
> *And, no it wasn't 'crap' that I paid privately. Part of it came out of savings. It's just that I didn't pay for a lot of stuff for myself that others do. Like holidays, smoking, a night at the pub, coffee in Starbucks and so many other things that some people see as part of their lives. It's all about priority.*


So people like me who where perfectly well and now am struck off work i shouldnt get any help, my son should suffer due to my disability due to falling ill after he was brought into the world? not everyone takes child benefit for the sake of it not everyone has a super life infact i have had an awful life from start to now, and i ant done a thing to anyone in my life infact i give more than i take.

You shouldn't pass judgments on people esp today, dont get me wrong there are a number of people today that have kids for the benefits i totally believe that i see it along my road

But also today a number of people my age are losing there jobs and are failing to find new ones, i was rejected a job pre break down due to be over qualified for it i was applying for a barmen job, i used to run a pub and the manager felt there would be conflict and took on someone with no experience.

As for the government benefit changes actually im all for it, alot of people are cheating it, it was so easy to cheat it was insane and now its hard thats what people dont like,i have had my new test, and i was previously signed of for 4 years no follow ups come back in 4 years  now and rightly im signed of for only a year.


----------



## x PIXIE x (Feb 9, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> I think general is


i believe general is member only  the rest is open to all


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Pointermum said:


> It's always a huge risk buying we are lucky interests rates are now lower than when we bought but the could have easily of been higher who's to know ! My mum lost her house when the interest rates went stupid last time to 15% odd! *Plus if we need care when we are elderly our homes will be sold to pay for it. So will we really be better off .*


well I could start a whole new broadside on that one, you can protect a property by several means if you take (legal) steps early enough.

Take cover!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

AlbertRoss said:


> . But people have a choice about having children and I don't see why I, or anybody else, should subsidise someone else's choice.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> Sorry - but this is all about your choice. I've known 3 people who wanted to become pilots. 2 worked to raise the fees to pay for their own training. The third went into the forces. Not one relied on their parents for money.
> 
> BTW I live in the SE too. I know how expensive it is - but the issue is simply about whether or not you should be subsidised to have children through Child Benefit. My take is that if you can't afford to do it without the benefit then you shouldn't do it. Simple.


I don't see how your subsidising my two children when my husband pays more than enough in tax than what it cost the government to school them and pay us CB  And where have i said i expect the tax payer to pay for my child to be a pilot? Just out of interest i'm guessing you refused to accept CB for your two , so others didn't subsidise your kids? I know a few people who private school until secondary , did you pay the whole way through ?

Also did house prices also tripped in 3 years just before you could get a wage and get on the housing market ?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> well I could start a whole new broadside on that one, you can protect a property by several means if you take (legal) steps early enough.
> 
> Take cover!


I think you have to survive twelve years now and not seven as previously after taking these 'steps' and why should we?
And don#t forget the death duties many have to pay when leaving large estates! you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about private housing for some reason!


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

Starlite said:


> you cant garantee your children will be producative members of society, Id love Anton to become a doctor but what are the odds, seriously? Saying your kids "could" be the next PM, a lawyer, cure cancer doesnt justify having a football team of them, or is that to increase the odds of at least one doing something procuctive? Not aimed at you directly just a general musing!
> 
> I dont work for the simple reason that my 4 12hr shifts in a care home came to round £870 a month, my nursery fees would be roughly £1000. You want to sort out the real injustice here sort out why we have the highest childcare costs in Europe, its killing most families.


No where did i say my kids could be a PM or anything else for that matter but were still saving to help them IF they decide to go to uni.



AlbertRoss said:


> Bullshit. One of my kids won a scholarship for most of his fees - but I paid the rest. The other was dyslexic and the amount of help he'd get through the public system was laughable. I was told, by the Education Head of my county council, that their sole responsibility was to get a child to the age of 16 with the ability in the 3 Rs of an 11 year old. I didn't think that was good enough. So, I gave up a lot of things I would rather have spent money on to give my children an education. When one of them needed an operation that he'd need to wait months for - in pain - on the NHS, I paid for it. That's responsibility.
> 
> My background - I was born and lived in rented council property until I was old enough to get my own place. The difference being that I worked for it and didn't expect to hold my hand out for other people to pay for me.
> 
> ...





AlbertRoss said:


> I fully agree with paying disability benefits - because it's not their choice to be disabled. Further, I think the current Government has been dreadful in the way in which has treated disabled people. But people have a choice about having children and I don't see why I, or anybody else, should subsidise someone else's choice.
> 
> And, no it wasn't 'crap' that I paid privately. Part of it came out of savings. It's just that I didn't pay for a lot of stuff for myself that others do. Like holidays, smoking, a night at the pub, coffee in Starbucks and so many other things that some people see as part of their lives. It's all about priority.


From the posts i have read of yours you come across as a narrow minded bigoted idiot! 
Me and my OH have worked since we left school (even before we left school) i worked up until i had my first child as we made a decision together that i would be a SAHM so the kids could have a parent at home instead of being stuck with a stranger. We have both worked our fingers to the bone worked 14hour shifts 6days a week and a 10hr shift sundays without any days off or holidays. 
We dont smoke, go out or do anything that doesnt involve our kids..we do get cb.....but from the way you see things were just lower class scum who shouldnt have had kids unless we could afford private EVERYTHING! Well guess what pal, we work friggin hard, pay taxes into the system for schools and medical care so we will damn well use them! 
You look down at the 'working class' as scroungers or whatever you refer to them as because they use the NHS and state schools...how dare you when you should take a long hard fooking look at yourself and realise that you are NOT anything special and just because you were LUCKY enough to be on a really high wage doesnt mean that will always be the case! Jobs these days are never safe and boy if you lose your job your fall from grace will be feckin hard considering how high you are in the clouds :crazy:


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> I don't see how your subsidising my two children when my husband pays more than enough in tax than what it cost the government to school them and pay us CB  And where have i said i expect the tax payer to pay for my child to be a pilot? Just out of interest i'm guessing you refused to accept CB for your two , so others didn't subsidise your kids? I know a few people who private school until secondary , did you pay the whole way through ?
> 
> Also did house prices also tripped in 3 years just before you could get a wage and get on the housing market ?


No One is subsidising your children only your hubby on the tax he pays 40% of every £1 earned he gives the government back 40p and has 60p not a bad deal for the government in my eyes.


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

i am going to flounce, i ant going to be on a forum where im told by a narrow minded bigot that im a bad person for falling disabled and claiming child benefit for my kids.

No way, lets hope ya dont ever have you life wiped out infront of you as trust me its hell and i seriously ant sure how much fight in me i have left. And reading comments on here dont help at all


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

Errrrm i hope all those that don't want to pay for my children

A) Never ever took Child benefit for their own kids and

B) Don't expect my kids to pay their state pension for them because you are deluded if you think the money you have paid in is still there  oh or run the country when you are too old to do it 

With the current economic climate if people only had children if they could afford private education and healthcare then there woul be a MASIVE labour shortage in a few years time because most decent working families with kids are just about managing to pay their bills right now 

I can kind of see the argument against Child benefit but Anyone who doesn't want to pay for my childrens eduction, healthcare etc can they please forward me their names and addresses so i can make sure that my children never inadvertently give them any assistance when they are to old to look after themselves  

Oh and just remember these kids might well work in your care home so could be responsible for providing you with you final dignities


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

We get £134 (odd) a month for my two children. I got the same when I was a single parent as I do now I am married in a working household. 

Nice to know we won't get any help for any more children, not that it will stop us. We don't get working tax credits, we get a small amount of child tax credits and the child benefits. But every year they reduce it a bit more. 

These tactic have proven in the past to only increase the numbers of people on the streets and not in work. Round here there are 100 applicants for every job. Literally. So how are people supposed to help themselves into work when there isn't any? Its not just child benefit. They start with the benefits people agree on and then slash the others on the quiet. Before the age of 35 you are now entitled to £60 a week max housing benefit as a single person. In parts of the country that wouldn't rent a room...assuming you would find someone willing to rent to you while on benefits. This is regardless of whether you are on JSA or disability. How are the government expecting those on disability to pay the excess rent?

Over the age of 35 you qualify for more, why? Do you suddenly need a bigger place when you are 35? 

We're going back to how it was before Blair got in. I remember those days and it wasn't good. Everyone moaned about the welfare system then, and still do, and always will.

I want to know though....I would rather pay my taxes towards helping those less well off, then pay towards the £million expenses tab the politicians have. I pay for their subsidised child care. Now that I'd like to see changed.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

seanmac said:


> i am going to flounce, i ant going to be on a forum where im told by a narrow minded bigot that im a bad person for falling disabled and claiming child benefit for my kids.
> 
> No way, lets hope ya dont ever have you life wiped out infront of you as trust me its hell and i seriously ant sure how much fight in me i have left. And reading comments on here dont help at all


Hun, dont take any notice! If you have a genuine disability then you have every right to have disability benefit! Just ignore bigoted idiots


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

RAINYBOW said:


> Errrrm i hope all those that don't want to pay for my children
> 
> A) Never ever took Child benefit for their own kids and
> 
> ...


I agree with this so much x


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

harley bear said:


> Hun, dont take any notice! If you have a genuine disability then you have every right to have disability benefit! Just ignore bigoted idiots


the issue is 80% of the country dont class mental health as a genuine disability


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

RAINYBOW said:


> Errrrm i hope all those that don't want to pay for my children
> 
> A) Never ever took Child benefit for their own kids and
> 
> ...


Great post!


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

DT said:


> AlbertRoss said:
> 
> 
> > . But people have a choice about having children and I don't see why I, or anybody else, should subsidise someone else's choice.
> ...


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

seanmac said:


> i am going to flounce, i ant going to be on a forum where im told by a narrow minded bigot that im a bad person for falling disabled and claiming child benefit for my kids.
> 
> No way, lets hope ya dont ever have you life wiped out infront of you as trust me its hell and i seriously ant sure how much fight in me i have left. And reading comments on here dont help at all


Try and take no notice some people are full of there own importance.xxx


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

seanmac said:


> the issue is 80% of the country dont class mental health as a genuine disability


But you know yourself that it is, so does your doctor and the agency that pays the benefits. That is really all that matters! You DO NOT have to justify anything to anyone. 
I have 3 kids..and were planning on having another, my husband works and pays taxes...i dont really give a flying fook what anyone thinks because they can all get stuffed!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

RAINYBOW said:


> DT said:
> 
> 
> > Why should i pay for someones old age  Surely they sould have made provision for that during their working lives or basically euthanazed at the age of pension
> ...


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

harley bear said:


> But you know yourself that it is, so does your doctor and the agency that pays the benefits. That is really all that matters! You DO NOT have to justify anything to anyone.
> I have 3 kids..and were planning on having another, my husband works and pays taxes...i dont really give a flying fook what anyone thinks because they can all get stuffed!


the issue is we do take it to heart, every day ya told by one person or another to get over it, your not really ill.

I then make the point that i would rather have my legs cut off than battle my daily battles atleast then they could see my disability and stop spouting the same old rubbish mental health is such a taboo subject still.

Yet 1/4 will get a form of mental health issues one way :crazy:

Anyway, il claim what i want.

Lets hope she dont claim her state pension or get her winter fuel allowance when she is older.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

seanmac said:


> the issue is we do take it to heart, every day ya told by one person or another to get over it, your not really ill.
> 
> I then make the point that i would rather have my legs cut off than battle my daily battles atleast then they could see my disability and stop spouting the same old rubbish mental health is such a taboo subject still.
> 
> ...


See thats the thing people are so narrow minded nothing is real or deserving of anything until sh1t falls on their own doorstep


----------



## waggy Tailz (Sep 14, 2011)

Luz said:


> Well much as I hate to agree with the government on *anything* If you are on over 50k will you really miss the child benefit?


Have to also agree here!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

seanmac said:


> i am going to flounce, i ant going to be on a forum where im told by a narrow minded bigot that im a bad person for falling disabled and claiming child benefit for my kids.
> 
> No way, lets hope ya dont ever have you life wiped out infront of you as trust me its hell and i seriously ant sure how much fight in me i have left. And reading comments on here dont help at all


I don't think anyone is calling you a bad person, All I think is that there are some, me being one of them think that many child allowance should be stopped all together and higher tax allowance given to conterfit this.

OK, like you say you are in the situation whereby you cannot work due to illness, as are many, one would expect that the government would have to have another form of benifit for the children to account for people in this situation.

What I am against, and I would think many more too is the amount of people that a seeing their 'occupation' as dropping a child everyyear at ours (and your) expense! This needs stopping!

As do people being in the UK and claiming for children that not only dont live here but dont even exsist!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

RAINYBOW said:


> Errrrm i hope all those that don't want to pay for my children
> 
> A) Never ever took Child benefit for their own kids and
> 
> ...


think you've got my addy rainybows


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

DT said:


> RAINYBOW said:
> 
> 
> > Awh! but rainybows, by the time you reach seventy years of age , and finally draw your pension you will have put a fair amount into the food chain! why then if you have lost out on your pension why should you worry about how you are going to keep warm?
> ...


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

DT said:


> think you've got my addy rainybows


I show my kids a picture of you every night before they go to bed and tell them under no circumstances are they ever to approach you


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

RAINYBOW said:


> DT said:
> 
> 
> > You shouldn't but its a bit much to say Feck families with kids once you have had yours and are more interested in pensioners rights
> ...


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

RAINYBOW said:


> I show my kids a picture of you every night before they go to bed and tell them under no circumstances are they ever to approach you


Totally agree! I dont think people have a leg to stand on in this argument if they had any sort of family allowance or cb why they were bringing up their kids...bet they didnt complain when they were getting it.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

RAINYBOW said:


> I show my kids a picture of you every night before they go to bed and tell them under no circumstances are they ever to approach you


lol rainybows! tell em to watch I dont sneak up behind em!
TOMORROW:devil:


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

harley bear said:


> Totally agree! I dont think people have a leg to stand on in this argument if they had any sort of family allowance or cb why they were bringing up their kids...bet they didnt complain when they were getting it.


If my memory serves me correct we did not get it for the first and got 90p for the second until my eldest was around five! (I may be wrong on that may be confusing it with when I was a child as I was the only one) BUT! what my hunband did get was an extra £300 (guess ???) per child per year on his tax allowance!
Which - if folk looked at it could work better.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

LostGirl said:


> You must be one of these people who thinks the world owes them.


????????? YOU are one of those people. YOU are the one wanting a Child Benefit subsidy - not me.



seanmac said:


> So people like me who where perfectly well and now am struck off work i shouldnt get any help, my son should suffer due to my disability due to falling ill after he was brought into the world? not everyone takes child benefit for the sake of it not everyone has a super life infact i have had an awful life from start to now, and i ant done a thing to anyone in my life infact i give more than i take.
> 
> You shouldn't pass judgments on people esp today, dont get me wrong there are a number of people today that have kids for the benefits i totally believe that i see it along my road
> 
> ...


Try and read what I wrote instead of rushing in with your hard done by stories. I said that I'm all in favour of disability benefits - because you don't have a choice about being disabled. As for the new tests - I've heard of one very ill lady who was told that because she could move an empty cardboard box that she'd be fit for work. Some test!



Pointermum said:


> I don't see how your subsidising my two children when my husband pays more than enough in tax than what it cost the government to school them and pay us CB  And where have i said i expect the tax payer to pay for my child to be a pilot? Just out of interest i'm guessing you refused to accept CB for your two , so others didn't subsidise your kids? I know a few people who private school until secondary , did you pay the whole way through ?
> 
> Also did house prices also tripped in 3 years just before you could get a wage and get on the housing market ?


Oh dear. My heart bleeds that you can't buy your own house. When your husband pays 40% tax? Give me a break.

And, yes, I paid for my kids up to university age. The very first person I met at my older son's school was a parent who was a cleaner. She worked as a cleaner so that her son could get put through private schooling in order to try and give him a better life than she and her husband had. But that's what being a parent is about - doing the absolute for your kids and not relying on hand outs.



harley bear said:


> You look down at the 'working class' as scroungers or whatever you refer to them as because they use the NHS and state schools...how dare you when you should take a long hard fooking look at yourself and realise that you are NOT anything special and just because you were LUCKY enough to be on a really high wage doesnt mean that will always be the case! Jobs these days are never safe and boy if you lose your job your fall from grace will be feckin hard considering how high you are in the clouds :crazy:


As you know nothing about me your rant is both stupid and inaccurate. I don't have a 'really high wage'. I just put my money into areas that I think are important. I don't look down on the working class - I am working class (by which I mean I work, I don't have inherited money, everything I have I worked for). My only gripe is that I don't see why people with a perfectly adequate income should get Child Benefit. If they can't afford kids they shouldn't have them. That's called responsibility. And I have no problem with people using the NHS or state schools. But I chose to pay for my children not to use them because they'd get a better standard of education and quicker health service if I paid. So I paid.



RAINYBOW said:


> Errrrm i hope all those that don't want to pay for my children
> 
> A) Never ever took Child benefit for their own kids and
> 
> ...


Certainly, I'll be delighted not to have your children look after me if you can arrange for me to have back all the tax I paid to provide their (and others) education, their healthcare, their 'benefits', etc. together with all the interest that I'd have lost so I could invest it to provide for my old age. If they work in my care home they'll be getting paid to look after me - and I'll be paying them to do so. And if your kids run the country in the same way as the last or present governments then God help us all.


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

Well you can bet your bottom dollar its only the start. like they started with the tax credit, slowly reducing the amount of people eligble to recieve it....so for those who still are going to get it...you had better make best of it !


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

AlbertRoss said:


> *Try and read what I wrote instead of rushing in with your hard done by stories*. I said that I'm all in favour of disability benefits - because you don't have a choice about being disabled. As for the new tests - I've heard of one very ill lady who was told that because she could move an empty cardboard box that she'd be fit for work. Some test!
> 
> .


Go **** ur self seriously.

Wow what a muppet you really are a scummy one at that

Oh and by the way "I heard of this lady" put the FRIGGING DAILY MAIL DOWN go sit on one the tests.

**** of the highest order


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

seanmac said:


> the issue is 80% of the country dont class mental health as a genuine disability


No they dont as the vast majority can be controlled by medication and CBT. If people choose not to seek help there is not much anyone can do to help them improve their situation so I dont really see mental illness as a reason not to work.

The joy of being mentally ill I think IS that no one knows. You just look like, you, so alot less judgement provided you arent having a psychotic episode at the time or something similar. I am all for help for the disabled but to a degree you have to be willing to help yourself first if you are mentally ill.


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

Starlite said:


> No they dont as the vast majority can be controlled by medication and CBT. If people choose not to seek help there is not much anyone can do to help them improve their situation so I dont really see mental illness as a reason not to work.
> 
> The joy of being mentally ill I think IS that no one knows. You just look like, you, so alot less judgement provided you arent having a psychotic episode at the time or something similar. I am all for help for the disabled but to a degree you have to be willing to help yourself first if you are mentally ill.


CBT is a fantastic therapy i have had it but hardly solves it same with medication it merely masks the here and now and dose not deal with the underlying issue

i also have paid for private therapy's NLP, have self admitted to get help and have never missed a appointment. So i literally cant do any more.


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

seanmac said:


> CBT is a fantastic therapy i have had it but hardly solves it same with medication it merely masks the here and now and dose not deal with the underlying issue
> 
> i also have paid for private therapy's NLP, have self admitted to get help and have never missed a appointment. So i literally cant do any more.


im not going to ask your underlying problem as that is of course your business mate, I really hope you get the help you need soon. The medication completely changed my life (Im Bipolar) but anti psychotics can have some nasty side effects, did the meds not help at all?


----------



## seanmac (Oct 22, 2012)

Starlite said:


> im not going to ask your underlying problem as that is of course your business mate, I really hope you get the help you need soon. The medication completely changed my life (Im Bipolar) but anti psychotics can have some nasty side effects, did the meds not help at all?


to sleep, i have BPD and PTSD

The only med i found worked caused me to become Urinary Incontinent which for a 26 year old lad i couldnt live with.

i write a blog i dont hide from what i have any more i would rather friends and family have an understanding of whats going on

http://mybattlewithmentalhealth.wordpress.com/


----------



## chichi (Apr 22, 2012)

To those that are all for scrapping CB and have had kids.....did you send yours back to the Government????? 

I had it for my kids and sometimes we relied on it to buy food... School uniforms....etc. I would have been lost without it at times. Financially we are better off now but I dont forget the hard times that many families have when the kids are young. 

Working families should get CB for their kids....its just getting some of the tax back that they are putting into the pot.

If we make it much harder for the youngsters (those that actually work) to have kids....we will just have those living off benefits being able to "afford" to have families.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

chichi said:


> To those that are all for scrapping CB and have had kids.....did you send yours back to the Government?????
> 
> I had it for my kids and sometimes we relied on it to buy food... School uniforms....etc. I would have been lost without it at times. Financially we are better off now but I dont forget the hard times that many families have when the kids are young.
> 
> ...


So you do think those earning 50K deserve some money back out of the pot too via CB, seeing as they put more in? If you say yes then I can understand where you are coming from. If you say no...


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

> Oh dear. My heart bleeds that you can't buy your own house. When your husband pays 40% tax? Give me a break.
> 
> And, yes, I paid for my kids up to university age. The very first person I met at my older son's school was a parent who was a cleaner. She worked as a cleaner so that her son could get put through private schooling in order to try and give him a better life than she and her husband had. But that's what being a parent is about - doing the absolute for your kids and not relying on hand outs.
> 
> l.


I never said we couldn't afford to buy, just it takes a lot of the income to live in a basic 3bed mid terraced house


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

DT said:


> If my memory serves me correct we did not get it for the first and got 90p for the second until my eldest was around five! (I may be wrong on that may be confusing it with when I was a child as I was the only one) BUT! what my hunband did get was an extra £300 (guess ???) per child per year on his tax allowance!
> Which - if folk looked at it could work better.


If you live in the UK, the only way you wouldn't get it is if you didn't claim it - and if I remember rightly the birth information was sent to the "powers that be" and the forms automatically sent out.

I can remember going to the PO to cash my mothers child benefit for me (my sister had already left home by then) - and I had it when my daughter was growing up (and as I've already said in an earlier post) it was a god-send - even though I worked my arse off.

There did used to be a married couples tax allowance which was also given to working single parents and there used to be a small additional amount for single parents - both of these were done away with very early on.

They did bring in family credit at some point which I got for a brief period before I started Uni - then it was my grant and whatever I could earn doing part time work.

Going slightly O/T - but I know student loans have been discussed in this thread - when I was a full-time student - there was no means testing on additional earnings - so if I could earn it - I got it - and with the normal single persons tax allowance.

I think I'm right in believing now that there are rulings on this, and any additional income is means tested and DOES affect loan eligibility etc

I do think this is wrong; if a student has the stamina, commitment and foresight to work their way through Uni, then the best of luck to them.

There is NO DOUBT such means testing will negatively affect those students willing to study and work to get through Uni - talk about knocking back that commitment when there are still far too many students who believe "doing a degree" is enough and they can't find time to work 

I was a single parent, but still managed to work and study, frequently having less than 4 hours sleep a night - in 4 years at full-time Uni I had just one full weeks holiday and the key bank holidays such as Christmas and Easter.

How I got through my Masters I still don't know - I was working full-time - my partner was diagnosed with cancer, my mum had a massive heart-attack - and then I also returned to finish my teacher training in my final year whilst holding down a full-time job with a part time secondment to another role 100 mile round trip away, attending college one night a week and teaching two evenings a week (for nothing).

The college were offering part-time students a second course free of charge, so guessed I had nothing to lose and a lot more to gain.

Getting my first dog for 20 years was "my treat" after I finished my Masters


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

My mother definately never got it for me and yes I was born in the UK, I think then it was only paid for the second and subsequent children

I have been thinking about my own and yes, I do think we did get it for both 90p for the first and £1 for the second is ringing bells, but we did definately get the tax allowance, because seem to remember when they scrapped it the child allowance shot up.


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> ????????? YOU are one of those people. YOU are the one wanting a Child Benefit subsidy - not me.


No again actually i said i'd miss it reading what you want there because you have no other come back  If it was taken away we'd cope we always do but i would miss it.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> ????????? YOU are one of those people. YOU are the one wanting a Child Benefit subsidy - not me.
> 
> Try and read what I wrote instead of rushing in with your hard done by stories. I said that I'm all in favour of disability benefits - because you don't have a choice about being disabled. As for the new tests - I've heard of one very ill lady who was told that because she could move an empty cardboard box that she'd be fit for work. Some test!
> 
> ...


Just out of interest... did you claim your family allowance/ child benefit? :glare:


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

Just seen on sky news website the proposed child benefit cuts break EU laws. So Cameron and his crooks won't be able to do this I think. I wonder how many more of the proposed benefit changes he wants to make break EU laws? We haven't got much left in the UK but we are still part of the EU and still have human rights as well


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

cuddlesmycat said:


> just seen on sky news website the proposed child benefit cuts break eu laws. So cameron and his crooks won't be able to do this i think. I wonder how many more of the proposed benefit changes he wants to make break eu laws? We haven't got much left in the uk but we are still part of the eu and still have human rights as well :d


    
Why does it change the capitals to lower case


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

I just read a comment way back mentioning student loans. Can I say the following?

I put myself through Uni as a single Mum. I now owe £19,000 and it goes up each year for an education that did not get me a job. I have to pay that back so to anyone who thinks they pay for this, they are wrong. Stop reading the Sun and the Mail and understand what its ACTUALLY like. Instead of taking the mick out of other's by claiming this is nothing but sob stories. No, its reality and its hard. If that makes you uncomfortable then move on from this thread, some of us have no choice but to live it. 

As for the mental health comment, the treatment for mental illness in this country is atrocious. Some illnesses do not regularly respond to medications or therapies. The problem with this country is that everyone is far too keen to either 1. cheat the system or 2. stamp all over the honest people who need help.

And again, to those nasty bigots on here...why so happy to pay your MP's expenses? Why do they get 100% of their live in Nanny for free plus their salary, their many homes, their other jobs. For what? Not exactly like they are 'doing' much.

For the 'get a job' brigade: Did you know they scrapped the back to work bonus? Did you know that to go from JSA into a job you have to spend 4-6 weeks with no money coming in. That you have to fund your own work clothes, food, electric, phone and travel fees out of the last of your JSA..and if a parent 4-6 weeks of childcare? That after that the government only pay 80% of childcare costs to working families (unless they are MP's of course) and that a lot of childcare providers won't take the vouchers? 

I'm glad I am no longer there, but I FEEL for the others in that position. That's what the government needs to fix. Anyone who makes a living on benefits (profits) is either starving instead or cheating the system.

I'm not going to say more on this because it makes me start ranting everytime. When my son was very small, I looked a lot younger then I was. I was taking a shortcut through an estate and someone spit on me yelling "damn single mum scrounger". An older gent too. I was living at home at the time, working. I was 20. That's the reality for many people on benefits. And we are not as much the minority that the press would lead you to believe.


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

ceretrea said:


> I just read a comment way back mentioning student loans. Can I say the following?
> 
> I put myself through Uni as a single Mum. I now owe £19,000 and it goes up each year for an education that did not get me a job. I have to pay that back so to anyone who thinks they pay for this, they are wrong. Stop reading the Sun and the Mail and understand what its ACTUALLY like. Instead of taking the mick out of other's by claiming this is nothing but sob stories. No, its reality and its hard. If that makes you uncomfortable then move on from this thread, some of us have no choice but to live it.
> 
> ...


I want to add my two pence to this, should I. Oh go on then....

I am a full time live in carer for a friend of mine who through no fault of his own has a long term life threatening health condition and disability and I get paid next to nothing from the welfare system but don't like to moan about it. I care full time (Day & Night, I do sleep by the way but I am there when needed). and it isn't the most glamorous thing to do. So you ask why do I do it? Well because I genuinely care for this person and have on many occasions gone above and beyond my own boundaries and even surprised myself. I get no thanks for what I do but I am not looking for any thanks I do this out of the kindness of my own heart and get a poxy £58.45 per week from the benefits agency. The benefits system is a mess and as you said people who need help from the Government aren't getting it because people are taking advantage of the system.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

cuddlesmycat said:


> I want to add my two pence to this, should I. Oh go on then....
> 
> I am a full time live in carer for a friend of mine who through no fault of his own has a long term life threatening health condition and disability and I get paid next to nothing from the welfare system but don't like to moan about it. I care full time (Day & Night, I do sleep by the way but I am there when needed). and it isn't the most glamorous thing to do. So you ask why do I do it? Well because I genuinely care for this person and have on many occasions gone above and beyond my own boundaries and even surprised myself. I get no thanks for what I do but I am not looking for any thanks I do this out of the kindness of my own heart and get a poxy £58.45 per week from the benefits agency. The benefits system is a mess and as you said people who need help from the Government aren't getting it because people are taking advantage of the system.


People like you save the governments millions every year! Its about bloody time they paid higher benefits to carers so more people would consider caring for their relatives.
I take my hat off to you


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

cuddlesmycat said:


> The benefits system is a mess and as you said people who need help from the Government aren't getting it because people are taking advantage of the system.


My heart goes out to you. My Dad cares for my Mum. She has had numerous strokes, a heart attack and possible cancer. She is still on the lowest rate DLA meaning he gets no carers allowance. I completely understand where you are coming from. Someone needs to sort it out whereby honest people are not punished.


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Just out of interest... did you claim your family allowance/ child benefit? :glare:


If I remember correctly the answer is no, I didn't claim it. But if I also remember correctly it was paid automatically - it wasn't 'claimed'. And, yes, it was spent. BUT the simple fact was we didn't know we were getting it until it was given to us. And, again, it was a pretty trivial amount. We didn't put it into our calculations about having children - unlike those who are moaning about it being taken away.

It's really simple. If you can afford to have kids then have them. If you can't afford them, don't. If you fall on hard times after you've had them then there is provision in unemployment benefit to help you (it's pretty cr*p but that's not the issue). If you have a disability, of whatever sort, then you should be able to claim benefits and if those cover your children then that's perfectly OK - indeed, desirable.

What's not OK is people who can well afford to have and look after their children asking for yet more money - particularly when, as exampled here, the money subsidises pets or whatever other interests people have. Benefits should be for people in need - not just available to anyone. But when I read of someone who is in a 40% tax bracket saying they rely on Children's benefit I'm afraid I have absolutely no sympathy at all.


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> If I remember correctly the answer is no, I didn't claim it. But if I also remember correctly it was paid automatically - it wasn't 'claimed'. And, yes, it was spent. BUT the simple fact was we didn't know we were getting it until it was given to us. And, again, it was a pretty trivial amount. We didn't put it into our calculations about having children - unlike those who are moaning about it being taken away.
> 
> It's really simple. If you can afford to have kids then have them. If you can't afford them, don't. If you fall on hard times after you've had them then there is provision in unemployment benefit to help you (it's pretty cr*p but that's not the issue). If you have a disability, of whatever sort, then you should be
> able to claim benefits and if those cover your children then that's perfectly OK - indeed, desirable.
> ...


Considering you have to physically send a form off for cb i dont believe you didnt realise you were getting it! If you are sooooo set in your ways regarding cb then you should have written to them and stopped the payments.

You took it, you spent it! You have no right to tell people they shouldnt have it. :nono:


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Considering you have to physically send a form off for cb i dont believe you didnt realise you were getting it! If you are sooooo set in your ways regarding cb then you should have written to them and stopped the payments.
> 
> You took it, you spent it! You have no right to tell people they shouldnt have it. :nono:


yep with your childs Birth certificate if i remember correctly (its been a while!) and give them your bank details or address for the giro's that you used to get (many years ago as i remember my mum getting them) which you also have to go and cash yourself. Funny how people forget when they are on their high horse about things they really dont know anything about spend their time assuming things about others


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

The Coalition government's decision to axe child benefit payments to over 1.2 million higher-rate tax earners has sparked a political backlash from professional families who stand to lose thousands of pounds a year.

Their anger will be compounded by new figures, which show that the benefit is being used to support nearly 29,000 children living in Poland, along with thousands of children elsewhere in Eastern Europe.

Under EU rules, child benefit is paid to parents who work and pay tax in the UK and whose children have stayed in their home countries.

The vast majority are likely to be lower-rate tax payers and will therefore carry on receiving the benefit once it is taken away from higher-rate earners in 2013 under Government plans announced last week.

Emma Boon, campaign manager of the Tax Payers Alliance said: "It is completely unfair that our taxpayers are expected to fund child benefits for children that do not live in this country."


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

LostGirl said:


> yep with your childs Birth certificate if i remember correctly (its been a while!) and give them your bank details or address for the giro's that you used to get (many years ago as i remember my mum getting them) which you also have to go and cash yourself. Funny how people forget when they are on their high horse about things they really dont know anything about spend their time assuming things about others


Thats right, the cba are not psychic and do not automatically know peoples bank details! And if i remember correctly when i was a kid my mother had a book and she used to have to cash her family allowance it was called back then so there is no way on earth someone would get it and not know about it! Hes talking out his @rse the bigoted hypocrite!


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

harley bear said:


> People like you save the governments millions every year! Its about bloody time they paid higher benefits to carers so more people would consider caring for their relatives.
> I take my hat off to you


Ive got the figure somewhere what informal carers save the government each year and its massive, i will find it

I have found a link, its from 2011 so the amount has more than likely gone up! It was £119 billion!!!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/may/12/carers-save-uk-119bn-a-year


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> Emma Boon, campaign manager of the Tax Payers Alliance said: "It is completely unfair that our taxpayers are expected to fund child benefits for children that do not live in this country."


Pretty much the opinion of most and what I said earlier .


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

ClaireLouise said:


> Ive got the figure somewhere what informal carers save the government each year and its massive, i will find it
> 
> I have found a link, its from 2011 so the amount has more than likely gone up! It was £119 billion!!!
> Carers save the country £119bn a year | Society | guardian.co.uk


Thats shocking!! i dont understand how they can pay careers so little when nursing homes and home helps cost so much!


----------



## ClaireLouise (Oct 11, 2009)

LostGirl said:


> Thats shocking!! i dont understand how they can pay careers so little when nursing homes and home helps cost so much!


Most care homes cost £400+ a week, informal carers are paid much much much less and have little support other than charity


----------



## skip (Sep 25, 2011)

I think that this government have been very successful in turning everyone against each other. They do say divide and conquer


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

ClaireLouise said:


> Most care homes cost £400+ a week, informal carers are paid much much much less and have little support other than charity


I think hers is between £600-700 a week, I know the staff dont get paid well either nuts really same with child care, costs the user £££ but pays the people who run it peanuts!


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

GoldenShadow said:


> And then all the 60K earners **** off abroad and we are left with mostly manual workers. In case you hadn't noticed here in the UK, we are now a luxury good/service industry, we cannot afford to lose the high earners, we need to keep them here.
> 
> I had a lecture from the CEO of Talk Talk yesterday, she said they intend to keep call centres out of the UK because it is 1/3 the cost, and it means they can *offer jobs in the UK that people WANT to do*, and which are more highly skilled, ie. can make use of all the grads we are churning out and have no jobs for.


Heard that so many times.... where are these jobs then? 3 times redundant two of the three jobs now done over seas. 20+ years experience, college etc etc counted for nothing when they wanted to pinch pennies! So tired of hearing this one trotted out!
This is where this goverment should be putting their foot down, make it worth while for companies to keep jobs in UK, employing UK residents and in turn let us invest in our own country.


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> ????????? YOU are one of those people. YOU are the one wanting a Child Benefit subsidy - not me.
> 
> Try and read what I wrote instead of rushing in with your hard done by stories. I said that I'm all in favour of disability benefits - because you don't have a choice about being disabled. As for the new tests - I've heard of one very ill lady who was told that because she could move an empty cardboard box that she'd be fit for work. Some test!
> 
> ...


Out of interest were you privately educated ??

Oh and when i said "run the country" i meant in a broader sense, eg nurse, doctor, vet, binman etc.

It's all very well not wanting to contribute to society but how would you envisage society functions if the youth arent educated or nurtured ?


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

harley bear said:


> Considering you have to physically send a form off for cb i dont believe you didnt realise you were getting it! If you are sooooo set in your ways regarding cb then you should have written to them and stopped the payments.
> 
> You took it, you spent it! You have no right to tell people they shouldnt have it. :nono:





LostGirl said:


> yep with your childs Birth certificate if i remember correctly (its been a while!) and give them your bank details or address for the giro's that you used to get (many years ago as i remember my mum getting them) which you also have to go and cash yourself. Funny how people forget when they are on their high horse about things they really dont know anything about spend their time assuming things about others





harley bear said:


> Thats right, the cba are not psychic and do not automatically know peoples bank details! And if i remember correctly when i was a kid my mother had a book and she used to have to cash her family allowance it was called back then so there is no way on earth someone would get it and not know about it! Hes talking out his @rse the bigoted hypocrite!


To the best of my knowledge I NEVER received any such form and I never had a Giro to cash. What you did may be at a different timescale to me.



RAINYBOW said:


> Out of interest were you privately educated ??
> 
> Oh and when i said "run the country" i meant in a broader sense, eg nurse, doctor, vet, binman etc.
> 
> It's all very well not wanting to contribute to society but how would you envisage society functions if the youth arent educated or nurtured ?


Yes, although my parents didn't pay for me. I won a scholarship to a grant maintained school.

Youth can be educated. I don't have a problem with that (in fact if you took your head out of your anal orifice and read things here I said so a few posts back). What I also said was that I wanted better education for my kids so I paid for it. I consider that value for my money. If you want to spend your money on something else that's up to you. But criticising me for doing things off my own bat for my children is laughable.

What I don't see is why I should further subsidise other people's children. If you want them - you pay for them. Simple. I'd much rather my taxes went on raising some war hero's pension than subsidising children of people who earn enough to support them. (Although most people apparently don't spend that child allowance on their children - it goes on things for themselves).

And, to make it 100% clear, if the parents are 'poor' or on other benefits then I agree they should get some state support for their children. But if they are earning good money then they should support them from what they earn and not expect others to do so. Anything else is pure greed.


----------



## CRL (Jan 3, 2012)

LostGirl said:


> I think hers is between £600-700 a week, I know the staff dont get paid well either nuts really same with child care, costs the user £££ but pays the people who run it peanuts!


i think it depends on the home, where the home is and the company its run by. i work in a care home run by a 'non profit' care provider. in the town my care home is there is 2 other care homes, 2 care agencies and a few assisted living blocks. all are run by different companies, some companies are profit ones others not. some are private, some are nhs funded. in one of the other homes a single bedroom is £1100 per week. if you move in with your partner to a double room its £1300 per week. this is a private care home. 
the home i work in costs around £800 per week. its a 60 bed nursing, residential and dementia home, 20 of each. 
if a person qualifies for residential care, eg. if they are over a certain age, cant cope at home etc, and they have less than £23,250 in savings then they are eligable for social services help to pay for the care. if they have savings over this they have to pay it themselves. 
as a carer i get just over minimum wage but am extrememly lucky that for the past 2 years i have got a wage increase, 7p last year and 3p this year. i work my ass of for that, sometimes 2 carers looking after 20 residents. care homes are not easy places to work unless you really enjoy what you do. 
as for carers at home i do also believe they should recieve more money and help for what they do. we have machines to help with moving people. home carers dont. whereas i come home with £800 a month a home carer gets around £200, the only difference is they look after 1 person and i look after 20 but i can get the help if i need it.

and as for the cb, i dont have kids so obviously dont recieve it. me and my husband find it hard to get by with just the 2 of us, we also have my pets, which i pay for. i dont plan on getting pregnant for a while yet as i know we couldnt afford it.


----------



## chichi (Apr 22, 2012)

GoldenShadow said:


> So you do think those earning 50K deserve some money back out of the pot too via CB, seeing as they put more in? If you say yes then I can understand where you are coming from. If you say no...


To be honest.....Im struggling to understand the workings of this 50K level...when two people earning under 50K each will continue to get CB fir tgeir kids.....even if their joint income could. ....for arguments sake.....be 95K....I dont really get that side of it.....am I missing something


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

chichi said:


> To be honest.....Im struggling to understand the workings of this 50K level...when two people earning under 50K each will continue to get CB fir tgeir kids.....even if their joint income could. ....for arguments sake.....be 95K....I dont really get that side of it.....am I missing something


Not really, it's shite logic like the government often come up with! I guess they assume if one parent earns over 50K you should get doubly screwed by extra tax and less money back out the pot. I can see why they want not everybody to have it but I don't think it's fair to cut it up on the basis of one parent being in the next tax bracket. That's a grand less a year that person will get back of the tax they pay...


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

northnsouth said:


> Heard that so many times.... where are these jobs then? 3 times redundant two of the three jobs now done over seas. 20+ years experience, college etc etc counted for nothing when they wanted to pinch pennies! So tired of hearing this one trotted out!
> This is where this goverment should be putting their foot down, make it worth while for companies to keep jobs in UK, employing UK residents and in turn let us invest in our own country.


If you read the following sentence and not just lynched half of my post you will see I said they are grad jobs and the vast majority of times these are for new grads with *no experience* hence schemes with lower pay to begin with.

If they base more call centres in the UK they could not afford to offer cheap services like they do now. Lets remember Talk Talk's typical and aimed customer is single parents with young children on a low income. They are a business therefore they have to do what is in their best interests to grow and it's not bloody giving people here call centre jobs when the pay is minimum wage, people can't live off that. We've seen on this forum the living wage is a whole £1 above minimum wage.


----------



## GoldenShadow (Jun 15, 2009)

I'm in subscribing from this, seriously need to get more essays done!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

skip said:


> I think that this government have been very successful in turning everyone against each other. They do say divide and conquer


*I said the same thing to my hubby. And whilst we fight among ourselves, they get away with murder.*


----------



## RAINYBOW (Aug 27, 2009)

AlbertRoss said:


> To the best of my knowledge I NEVER received any such form and I never had a Giro to cash. What you did may be at a different timescale to me.
> 
> Yes, although my parents didn't pay for me. I won a scholarship to a grant maintained school.
> 
> ...


I have my head up my arse ! Mmmm pots and kettles  Most of my posts were actually aimed at DT and if you look you can see there is a fair bit of "banter" in them  Clearly your private education taught you no manners and very few debating skills (yes now i am critiscising you because you started it and i am in that kind of mood today so ner ner na ner ner  note the level we have descended to  ) Well done you for winning a scholarship. What if you hadn't been academic, not all children are ?? I have one that is and one that isn't. Now that doesn't bother me because i don't believe academia is the be all and end all and i know some VERY high acheivers who don't have a private education.

I don't believe at any point i critiscised you for your descions so you just made that up, i think it is admirable to sacrifice your own luxuries to give your children an education if a private education is that important to you  I chose to leave a reasonably well paid job so that i could be at home with my kids in their formative years (sorry but for me that is just more important ) I took the standard "year off" for maternity and then started as a childminder to enable me to continue to be at home (so yes i work and contribute  ) My CHOICE/SACRIFICE meant less money in the household and back then we were on alot less than £40k so yes the CB was extremely helpful some months (oh and i had no expensive pets then just so you know  ) To afford a private education for my kids i would have to go back into Insurance and sell my soul to the devil, work very long hours probably commuting to London, never see my kids and basically have a **** life because even in doing that we would still have to spend every spare penny on their schooling. My kids love their life and are very happy, bright, well adjusted kids who i hope will do well because we continue to support their needs and that is the very best most parents can do . I think to say MOST parents spend the CB on themselves is just a bit too "Daily Mail" for my liking.

I see my choice as no less noble than yours to be honest. I put my kids first  (note the smiley !!!)

Also if you read posts you would see i have also stated that i dont disagree as such with the removal of some CB however i do "begrudge" people losing it whilst some families sit there on £95k and continue to recieve it and the Government wont tackle the bigger tax earning issues like corporation tax .

So just to recap

We both agree that it is fair to remove CB from higher earners (although i think they MUST address the dual income issue)
We are both happy to pay taxes to support state educated children and families suffering genuine hardship.

 Only on a forum could 2 people who fundamentally agree end up arguing :crazy:

Anyway i am off to play with my new Puppy before i have to give her back because they took my CB away  (please PLEASE see the humour intended in that  )


----------



## AlbertRoss (Feb 16, 2009)

RAINYBOW said:


> We both agree that it is fair to remove CB from higher earners (although i think they MUST address the dual income issue)
> We are both happy to pay taxes to support state educated children and families suffering genuine hardship.
> 
> Only on a forum could 2 people who fundamentally agree end up arguing :crazy:


I think your last point sums it up rather well :001_smile: (rep given)


----------



## harley bear (Feb 20, 2010)

AlbertRoss said:


> To the best of my knowledge I NEVER received any such form and I never had a Giro to cash. What you did may be at a different timescale to me.


Really? Then could you please explain to me how they managed to get your bank details? Considering your opinions of child benefit why did you not ring them and stop the payments? Why didnt you give them the money back?

I personally believe your talking a load of bollucks and if you are genuine and didnt realise you were getting cb (very unlikely as i said they dont receive bank details via telepathy) then the private education was wasted on you


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

CRL said:


> i think it depends on the home, where the home is and the company its run by. i work in a care home run by a 'non profit' care provider. in the town my care home is there is 2 other care homes, 2 care agencies and a few assisted living blocks. all are run by different companies, some companies are profit ones others not. some are private, some are nhs funded. in one of the other homes a single bedroom is £1100 per week. if you move in with your partner to a double room its £1300 per week. this is a private care home.
> the home i work in costs around £800 per week. its a 60 bed nursing, residential and dementia home, 20 of each.
> if a person qualifies for residential care, eg. if they are over a certain age, cant cope at home etc, and they have less than £23,250 in savings then they are eligable for social services help to pay for the care. if they have savings over this they have to pay it themselves.
> as a carer i get just over minimum wage but am extrememly lucky that for the past 2 years i have got a wage increase, 7p last year and 3p this year. i work my ass of for that, sometimes 2 carers looking after 20 residents. care homes are not easy places to work unless you really enjoy what you do.
> ...


Hers is private, I think nearly all of ours here are now there was one or two but i know about 2 yrs ago they closed one down. She well i say she but the family had to sell her home to fund her care. I must say she does get good care and even her dementia seems alot better.

AlbertRoss how old are you children now? Can i ask who funds the scholarships i know the schools do but is it parents who pay full fees pay a percentage towards the children that "win" these scholarships?


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

This affects me. 

While I accept our household will justifiably lose the benefit, it galls the hell out of me on two sides, firstly the misnomer of two parents earning under the cut off still receiving the benefit. Secondly, apparently there is going to be no saving of money, the admin needed to follow rhrough with this change swallows up any perceived saving.

One point to mull over for those affected, the tax charge is on nett earnings not gross, so if on your self assessment you can get below 49,995 (i think thst the cut off) then you can keep the benefit or at least some of it cos it goes up in increments.

Please think carefully before opting out of receiving this, if your child is under 12 and you (the person receiving CB are not working) it affects your future state pension payout.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

westie~ma said:


> This affects me.
> 
> While I accept our household will justifiably lose the benefit, it galls the hell out of me on two sides, firstly the misnomer of two parents earning under the cut off still receiving the benefit. Secondly, apparently there is going to be no saving of money, the admin needed to follow rhrough with this change swallows up any perceived saving.
> 
> ...


You make some excellent points

The cost of administering the changes will be horrendous (and I suspect probably far higher than any savings made)

A lot of people may not realise that child benefit automatically translates to "pension credits" - again a very valid point -

Another thing a lot of women didn't realise particularly in years gone by (I suspect / hope this has changed now - never been married so wouldn't know), is that they chose to pay NI as a married rather than single person - it might have seemed like a good idea at the time - but significantly affects any state pension.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

harley bear said:


> Really? Then could you please explain to me how they managed to get your bank details? Considering your opinions of child benefit why did you not ring them and stop the payments? Why didnt you give them the money back?
> 
> I personally believe your talking a load of bollucks and if you are genuine and didnt realise you were getting cb (very unlikely as i said they dont receive bank details via telepathy) then the private education was wasted on you


To be fair Albert may well have not known - hasn't CB always gone to the mother in which case Mrs Albert would have completed whatever forms


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

swarthy said:


> You make some excellent points
> 
> The cost of administering the changes will be horrendous (and I suspect probably far higher than any savings made)
> 
> ...


*I made this mistake.*


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

swarthy said:


> You make some excellent points
> 
> The cost of administering the changes will be horrendous (and I suspect probably far higher than any savings made)
> 
> ...


I didn't know about the NI, haven't had earnings since kids were small but might have soon with letting out the Ugly House. How can I claim single NI when I am married, is that even legal?


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

westie~ma said:


> I didn't know about the NI, haven't had earnings since kids were small but might have soon with letting out the Ugly House. How can I claim single NI when I am married, is that even legal?


"Until 1977 married women and widows could 'elect' (choose) to pay a reduced rate of Class 1 National Insurance contributions when an employee, and not to pay Class 2 National Insurance contributions when self-employed."

HM Revenue & Customs: Married women, widows and reduced National Insurance


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> "Until 1977 married women and widows could 'elect' (choose) to pay a reduced rate of Class 1 National Insurance contributions when an employee, and not to pay Class 2 National Insurance contributions when self-employed."
> 
> HM Revenue & Customs: Married women, widows and reduced National Insurance


Thank you

Ah I see, this doesn't affect me.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

westie~ma said:


> Thank you
> 
> Ah I see, this doesn't affect me.


I did think things had changed - the people I am referring to are already in retirement - not sure if it had something to do with the fact that a married couples state pension is less than the pension of two "individual" pensions - but in the majority of cases, one pair of the partnership will pass away before the other - and from what I know, it still impacts then.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

DoodlesRule said:


> To be fair Albert may well have not known - hasn't CB always gone to the mother in which case Mrs Albert would have completed whatever forms


Typically yes.

My daughter was born nearly quarter of a century ago (GULP) - so it is a bit hazy - but just checked with a friend and she said they were actually given forms in the maternity ward to complete and return.

The only other time I had to do anything was when my daughter hit 16 to sign to say she was staying in full-time education.

I had a book to take to the PO - it was only the last year or so it went directly into my bank.


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

swarthy said:


> I had a book to take to the PO - it was only the last year or so it went directly into my bank.


Payment direct into the bank became a widely advertised option only 9 years ago.


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

My eldest is 17, always had it paid into the bank.


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

I was having a read at the papers and came across this statistic.40,000 kids who live abroad are in receipt if family allowance??? I don't want to pay for that .


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

westie~ma said:


> My eldest is 17, always had it paid into the bank.


Yup but they did the advetising for that 9 years ago, a benefit wide ad campaign to try and get everyone to move to a bank account so they could try phasing out the old giro system.


----------



## myshkin (Mar 23, 2010)

noogsy said:


> I was having a read at the papers and came across this statistic.40,000 kids who live abroad are in receipt if family allowance??? I don't want to pay for that .


You're not paying for that....in a completely unprecedented and surprising move, a newspaper has made some stuff up:

Is govt spending £36 million CB abroad?


----------



## LostGirl (Jan 16, 2009)

ceretrea said:


> Yup but they did the advetising for that 9 years ago, a benefit wide ad campaign to try and get everyone to move to a bank account so they could try phasing out the old giro system.


My oldest is 8yrs old and at the time i remember having to tick if i want it in the bank or for them to send me a giro to cash at the post office, so that sounds about right. I dont think i had that option for my 7yr old though.


----------



## Pointermum (Jul 2, 2010)

So are the government sending out warnings that we will either have to make the person do a self assessment for us to keep the NI stamp or make us (mostly) women pay NI stamp , so we lose child benefit and need to pay out money  

Funny they have neglected to mention ANYTHING about the NI side of things


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

ceretrea said:


> Payment direct into the bank became a widely advertised option only 9 years ago.


I'm not quite sure why that was aimed at me 

We've not had CB in this house for over 5 years - I resisted payment going into my bank for as long as possible because I intentionally kept the money separate from day to day finances


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

swarthy said:


> I'm not quite sure why that was aimed at me
> 
> We've not had CB in this house for over 5 years - I resisted payment going into my bank for as long as possible because I intentionally kept the money separate from day to day finances


It was expanding on the 'straight into the bank' vein of the thread. Explaining that it was still optional and the move towards making payments solely into bank accounts didn't start il 9 years ago. 
I also intentionally kept mine seperate, its a shame I don't have that option anymore.


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

Pointermum said:


> So are the government sending out warnings that we will either have to make the person do a self assessment for us to keep the NI stamp or make us (mostly) women pay NI stamp , so we lose child benefit and need to pay out money
> 
> Funny they have neglected to mention ANYTHING about the NI side of things


The NI stuff I picked up from Paul Lewis off of Moneybox on radio 4. He tweets really useful stuff 

My hubs is the only wage earner, he already does a self assessment every year, so he needs to work out whether or not his earnings after tax are going to take us below the threashold. If we are still over then I will opt out as my youngest is 13 yo so this won't affect my NI. Although if I wanted to I could keep claiming and it gets taken out of his wages as a tax.

The details don't usually get mentioned on the news etc, need to dig deeper into it to know for certain how this will affect peeps individually.


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

BBC News - High earners abroad may keep full child benefit

Just to make the unfairness of it even more unfair ...


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

Yup it's wrong


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

noogsy said:


> Yup it's wrong


Plus it all adds to admin costs, but it helps Cameron look good cos he's taking money from high earners.

My worry is with the CB going, fine, but they still haven't decided if high earners will be able to benefit from the change in the tax at the lower end, first £9K odd rising to £10K in 2014/15.

Makes you wonder why bother staying in this country just to get clobbered


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

weve looked into it and wistfully look at houses abroad,
but things are bad there to .


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

noogsy said:


> weve looked into it and wistfully look at houses abroad,
> but things are bad there to .


But certain countries you get a LOT more bang for your buck in terms of property particularly at the moment 

I was looking at a lovely bungalow recently in France with 2 bedrooms, bathroom, en-suites, a lovely living area, around an acre of land and a swimming pool - c£100K


----------



## vampirecatladyx (Sep 26, 2012)

we have had our child tax credits cut from £280 + to £108 per month cos I had a freelance job for a few months and earned £1600....now I can't work much cos of ME... not had it put back up and can't get any kind of benefits cos I was self employed for a while , even tho I didn't earn much..... they said I haven't paid enough stamp but will only look at the year I had a child, an op then went self employed. All the years previous I was working full time for nearly 20 years.

this country absolutely sucks...no wonder people want to go abroad.
I have to work 2 jobs, while looking after a 4 year old and having ME and allergic reactions, just to keep food on the table!!!!


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

we lost every thing and are loosing our family allowance :O( my youngest is disabled.my hubby works 6 weeks away the 3 weeks home to make the money but he dosent see our kids and grandbabies and misses so much.its hard going.it must be nice to be comfy with a hubby in bed every night while claiming every benifit going :


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

re emigrating ive always looked at spain or the canaries or greece.ive never looked at france so i will have a look and do some homework.hubby is going to the footie tonight so i will look after all the guisers have done the rounds


----------



## ceretrea (Jan 24, 2011)

noogsy said:


> we lost every thing and are loosing our family allowance :O( my youngest is disabled.my hubby works 6 weeks away the 3 weeks home to make the money but he dosent see our kids and grandbabies and misses so much.its hard going.it must be nice to be comfy with a hubby in bed every night while claiming every benifit going :


I used to claim every benefit going, I met my hubby who works almost every night on shift to help pay for us and our crappy house. I spend each night on my own and I wouldn't change it to go back onto benefits. Now I have a life instead of just existing.


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

swarthy i fancy the land thing cos i adore gardening and have a allotment so i will look at that option  thankyou.


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

noogsy said:


> we lost every thing and are loosing our family allowance :O( my youngest is disabled.my hubby works 6 weeks away the 3 weeks home to make the money but he dosent see our kids and grandbabies and misses so much.its hard going.it must be nice to be comfy with a hubby in bed every night while claiming every benifit going :


Hmmmm I've seen my husband out of work albeit for a short time, he's a confirmed workaholic, he's far better off in work ... holidays, he takes work with him, thankfully he loves his work. Even during downtime I know he's thinking about work, that's just the way he is.

I joke to him that when he retires I shall go out to work :lol:


----------



## noogsy (Aug 20, 2009)

aw bless hun my hubby has been made reduntant 4 times over the years.i always was working though or found a job double quick .we are older so have survived the tough times.and you will be the same  hopefully your hubby will get a job soon before he totally guts your house...lol mine use to do things in the house when he was paid off and it was fine to begin with then really used to get on my nerves:crazy:.i recon everything happens for a reason the last time my hub was not working was millenium year and he was home when his mum died suddenly.which was ment to be .fingers crossed for your wee hubby xxx


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

noogsy said:


> aw bless hun my hubby has been made reduntant 4 times over the years.i always was working though or found a job double quick .we are older so have survived the tough times.and you will be the same  hopefully your hubby will get a job soon before he totally guts your house...lol mine use to do things in the house when he was paid off and it was fine to begin with then really used to get on my nerves:crazy:.i recon everything happens for a reason the last time my hub was not working was millenium year and he was home when his mum died suddenly.which was ment to be .fingers crossed for your wee hubby xxx


Thank you, he's found another job pretty quickly, I was talking about 2years ago when he was home. I knew he'd find something what worried me was where. Now he works a three hour round trip commute away. Not ideal but needs must. No jobs around here that paid anywhere near good enough.

I count our blessings cos others aren't as fortunate but hubby is the type he needs to work and while he was applying he was not willing to lower his aspirations and limit himself to just this area. I did suggest abroad but he difn 't want to with the kids.

I told him I'd follow him anywhere .. as soon as he got his new job I bought our big tent then said to him I now have a tent to live in if the worst comes to the worst :lol:


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

noogsy said:


> we lost every thing and are loosing our family allowance :O( my youngest is disabled.my hubby works 6 weeks away the 3 weeks home to make the money but he dosent see our kids and grandbabies and misses so much.its hard going.it must be nice to be comfy with a hubby in bed every night while claiming every benifit going :


You are far from the only one who has to do this - I've spent up to 9 months at a time working away - leaving my OH, daughter (who had left school by then and was driving) and very trustworthy (if rather expensive) dogsitter / walker at home.

I used to leave home either around 8pm on a Sunday night or 4am Monday morning and do a 220 mile drive to start work at 830 - stay in a motorway hotel all week, then return home after another 220 mile drive around 9pm on a Friday night.

I was then fortunate enough to be able to work from home for the rest of my contract with just occasional visits on site - it's just sometimes what you have to do to earn a living and from my experience, certainly isn't unusual (although it is predominantly men who do it - so we've had a bit of role reversal in our house until my health became too poor for me to be able to do it anymore 

I presently work from home with limited travel - but do fear what will happen after this, as without some drastic (and potentially dangerous) surgery which I won't get on the NHS and can't afford to go private - I am simply not in a position to live that sort of life any more


----------



## tinktinktinkerbell (Nov 15, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> Households where at least one person earns more than £50,000 will have the benefit effectively reduced or stopped.


good, about time


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

noogsy said:


> re emigrating ive always looked at spain or the canaries or greece.ive never looked at france so i will have a look and do some homework.hubby is going to the footie tonight so i will look after all the guisers have done the rounds


Uzbekistan! I'm getting my sister to knit us a Yurt! We'll be rich I tell you!


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

> Originally Posted by JANICE199 View Post
> Households where at least one person earns more than £50,000 will have the benefit effectively reduced or stopped.


Damn Tories! whose going buy the Pimms?


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

DT said:


> And thats no forgeting that *council houses or social housing come with NO repair bills!* You central heating breaks down, you roof springs a leak or your ceilings collapse and you are faced with massive bills if you own your home


God, the times Ive heard that one

No, I wouldnt have to pay for repairs BUT remember, like with my parents, a 50 year tenancy could produce over £90,000 income for the council, thats more than any central heating boiler I know of, a whole installation of heating, £2K, they had new windows £2K and not much more, they never had HB, they could have bought the house for £13,000 but hadnt got it


----------



## tinktinktinkerbell (Nov 15, 2008)

DT said:


> And thats no forgeting that council houses or social housing come with NO repair bills! You central heating breaks down, you roof springs a leak or your ceilings collapse and you are faced with massive bills if you own your home


that is not true what so ever

council tenants have to pay for a lot of their own repairs now, we had a hole in the floor we had to repair ourselves


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

Letters out today... they never make it simple do they 

You have to declare if you earn above 60k or above 50K so that's open to abuse for a start.....and if you earn above 50K but less than 60K you have to fill out a self assesment tax return form every year..:


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

paddyjulie said:


> Letters out today... they never make it simple do they
> 
> You have to declare if you earn above 60k or above 50K so that's open to abuse for a start.....and if you earn above 50K but less than 60K you have to fill out a self assesment tax return form every year..:


*And no doubt if you make a mistake it will be all your fault.*


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> *And no doubt if you make a mistake it will be all your fault.*


I would think a few people will just say stick it where the sun don't shine and do without, rather than fill a self assessment out every year .


----------

