FAQ |
Members List |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#1 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Sorry but should people whos household income is at least £44,000 really be whinging about not getting an extra £50 a week? They need to look at the bigger picture, there are people out there living off child benefits altogether with no extra income
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |||
|
||||
REVIVAL
|
Do what I heard suggested today, Women who just sit at home and have 5-6 kids, well only let them get benefits for only two children.
__________________
WALK ON WATER
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |||
|
||||
Account Vacant
|
Quote:
Its £20.30 for the first qualifying child then £13.40 for each qualifying child after that. It doesnt really make much difference to people with over 44 grand a year does it? Unless their budget counts on it. There is the slight disparity that a family with a single earner earning £45 thousand wont get it. Yet a family with two earners earning up to £80+ thousand between them will. But the line for qualifying had to be drawn somewhere. Maybe the govt should have said total family earnings over 44 grand. Last edited by Shasown; 05-10-2010 at 10:48 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |||
|
||||
REVIVAL
|
Quote:
__________________
WALK ON WATER
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |||
|
||||
Secretly falling apart
|
People who earn over 44k can still have debt.
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
What is basically pocket money to said people isn't going to solve their debts
I agree that it should be total earnings rather than one persons earnings but the way the media are going on about it you'd think they're axing half of their salary and its the end of the world instead of them just not getting child benefit anymore
__________________
Last edited by Tom; 05-10-2010 at 11:09 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |||
|
||||
REVIVAL
|
I dont think thats the issue though, I just think its tougher for someone on say 20K to lose that money rather than someone on 44K who could budget to deal with the loss of the money...
__________________
WALK ON WATER
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |||
|
||||
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
Well, cutbacks have to be made...
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |||
|
||||
Secretly falling apart
|
Well maybe if you ever know someone who earns over 44k and isn't in the picture perfect idea everyone seems to have that their loaded you'll think differently.
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
me & my girlfriend don't even earn £44k between us and we're fine with a lot of excess and probably won't claim should we have a kid its not so much being loaded, just more being comfortable and such a small amount of money (to some) is going to make minimal difference |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |||
|
||||
Secretly falling apart
|
Your mum isn't the advertisment for every person who earns over 44k in the world.
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
So? I'm just putting a point across that you can earn that much money and still live a comfortable life without the need for benefits. If you get into debt when you earn high amounts then its your own fault, you should live by your means instead of wanting what you cant have. the 'poorest' people affected by this will be earning £2800 minimum per month after tax, do you really think child benefit is going to bridge a gap between being in debt and not being in debt?
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |||
|
||||
Secretly falling apart
|
Quote:
![]()
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |||
|
||||
Secretly falling apart
|
No, you really think she'd be in debt if she was getting an additional 44k wage sick pay!?
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
I'm not saying about everyone in debt, its unavoidable for some people, but for people who are on high wages (bearing in mind the average wage is around £19k) if you manage to get yourself in debt then its your own fault |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |||
|
||||
Secretly falling apart
|
Quote:
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
I earnt a lot of respect for the Tories for this.
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |||
|
||||
Honourary Super Moderator
|
Quote:
Last edited by Kerry; 06-10-2010 at 01:24 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
What is wrong with means testing child benefit? It was introduced in 1977 to help families feed and clothe their children and should never have been available to high income families. However, over the years the system has been abused by scroungers and feckless young girls who carry on having children they cannot afford to bring up themselves. I had to bring up two sons on my own when I divorced and whilst the child benefit was extremely useful and it was spent on the CHILDREN, I didn't consider it a right or an entitlement, and would have supported any move to cut it back or even abolish it then, as well.
Well it is still going to be paid to families who earn under £44K so what is all the outrage about? The Tories need to go further and make it payable only for the first two children. There should also be some way of ensuring the money is actually spent on the CHILDREN and not seen as pocket money for mum and dad. Most families, even earning £44K or more, plan their families within their means, and people who wish to have large families should support their OWN children since it is their choice to have more than 2. It annoys me that some parents who have never worked a day in their lives so as to contribute anything to society, can blithely carry on having children that other people are effectively supporting. And why the hell are we giving child benefit payments to eastern european immigrant workers who send it back home to the tune of millions? Has this country completely taken leave of its senses? Why are we funding child benefit payments for children living in their home countries of Poland, Rumania etc? These payments should be STOPPED immediately, there is no justification for British workers funding the children of economic immigrants. That would slash the welfare burden quite considerably and free up more money for those in this country who have actually CONTRIBUTED throughout their working lives, like pensioners.
__________________
![]() 5 Kings: 1 throne |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
IF you listen to the reasons why,and the details you will see they are right!!!
__________________
![]() RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo "If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian" |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
__________________
![]() RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo "If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian" |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
If you're THAT principled, you can opt out, maybe that's what is meant. Unfortunately, a lot of people who don't really need it, take it anyway.
__________________
![]() 5 Kings: 1 throne |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |||
|
||||
Account Vacant
|
Quote:
Quote:
Unfortunately not a lot can be done about that as its one of the benefits of the EEA policies that workers can pick up tax allowances from their own country and the country they work in. Its good to know should you decide to work in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, or Slovenia you will be able to sign up for the pittances oops allowances their workers get. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |||
|
||||
Quand il pleut, il pleut
|
I agree that whatever the threshold they decided on it would p*** off some people so that part of it is fine. If they decided on 44k thats fine its fair and reasonable.
But its the absurdity of the fact that two joint incomes can be earned up to £86999 and they get it but a household where a mother or father has made the decision to be a stay at home parent earning £44000 lose out. Its ridiculous. And £44000 is a great income in some areas of the country but in other expensive areas its not especially high if you have a mortgage and children. And the higher earners are supporting the 'poor and vulnerable' - well that is not necessarily the case. I come into contact with lots of families in my job and I would say that the 'poor and vulnerable' on different benefits - their children have a lot more games consoles, TV's in all their bedrooms, latest up to the minute phones, sky TV and basically every damn gadget and new craze that comes onto the market - whereas so called 'well off 'families cannot afford afford any of this stuff. And they could do with the extra towards school uniforms, school trips, christmas, birthdays, university fees etc as much as anyone. And they pay enough god damn tax and national insurance - why shoudn't they |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
Reply |
|
|