AIBU to think that people earning £960 per week don't really need Child Benefit?

[OldGreyWiffleTest]

Well, am I?

no stealth because you are a lowly woman/mother and the conservatives got into power spouting about traditional family values, do keep up love

There shouldn't be any child benefit for anyone. The idea of the state paying people for reproducing is ludicrous. People will continue to have children with or without the benefit so it should be scrapped altogether.

Lostboys - there is a link for SAHP - claiming CB protects your state pension provision by paying NI contributions.

Stealth - it reduces at 50k (by 1% for every £100 over the £50k) and goes to nothing at 60k

Your salary is not relevant

Right. Sure i got this before! Dh earns just over 50k so we will continue to get a Sig proportion of child benefit, despite the fact I'm earning. Well. That makes sense. If our roles were reversed it would be the same

because you are a child carer stealth, you may as well be a single parent, you could claim more of the state then

can anyone please tell me how this supports the claim prior to election that david cameron wanted to PROMOTE 'traditional families'

and as a disclaimer, I do understand those who are single parent families are being royally screwed by this as well, the traditional family 'thing' is not my opinion, it was HIS and in THEIR manifesto

Charming catgorl :)

Catgirl you don't need it but many do.

Sorry MrsH but I do think if you earn over a grand a week, then £20 from CB is not normally "needed" and the OP is correct - but thats just my opinion

Stealth - sorry - I didn't mean your salary is not relevant - just that it is not relevant for CB because of the bonkers way they are doing it where they are only looking at the higher salary not both. Which makes no sense but is how the seem determined to do it.

try having a severely disabled child soverylucky and a stepchild maybe? you know the person you considered before procreation because it was sensible and responsible

But people don't get a grand a week and are taxed higher.

Somebody on £50 K living in an extortionate area and paying over £1K in mortgage,extortionate commuting bills etc are going to be in a completely different position to many earning over £50 K say living in a cheaper area with no train fares etc to pay.

You can't say because you don't need it everybody doesn't,that's ridiculous.

"The idea of the state paying people for reproducing is ludicrous."
I don't agree.
The state doesn't want an ageing population. There has to enough tax payers coming into the system to pay all the pension and health bills. Lots of countries (France, for one) makes it financially beneficial to have a family.
The UK prefers to deal with the problem with immigration although they pretend to the voters that they are trying to reduce immigration

OK - but if you earn £60k you are taking home (Assuming standard tax code) £3.5k per month. £2.5 left after your £1k mortgage. Lets say £500 on your train fares, £1k on bills and food, you still have £1k left. I really, really don't think £20 a week will make a huge difference to the majority of people in that situation to the point where they can claim to "need" it.

There may be some people on £60k who "need" £20 a week but they will be a tiny minority. And by "need" I mean it makes a difference in being able to feed the family or heat the home they way people at the lower end of the income scale "need" it.

London some people couldn't eat/pay rent etc if it wasn't for CB. They didn't have children to get benefit but fall on hard times and rely on some benefits to keep the family together and try and get back on their feet again.

sorry soveryklucky but we are on a forum board, i don't know any of you, and you err don't know me, so with that in mind don't 'say' things about other people either

I am shrugging my shoulders now for heavens sake

I just had my children for the child benefit.

Forget the thousands they have cost me in childcare, nappies, clothes, food, toys, days out, etc etc etc (all of which has gone into the economy I might sniffily add.)

hecubas - we have plenty of benefits available for when people fall on hard times. We don't need a general benefit that is simply given to people for having children.

YABU. I am fucking furious about this!!!

Having paid my taxes (ie other people's child benefit) all my working life I am now pregnant with our first child. My DH has a good job (just crosses 50K threshold) because he has worked his ass off all his life and now has 2 jobs, both professional, one self-created. I would really like to be able to stay at home for a while and CB would really help with that.

It is the principle of the thing - as others have said 2 workers earning 49K each will be able to get CB but one worker and one SAHM on half that will not.

anyway if the tories thought child benefit was outdated after post world war 2's financial progression and stability, why didn't they abolish it in the 1980's?

YABU.

They might not need it, but it's the principle.

agree mrsheffley
We chose for me to give up work for a couple of years to be a SAHM and we decided to cut our cloth accordingly. Our decision and i don't really expect to take benefits to enable me to do what i consider to be a bit of a luxury.
However we will miss child benefit.
Mortgage is £1.1K in a modest 3 bed house in a very average area on the outskirts of London.
DH spends £400/month to commute.
We do not have the same lifestyle as a family on just under £60k living in another part of the country.

If £30 per week makes having children financially beneficial then I'm obviously doing it wrong...

If he just crosses it Angelico you will probably still get it

However I am hard pressed to believe that £20 per week makes the difference between you going back to work or staying at home for a while.