CB - alternative solutions?

[CardyMow]

If cutting CB in the way that has been outlined is unfair, how else could/ should the government save money on this benefit?

I ask this because a columnist in the Daily Fail (I ^know!) said that he would rather they stopped CB for dc at the age of 16yo, regardless of whether they are still in education or not.

I always thought that the reason CB was paid to 19 was because, if, like our family, you are caught in a cycle of very low wages (£16Kfor a FT job), the only way out is more education. If you take away CB for poor people, they will also lose their TC's, and theefore have a dc in FT education that they get NO income for, and are therefore unable to feed or clothe them. It was done because otherwise, these DC would HAVE to go out to work FT, just to have money to eat, thus them also being stuck forever in a very low paid job, with no chance of bettering themselves.

Surely education is the way OUT of the benefits trap? But many more dc will be forced to leave school at 16 to work in min wage jobs if their parents cannot feed them while they gain better qualifications.

It would make any form of further education the preserve of the rich, surely that is a step too far back in time?

While I agree that the way of administering this CB cut needs to be fairer and based on household income rather than one earners tax bracket, surely if minimum wage is £5.85 p/h, then a lot of the country earn barely more than £12,000pa for a FT job, so wherever you are, whatever you are doing, £42K is a HUGE income...Why shouldn't CB be cut for anyone with a household income of £34K pa? My family certainly wouldn't need CB if we had an income of £34Kpa.

Got you. I don't see how it can ever be fair until it is judged on one criteria for everything though.

How about this for an idea. EVERYBODY get CB until their child is 5 years old. If at 5 years they are then sent to a private school, it is kind of obvious that the parents are not on the breadline - so privately educated children do not receive child benefit. It's a start. If the parents decide to do "State til 8" then the benefit would be cut at 8 and so on. If parents get into financial difficulties whilst their child is being privately educated they could appeal. Most parents who send their children to private schools could probably survive without CB when compared to those families who are on the breadline. We are very fortunate to have had CB for so many years and for far too many parents it is treated as "ice cream" money!

I agree. But if they want cheap and dirty at least apply it to every household and every benefit!

Kecca, what if they are on a scholarship?

To the poster who asked about apprenticeships - DP has severe dyslexia, and was refused an apprenticeship when he left school (an SN school, as he is also 'borderline asd'). They stil did them then, he's 35. It just doesn't work for everyone.

I have epilepsy, but get no DLA...I'm able enough to not qualify for DLA, but not able enough for anyone to want to employ me. Not everyone stuck in minimum wage jobs has ANY way out of them, they accept that a min wage job or the dole are the only options open to them. ANd some of us DO chose to take a low paid job rather than be unemployed.

We have no money available to retrain, the jobcentre won't help me because it's not 'commercially viable' as they know no-one will employ me. AND the fact that being the 'unwaged dependant' of someone working,I don't exist as far as the jobcentre is concerned. They can't even give me appointments or any advice any more. DP can't retrain, because he would have to give up his job.and we would go without benefits for 6 monts if he gave up his job. How do we retrain to get out of our situation??

Can i just say that when my sister was married to her Husband which is going back 20 years, he was a high earner then but kept my sister in poverty. Child benefit was all she got and with this she used to buy nappies, clothes etc.. because he was so mean. This morning i heard someone say exactly the same thing, that child benefit was all they had even though their hubbies earn well. Sad but true not all men are generous and work as a team with their wives and partners.

stop all the immigrants getting chil benefit ...why should they get anything if they have never put anything in the pot and probably never will ? They bring loads of kids with them ...claim then send half back to their country ! Dont out in ...you dont get !!! We wouldnt get any help if we went over to their country !!

sorry meant if you dont put in ...you dont get .

The issue is that there are certain benefits that have been enshrined as Universal benefits, i.e. not means tested. These include pensions; benefits for the elderly, such as bus passes, winter fuel payments; and until this week, child benefit.

Why do those in power always start by hitting parents first? We seem to be to blame for all of societies ills, and currently we are being targeted first to give up the only benefit that is paid direct to Mothers.

I don't think it is fair that this is the only Universal benefit that is means-tested - why not Winter fuel payments? Both my parents and my in-laws claim this, and yet they are far richer than me?

Also why isn't the means testing being applied fairly? And what about London weighting? £44k in London does not get very far, where you need to pay a mortgage of over £2,000 to afford the average house price.

Moreover what happens to the pension credit now for stay at home mums who are excluded by their husband's earning too much?

And if it is to be means tested, it should also be measured against the contributions that they family have made to National Insurance - why should European Union Nationals be able to claim it, whilst people who are working in London and getting by on £45k aren't?

Us mums are now stuck in limbo, of having an even more limited income if we choose to stay at home, but if we go out to work, cuts in nursery funding and rises in season ticket costs, are making it increasingly hard for us to this option too...

These questions are why removing child benefit, in the way it is being proposed this week, is grossly unfair.

susie14

'I don't know what all the fuss is about -I've been saying this should be done for years !!. We have 2 kids at home, I'm earning £16500 pa and my other half is unemployed with jobseekers of £65 pw, and we manage OK, I would love to have an income of £44k + and think that anyone who can't manage must surely be living beyond their means. If we had this much money coming in we certainly wouldn't need cb.'

I am presuming you do not have childcare costs because your partner looks after them as he is unemployed? Your income plus his job seekers would be around £1250 a month after tax?

We earn around 45k - so extortionate amounts according to some people. We both work. Our childcare costs are £1500 a month. We bring home around £2600 a month between us. Therefore we have less money left over than someone in your situation.

However if you took child benefit and tax credits away - which on your salary you would qualify for, then someone on your wage would be much better off per month than we would.

This would change when the DC's were all in school - I would then gladly give up any benefits. Childcare costs need to be taken into account when deciding household income.

Most people in the 40 - 50k bracket with two working and two in childcare would probably be better off if one gave up work. If CB and TC are taken away, they definitely would be.

Oh and also, I have spent over 10 years in university studying for my job. I have thousands and thousands of pounds of debt and have had a low or lower wage for that entire time. I understand the argument that higher earners should pay more and receive less but resent the idea that we have loads of money rolling around. If you include student loan and loans taken out for tuition fees etc (post grad) then I pay back another £400 a month. So even less money.

That debt went towards ensuring I got a good job, have chance to progress etc - so it is unfair we are then penalised for it.

First of all, I don't think that my family should get CB. When I found out about it my first response was 'I think that is right' and DH was the same.

However, it the household/joint income thing does seem unfair. It isn't even a SAHM issue really. Even for two ft working parents a couple could be earning £12K + £74K (no CB and more tax at higher rate) or £43K + £43K (CB + less tax at higher rate). That seems grossly unfair - or have I oversimplified it?

Anyway, I do think that CB should be abolished for wealthier families but they really need to rethink how it should be implemented.

I'm not against cuts to CB if people dont need it. DC & GO should stop being so lazy and put a proper system in place - say... just for example a JOINT income of over £60,000?

The only thing I am hopping mad about is way they have done it, so one man earning £45,000 and his wife a SAHM loses it and a couple earning £40,000 each (joint income of £80,000) still get it.

Surely its pure madness and anyone can see which couple needs the money more!!!

My solution would be simply for the Government to THINK about whats FAIR!

The big issue over whether 44K is enough money to live on, depends on your outgoings. A lot of people are paying a HUGE amount of money each month on a mortgage.... a problem that extends to a lot of families. That is down to the banks lending more than realistically people could afford to repay.

The other issue is jobs. All the cuts will be designed to force people out to work. All fine and well, but where are the jobs? As I posted yesterday, there just are no jobs available. Even minimum wage jobs are hard to come by at the moment. So the Lib-Cons are well in - take away all the benefits, cut the deficit and ignore the fact that THERE ARE NO JOBS.

As for whoever was saying earlier that minimum wage jobs are "beneath" them, and no-one should be greatful to work for minimum wage, get real!!! If thats the wage on offer, you take it - the only other option is to remain on benefits, because you can bet your bottom dollar, that there are hundreds of people in line behind you willing to take that job!

Why not scrap CB and replace this with free lunches at state schools for all children until aged 16,thus ensuring the child benefits directly,creating jobs in the local area, encouraging healthy eating,cut down the obesity levels and ending the stigma of free school dinners), school lunches cost us £10 per week per child during term time.

Families who previously had free school meals can also apply for EMA (education maintenance allowance)from the time their child starts school until 18 if they continue in full time education. You could adjust it so children get more as they get older reflecting increased costs.

My objection is also fairness. Single mothers who have a high income also HAVE to send their children to nursery (there is no partner to stay at home) so they will necessarily have very high outlays. They have no way of fiddling about with the system to get benefits by going dutch with their partner on 43+43.

Cameron seems to admit that this is a flaw/loop hole in his proposal, but says that this is the only option because to administer child benefit fairly - ie calculate on household and not individual income - would be too costly and would wipe out any money saved.

To which I would say - if it can't be done fairly, don't do it at all.

It's also about priorities: Why does Cameron think it's ok for single mothers to fall through this net? Because he thinks single mothers don't count - that's why. That feeling is reinforced by the murmers of tax breaks for married couples. I am sure the Conservatives would argue they are being 'pro-family' but I would dispute that being pro-family nmeans being part of a two parent married family. It also does not reflect the true make up of society - where a very high percentage of families are headed by one parent.

All in all I am completely ars** off and insulted (and I don't earn over 44,000 by the way - so it's not, in that sense, personal!).

Simple solution: You breed em, you fed em. Take your hand out of my pocket!

You say to us to take our hand out of your pocket...I didn't ask to get a disability that LEGALLY barred me from working in the trade I was trained for, and was earning £29K which, plus DP's wage of £16K would have been more than enough to support our dc.

I now earn nothing so we get DP's wage of ££16K plus TC's. So sue me that we need help to keep DP working, earning, and paying taxes. It's either that or we take even MORE out of your pocket by DP being unemployed.

And how is it that the person on £16,500 can have their DP claiming JSA? I get nothing because DP is working? Unless it's contributions based, and it's because I've been out of work through disability for 3 yrs?? I certainly don't get anything now. No DLA, no JSA.

You are correct Loudlass, you did not ask to get a disability. To suggest that, due to that disability, you cannot find appropriate employment is somewhat disengenous.

I cannot earn a wage as a professional footballer (approx £60k pw). So I trained to do something else. I humbly suggest that you, and others who make the same groundless claims, do the same.

And take you hand out of my pocket!

Please join the facebook group: Single Parents Against Child Benefit Cuts!

This is not just for single parents but also for one earner families.

So when the disability advisor said he can get people with downs syndrome a job much easier than someone with uncontrolled Epilepsy he didn't know what he was on about then?

And where do you propose the money for retraining comes from? There is NO leeway in our budget to allow for that, and we get no help with it because...DP works and doesn't claim benefits. .

ANd even without retraining, in the past 3 years (since my last place of employment closed down), I have applied for over 200 jobs. None of which were wiling to give me an interview...I legally have to state on the application form that I have uncontrolled epilepsy. ANd it also costs any employer MORE in liability insurance to employ me. Strangely no employer has been willing to do so.

Yeah, we can realy change our situation, can't we!

So, Obnoxio (you live up to your name btw). Fuck of and get a grip and try joining the real fucking world, eh.

The reason i think that the cut off is the higher rate of tax is the expense of means testing. If you just cut anyone with an income of over 44k it is very simple to administer, fair or not. That is why its inherently flawed. If you make it more difficult to test you wipe out most of the savings of cutting the benefit in the first place.

We are losing ours. As DH earns over 44k but i am SAHM. I also feel fed up that the people down the street who are both working and bringing home 80k between them can keep theirs.

I was thinking just that loudlass

as a family we never "needed" our CB and always felt a little strange being paid it. we just put it all into savings accounts for the kids. But there is/was no way to opt out of it and I doubt many people in this "43k + 43K" category would voluntarily. I really feel it needs to be scrapped altogether and added to the WTC then it will be directed to the families who really need it. The means testing technology is there already and i believe that the people who need it most are the ones in the system already.

but there is a failure in the whole CB system - we left the UK 18 months ago and are still getting letters about whether we are eligible for CB! and know of other ex pat families who are still getting it! this needs to be looked at and stopped! a government cannot be providing benefits to people not paying tax in that country!

Very mature Loudarse. And demonstrative of your whole attitude in general.

"Employment Advisor". Someone who listens to what YOU tell them, and makes a decision affecting YOUR life. And you accept this? Largearse, you really need to take more control of your life instead of letting someone with probably no more that 4 GCSE's tell you what is best for YOU.

I would have kicked his arias and proved him wrong. Guess that's why I have a job instead of sitting whining all day. It's not about what you cannot do, it's about what you can. Prove them (and me) wrong. But please don't tax me (and others) for your problems :(