Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Child Benefit to be scrapped for higher earners
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
LOL!
erm........
Riggsy - you have paid for your pension. Are you sure there has been no contributions whatsoever from the state?
On the decline of industry, while I have sympathy for the decimation of such activities, they became unsustainable (i.e. not cost effective). Granted lefties love to blame Thatcher, but I think you'll find that under the last government, the gap between manufacturing and service sectors widened. But we'll gloss over that shall we.
Personally I think all state handouts should be means tested (child allowance, winter fuel etc) but don't disagree with child benefit per se.
If people without children should get tax credits as they fund the education system but do not use it, should people with children in private school also get the same kick backs? Using the same logic, yes they should. In the same way anyone with private health should be reimbursed.
I think Smithy was just being provocative with that "selfish people who choose not to have kids".
However, it used to be put to me that I was selfish for not having any, many years ago. Or maybe it was that I didn't want any BECAUSE I was selfish? Whatever, I haven't heard that one in a long time.
Dave: I think it may be, basically.
The planet will be fine. We just won't be around to see it recover (and neither will the polar bears and some other species).
The whole global warming/consuming more than we produce/depleting natural resources thing is based on the effect these things have on the human race. If the human race dies out, which species will care that there's no oil left, or diamonds, or wheat? All we are destroying is the part of the planet that sustains US. And in some ways we deserve that.
<dons li'l tin hat>
Dustin I am not saying that I have paid for it all, just that I have paid towards it. When I worked in the private sector I paid so much the firm paid so much into my pension. I just get a bit annoyed that the public sector pension is seen as an evil thing. Most public sector employees are not on large incomes. Have a look at the pay of a private in the army or a support worker in the NHS.
I am not blaming the tories for everthing and actually have little support for any of the main parties but do like ideas from them all. I agree that industry should have been supported in the "good times" in the 90s to create a more stable economy.
I also agree that all benifits should have some form of means testing so that the cash goes to those that need it most.
Hey, they get free housing. If we could just dig a hole to live in where we felt like it, we'd all be so much better off.
Apart from builders, of course.
Oh just thought if we all hibernated through the winter like some bears do we could do away with winter fuel allowance.......thus saving more money,
The bears are onto something.
_certainly_
_conveyor_
or it might be _conveyer_
I hear many parents who put the childrens family allowance straight into an account for the children for when they leave home etc..............If they can afford to get by weekly without this money then I think that it can safely be taken away without too much problems........
That said i spend mine so i need it......... .honest............
we might not like children but i heard this week that there are more 80+ year olds in this country now than children...........we need some children to make sure there are enough carers in the future to look after us all when we are in our care homes
mmm- we are not doing the planet we live in much good. I would like for my grandkids and neicies and nephews a cleaner pleasant planet for them to live on. Good if society embraced better those who choose not to have kids and maybe restricting kids to 2 a piece (with state funding anyway). We could do with consuming and wasting a lot less than we do. That means a societal shift in attitude on a big scale. Quality of life rather than quantity of possessions should be the focus.
What a f*cked up housing market when folk cannot afford to own or even rent the accomodation in the place they were born in. State needs to possess a quota of houses in every area. The situation we are in now is due to private sector activity at all levels.
Not currently in my opinion. A universal payout to all with children is not a benefit. It is about to become one though.
CTC/ WFTC ARE benefits because you have to qualify for them through means testing and are therefore handouts.
Just spoken to a VERY upset mum at school. She is an A&E sister at the local hospital, works every hour God sends for her kids. She is a single mum who has worked like a demon to get to her grade. Her childcare bill is through the roof because of shift work and she has a mortgage to pay.
She is "just" over this threshold. She doesn't get WFTC or anything like that. She earns too much. They don't take into account the massive childcare bill.
Now she has just lost £120+ a month. Her solution? To reduce her hours or get a different job. "They don't reward the hard working" she said....
And she's probably right. I can hear it sticking in her throat that a couple can have an income of £86,000 divided equally and still qualify.
There will always be some people who will always be just over the cutoff.................I agree that it should be a family thing not an individual thing.must be trying to promote marriage but a strange way......
But its hard to believe after so many years of hearing how crap nurses pay is that a sister is getting over £45,000 a year.........not as crap as it was maybe.......
Haven't read back so forgive me if this a repeat. Firstly, if you're on £45K you shouldn't need anything from the state. That's a decent wage, so make sensible choices to make sure you live to the standard you wish within that budget. Secondly, what they should also do is halt child benefit from the second kid onwards. Two is enough. You want more, budget accordingly. Go without one of your holidays, drive an older car.
Have we had the usual "I've not got kids so why should I pay for yours" rant yet?
If you don't need child benefit on 40-45k then you don't need it on 80k - yet this policy will leave some households on the higher figure getting it.
Whether you think parents deserve a subsidy for bringing up the next generation whose taxes will support most of the childless people on here in their old age or not is largely a philosophical question. But whichever way you go on that I can't see how anyone thinks the way this is being implemented is fair - expedient maybe but not fair.
DR, TL.
Should be judged on household income IMHO. If your family income is over 50K a year, there's no way you depend on your child benefit.
My colleague suggested you should get it only for the first child as "women have kids just for the child benefit"...erm, I think not. £40 a month does not make that much difference, but it will buy me food when I've no wages coming in.