Child Benefit to be scrapped for higher earners

2456712

Comments

  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭

    What if she has saved for her own pension JB? Also I'm damn sure that she's been paying NI throughout her working life which is a contributing factor. Not everyone tries to fiddle the system and I'm sorry popsider i hear what you are saying but if you really can't afford it there are things that can be done, having a word with your school is a starting point.

    Being a parent IS expensive, you know this so don't become one if you can't afford to be one or become one but don't complain when you have to pay for stuff and expect it to be paid for by others kids are expensive..... FACT

  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    Johnny Blaze wrote (see)
    Wilkie, has the point entirely escaped you that people's children will be paying for YOUR pension soon enough?


    Not at all - just as I've been paying for the pensions of the previous generation (along with the education of the next).

    I won't expect an EXTRA hand-out to fund my soccer lessons, music club or after-tea-dance activities though.  If I can't afford them, I won't do them.

  • CindersCinders ✭✭✭
    Wilkie, fair point.  We paid privately for our round of IVF.
  • BarklesBarkles ✭✭✭

    The thing is that nothing is as simple as it seems.

    The only thing that is clear is that I will end up worse off. What galls me is that I began work in 1986, have never missed a day. Have always born the brunt of evey budget since that time. I am PAYE so there is no where for me to find tax dodges,.. and I have become, Govts target number one, every time. Bar none.

    I do resent paying to a system to prop up the workshy, as well as the corporate crooks who employ accountants to hide wealth or claim it back.

    As a society we have hard judgemets to make -are we willing to see children actually homeless in order to stamp down on benefits to their  parents? Are we willing to live with the consquences of a generation of young people who have been even more written off then the present one?

    Answers need to be long term, and widely considered.

  • Nope. It isn't. 

    Its not like a private pension where you pay into a pot and the pot is what pays out when you retire.

    Pensions are paid from the money of people paying tax today. Look up the phrase "Ponzi scheme" for more information.

  • And what Horny said + 1. Put much better than I could.image
  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭
    Wilkie wrote (see)

    I know you weren't asking me, Cinders, but MY beef with IVF is the idea of the NHS paying for it.

    I'm childfree by choice, but I do understand that a lot of people would like to have children but can't, but they are not actually ILL, not in need of treatment to save their lives, or their limbs, so I don't agree with the NHS funding very expensive rounds of IVF.

    I get the IVF argument to but i don't agree with it, there are some couples desperate for children and the reasons they can't are out of their control, we have the NHS to fund this kind of treatment for people who can't themselves so why shouldn't they. I would favour an arguement against gastric band surgery for overweight people (DIET MUCH) before I favour one against treating people with IVF.
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    Barkles wrote (see)

    As a society we have hard judgemets to make -are we willing to see children actually homeless in order to stamp down on benefits to their  parents?

    Bring back the work-house, I say image

  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭
    Johnny Blaze wrote (see)

    Nope. It isn't. 

    Its not like a private pension where you pay into a pot and the pot is what pays out when you retire.

    Pensions are paid from the money of people paying tax today. Look up the phrase "Ponzi scheme" for more information.

    You are incorrect, NI payments are used to contribute towards state retirement pension.
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭

    JWrun - I'm with you on the gastric band thing, too.

    There are too many actually sick people awaiting treatment, or being told they can't have a treatment, because of lack of funding in the NHS.

    Money should not be taken away from treating the ill to assist others to reproduce.

  • Cite your source that state pensions are properly fundedimage
  • BarklesBarkles ✭✭✭

    Playing devil's advocate on the NHS thingy - what if it's far cheaper to fit a gastric band to a tubby person than, say, cope with the long term effects of extreme obesity over a prolonged period of time... what if it actually saves money?

    I guess I prefer to take the long term view...

  • To be fair I was making a remark more about the pensions public sector workers get, which are certainly NOT fully funded.

    And the reasons given for G operations are exactly what barkles said - they save more money long term.

    it is alleged.

  • Cinders - my beef with IVF is succinctly answered by Wilkie

    but to add and to pick up on what JWRun says:

    "there are some couples desperate for children and the reasons they can't are out of their control"

    yes - but equally there are loads of kids who need adopting as well. I understand the need of many to want biological offspring but when many sessions of treatment fail, then why don't they turn to adoption? it's the funding of these people by the NHS that gets my grumble - just accept that nature can play cruel tricks and move on
  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭
    Johnny Blaze wrote (see)
    Cite your source that state pensions are properly fundedimage
    Never said it was "properly" funded imageJust that NI contributions played their part!
  • Wilkie wrote

    You could take the issue of the uniform up with the school, though.  You could become a parent governor and have a say in the way the school is run, and whether or not there should be a uniform. 

    When you say THE STATE should pay some subsidy, that actually means THE TAX PAYERS, society, people like me.  Who are already paying for the education of your children.  Educating them may be imposed on you, but paying the full cost of it is not.  You want free education for your kids, AND some cash?

    Wilkie - OK but when my kids are of working age is it OK if their tax money only goes to parents - seeing as we are the ones that brought up the next generation.   You lot can save up to keep yourselves in old age ?

    We live in a society - I pay tax for lots of services that I don't use.   I've never had a hospital stay, I never use libraries, I don't do a lot of driving - I still pay for it all.   We get no other benefit or tax break yet we still pay for them.  The idea that because you don't have kids you shouldn't have to pay for them doesn't really travel well if you apply it to everything.   We live in a society and bringing up kids - the kids who will be paying tax to keep you and the rest of us in the future - is very very expensive.   It's not totally unreasonable to pay some kind of subsidy.  

    OK so if the country can't afford it then it can't afford it - in which case don't just chop it totally for those with one income over 45k where they might be far less well off than other households with 2 incomes of 40k and fewer children.  

  • image

    Its more public sector pensions where the problem of shortfall lies, I believe. 

    I suspect that's another candidate for the axe sooner rather than later - there'll be blood on the streets I tell thee!

  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭

    Barkles you make a fair point.

    But FB, that is a personal choice, some people may not want to adopt and may have emotional barriers that would hinder them adopting, Its very easy to say "nature has played a cruel trick" but given that there is an inate need to reproduce for a majority of people, some may not be able to shrug it off so easily. That is a very black and white view of an emotional issue that is pretty much grey all over!

  • Other than one or two examples like NI and ahem, road tax and fuel tax and the TV license fee, most central govt taxes are unhypothecated.

    That is, they have no pre-determined purpose. So you can't opt out of paying for other people's kids because you don't like kids. Or propping up doley chavs/benefit/health tourists because you don't agee with it.

    Basically the govt takes your dosh and ladles it out how it bloody well likes and just get used to it.

    Jog on, mr/mrs taxpayer. image

  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭

    But pops its not your RIGHT to have a benefit, what if you do need the hospital? You do drive so you use those services, libraries?? I'm sure there are better examples of where our money goes. You keep saying we live in a "society", yes we do but your attitude veers on the individual, if we live in a scoiety for the benefit of all, not just you and your family, we should stump up. I agree the rule that this will be applied to individuals rather than couples doesn't make sense but I can't say that i disagree with the move.

    I'm also sure that if the NHS was scrapped and we all had to fork out for insurance there would be a lot more disgruntled people

    Edited to say - not sure why i mentioned the NHS in this context but it popped into my head!!.

  • "That is a very black and white view of an emotional issue that is pretty much grey all over!"

    and I won't disagree with that statement either but I'll stick with my black and white view even so
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭

    Damn right there will, be JB! image

    Pops, I don't have a problem with paying for the education of kids, but stuff like the extra, after-school activities, and so on - surely that's for parents to pay for if they think it has value?

  • Good man - I like a man who knows his own mindimage
  • It is all quite simple really, we are just another animal on this planet and our sole consideration is to continue our race, society should support those offspring as they are the future of our species. And those who selfishly choose not to have children or who cannot because they are reproductive rejects should be made to do their bit by helping support those who are doing parential their duty!
  • Why would anyone earning £40,000 a year need child benefit anyway?
  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭
    RICKSTER wrote (see)
    Why would anyone earning £40,000 a year need child benefit anyway?
    BOOM!!
  • NessieNessie ✭✭✭

    12 runners all want to go to a race.

    "Let's not drive 12 cars there, it'd be too expensive.  We'll hire a minibus and share the cost. Good for the environment and we all save money"

    "Yay! - great idea"

    Runner 1 is elected as the organiser.  Hires the bus, fills it with fuel, arranges all the pick-ups.

    Runner 2 - "I live closest to the race, so I'm going to pay less than the rest of you."

    Runner 3 - "I live furthest away from the race, but I'm not paying any more that anyone else!"

    Runner 4 - "I earn less than you lot, so I'm paying less"

    Runner 5 - " I earn more than the rest of you, but why should I pay more for the same thing"

    Runner 6 - "I want to bring my wife and 2 kids with me, and there's room on the bus, so I will"

    Runner 7 - "If Runner 6 gets to bring his family, I want to bring a couple of friends too, for support"

    Runner 8 - "What about my dog?  He trains with me."

    Runner 9 - "Can you drop me off at Silverstone on the way home.  It's only 20 miles out of the way.  But I don't want to pay any more for it.

    Runner 10 - "Stuff this, I'm not going with you lot.  I'll take my own car.  And I'm not paying now 'cause I'm not using the bus"

    Runner 11 - "I'm injured so I'm not going.  I'm not paying either."

    Runners 2 - 9 - "We're all going to pay the same as Runner 4.  Why should he get it cheaper"

    Runner 1 - "I've paid out £150 - all I've got back is £60.  Why should I be out of pocket?"

    Runners 2 - 12 -  "Well, you should have organised it better............................"

Sign In or Register to comment.