to be pissed of at the news saying the cut in child benefit is an attack on SAHM's. - AS IF ALL SAHM'S PARTNERS EARN ENOUGH TO PAY HIGHER RATE TAX....IF ONLY......

[ssd]

if only dh earned that much we'd be laughing

how about all the sahm's who's partner earns less and is paying lower rate tax?

does the media just assume to stay at home one of you MUST be earning £44k or above

what about those of us who struggle by on a lot less but want to be at home for our kids?

am sick of hearing how SAHM's with a partner earning higher rate tax will be hardest hit, some of us WOULD LOVE TO BE IN THAT POSITION

Don't think us SAHP can claim JSA though. As like all benefits it based to family income savings. O except child benefit of course.

PMSL at the thought that childcare could cost £43k a year, thereby justifying the crazy policy of allowing families with a joint income nearly double that of a single HRT to keep their CB. How ridiculous!

Putthekettleon...I just have to comment that not everyone is in the position you describe. I have just gone back to work part time, I pay £650 of my £1000 take home pay for childcare and £110 a month to commute to work. It makes no sense for me to work financially but I am taking a longer term view that it is an investment in my future because I am in a field it is very difficult to get back into once you leave.

My OH is working round the clock, literally, to pay all the bills and it is making us all miserable.

And we have absolutely no family anywhere near us, they all live on a different continant. Furthermore lots of the people I know round where I live don't and are in similar positions to us.

Agree with getorf.

not sure i get your point gs. I'm not trying to justify the policy at all - I think it should be based on household income - it's ridiculous to base it on each individual's salary. My point to GOML was in response to her suggestion that all SAHM have the option to go back to work when actually, depending on what job they manage to get, their childcare costs could be more than their salary so it isn't a feasible option. Not sure why you think childcare has to cost 43k for that to make sense.

Bubbly - no, don't think you are criticising me at all

Willow said "It makes no sense for me to work financially but I am taking a longer term view that it is an investment in my future because I am in a field it is very difficult to get back into once you leave. "

I totally agree with that. Often you DO go back to work and are out of pocket. It is your choice to have children, in the end, so is daft to think that financially there is not a penalty. It is a short term loss for a long term gain. Yes you will be spending most of your salary on childcare (if not more than) but FT childcare is only an issue for the first few years, after that you have gained more by being in work for 5 years, than if you took that time out and tried to get a job after a career break.

Plus, anyway, my main point is that your DP is earning £43K you are better able to pay that childcare cost, than if you are on your own.

And if you are single, you are entitled to no extra benefit as far as I know, when you are working, than a couple are.

Looby I mean on the wage dp is on now even if I went out to work it would be pointless as childcare costs etc and also my ds isnt even at school now :)

pmsl at the people who are critsising sahm's

There is nothing wrong with being a working mum and nothing wrong with being a sahm is down to choice and nobody has the right to judge that and tbh its none of nobody elses business.
I just think the cb cuts are unfair to sahm's. :)

as far as I know there are no specific benefits/tax breaks paid for being a working 'single parent'

eg I am taxed as single person

Nothing extra given.

My dm said oh but it won't affect single parents (she reads too much express and daily mail) because she believes that hype that single parents are given loads of benefits etc and a a protected species

err no they're not love and especially now the new govt have got back in power.

it's amazing what people will believe

The3bears - why is it pointless? Surely breakfast club or after school club is less than you would earn on a full time wage?

The most you'll lose if yo're salary goes uo is £400. hardly a major loss on an income of double the average wage.

My son is not in school he is in preschool 2.5 hrs a day Its not just a couple of hrs is it?

I am not saying I can never work I am saying it is more difficult in the current climate...I really dont understand the big deal I am not here slating working mums for hardly being with there children so I hardly think other people are in a place to judge me

All my point was is it isnt as easy now to get work and most people I KNOW have help from family. Dont really see why Im being flamed

Childcare obviously doesnt cost 43k - however for 3 DC's in London I bet it actually comes close.

I live in Wales and for 2 DC at nursery and one in after school club it costs £1500 a month - that is the equivalent of around 25k gross salary.

So one family on 45k with a SAHP is better off than a family with one who earns 45k and another who earns 20k still. I think - too sleep deprived for the maths

I for one would not miss £400 if dp earned 44k :) I just think the way its done is stupid it should be straightforward if you have 44k coming in your household

Single parents do get a discount on our council tax. That's about the only benefit I get. But I'm delighted that the government think that I won't miss the CB which pays for the childcare so that I can work

YABU.

It's an attack on the welfare state - not an attack on (wealthy) SAHMs. The government don't give a flying fuck what your and your partner's working/childcare arrangements are, nor how much money you're bringing home (hence they utterly ignored various, glaringly obvious, anomolies).

And it's just the start.

I have completely missed the point of the OP, haven't I

OK. ssd - save your ire for the government. Don't aim it at wealthier SAHMs or even the media.

threebears-I was responding to this:

' I dont understand children of school age at which point they have no reason to work, I agree I would love to have a part time job that fitted around ds going to school next year but the way thing as are its impossible to find a full time job let alone a part time one that fits around school times. I have no one to rely on to pick up my son my dp works from 7 to 5 and I have no relatives near by what could I do???'

You seemed to be suggesting that it would be impossible for you to go back to work even when your son started school next year because you have no relatives to help with childcare and a partner who works f/time.
I was responding to this by saying that a lot of people are in this position and manage with childminders/ after school clubs, etc.

I'm not sure there is a really fair way to be organising the CB- the way the government are organising it currently, SAHP loose out. However, if it was based on the total household income, working mothers would lose out because of childcare costs which are v expensive (except those with family to help).

NOBODY is saying that SAHMs will not be affected by this.

What I am saying is that they will not be the MOST affected. Single parents will be a lot worse off.

And it is not just about childcare costs. If you have a partner, you can get a job in the evening when your DP is at home. I know a load of people who do this - and have done this for years. DH works the early shift, DW works the late. Then there are no childcare costs whatsoever.

A single parent would not have that option would they? The only option they would have is getting a second job themselves, and for that they will have to pay chilcare. And the brunt of that costs is theirs alone. And if they earn £44K they will not get CB.

If you are a SAHM, your DP could earn £40K, you could get a job in the evening for £10K, no childcare costs, and you still get your CB.

Unless the above is written in Esperanto I fail to see why you cannot understand this.

Interesting how this thread has really highlighted the same old attitudes to SAHM and WOHM

cory, willowstar, I just meant that in the particular example given, a couple on a joint income of 60k probably would not be paying 25k in childcare as it wouldn't make sense financially.

I just don't agree with the people justifying the fact that a single-income family on 44k will lose CB while a joint-income family on 80k might not by saying 'well, they do have childcare costs...' That may or may not be true but it doesn't change the fact that the system is inherently unfair and should be based on household income, not tax band.

I was just going on my own experience which is pretty much that when the 2nd child comes along if GPs are around to help the mum goes back to work, if they're not, she stays at home. But I appreciate it's not the same for everyone.

And yes I agree it's even harder on single parents. None of us should be losing CB, but if they insist it should at least be done fairly!

'Pmsl at the excuses why people with kids can't work'

For many it is not excuses it is a choice - to stay with their kids rather than work

Now don't take this is any kind of dig at working mums. I don't care what people choose to do with their own lives, and most choose the option that suits them best based on many factors e.g. income, personality, career choice, availiability of childcare to name a few.

However don't presume that every SAHM is making an excuse not to work. That veils a very judgemental attitude