To think that this woman is a greedy bitch?

[TheHairyDieter]

Greedy Bitch here

I believe that state handouts should be for people who genuinely need them. There is just not enough money to go around without giving them to people who are well-off. If Child Benefit was means tested, people on low incomes could be given more. That might be enough to get them off the dole and into work.

Honestly, this article had me seething. I hate greed

Uabu

CB was a tax allowance not a benefit until recently.
CB is for women for children it should be a universal benefit. It may be a womens only source of income.
CB probably keeps many 60K sahp familys afloat.

High earners more than pay their way without being shafted on the only tax allowance to fund those who do not work.

That article pissed me off too.

She's moaning how a trip to Clarks cost them £100 for school shoes.

Well try being a very low income family where your kids can only have either very very cheap shoe zone shoes or second hand from eBay.

My heart bleeds.

Just another example of how those on a lot of money have absolutely NO IDEA what it is like to have hardly any.

brrbrrwinteriscoming, the problem with just "getting a job" for some people is that not everyone can be wealthy, minimum wage at full time is about 13k a year, some people will always need topping up with benefits or tax credits because their employer doesn't pay them enough to live on. Not everyone is a scrounger on benefits and some are working bloody hard for shit pay.

The gives autonomy to women argument undermines the gender eqality arguement by making the assumption that it is the man who has control of the family finances, the woman is the primary child carer and she is the lower wage earner. By means testing the family income and giving the CB to the family member who is in a position to be the primary carer i.e. works fewer hours earns less irrespective of gender it will give an institutional underpinning to gender equality. However that would be expensive to administer and monitor changes, therefore it is unlikely to happen and so I think it should remain a universal benefit as it is the children not the wage earners who it presumes to benefit.

Sunflowers I put all my DD's child benefit into her savings account. I saw it as I didn't have it before she was born so I won't miss what I never had. I'm one of these women who waited until DH and I were in a good position financially before we started a family. Just because I waited to have a baby why should I not get child benefit? It means my DD will have a lovely pot of money to buy a car/ university fees etc when she's 18. The money will be used for her then, not now. I'm still going to be using it for her.

I am an older mum too squishy. Not working at moment [which is a choice I know] and thus CB is very useful money to us.
It was hard losing ten pounds a week tax credit due to household income being over 26,000.
The choices we make...

Diddydollydo if you are going to moan then do please actually read what i have written. i said most, NOT ALL

SlanketySlank at least if you have a job you are actually paying into the system and so, in my opinion, entitled to some help back.

My job is not exceptionally well paid. it is my DH who earns all the money.

DH and I are going to lose our CB as we both earn over 60k (just). On the one hand, I think it's right, in austere times, that we should lose it as it's a nice extra for us rather than a necessity as it is for some families. But I will miss it for exactly the reasons the woman in the article states. I don't piss the money up the wall on booze and fags or shoes and handbags, it genuinely goes towards paying for stuff for the DCs -nappies and milk when they were babies, clothes and shoes now they're bigger.

I also think that she makes some very interesting observations about free schooling and NHS treatment, should that be means-tested too?

I don't think it's greedy to be pissed off about the government promising you some money then suddenly pulling the rug from under your feet. The UK now lags far behind other Western countries in it's failure to provide tax breaks or other incentives for families.

Sorry Squishy!!
I am older [err mm over 45 with two young children].

The justification of any provision of state expenditure should be built from zero assumption. "Why should we pay" is the question, not "why should not we". There is no automatic right to any benefit, and historical reasons are not a sufficient argument in benefit discussion. YANBU.

YABU! Times may be hard, but when times are good again for the economy will the benefit be returned? Will it bollocks!

CB should remain a universal benefit.

It is currently very cheap to administer because means testing is expensive.

Means testing CB won't give more money to poorer parents, it will give more money to state administrators of CB.

Every universal benefit that is cut is a step closer to dismantling the welfare state.

Once benefits are only paid to the poor it is a fuck of a lot easier to get rid of them entirely.

The willingness of the English to see CB decimated because they have bought into the arguments of the right that benefits are only for scroungers will be the end of the UK.

Scotland will go their own way rather than stay part if a country where rich people and corporations get massive subsidies, and the post-war settlement that protected the middle class as well as the poor is dismantled by the lackeys if the wealthy with the support of the petty and spiteful.

Anyone who says "why should my taxes pay for..." is a cunt.

This article is meant to muddy the waters regarding CB changes. Not all high earners have this attitude, most are objecting to the anomalies in the system, rather than trying to make out they can't afford shoes without this money.

Compared to what genuine, disabled people are faced with losing, those who are only losing their CB are bloody lucky! I wish the media would pick up on this, but they don't and they won't!

How anyone can whine and moan about losing their CB when they earn the money that the woman in that article claims to earn is totally and utterly beyond me!

Don"5 particularly want to engage with anyonenwho uses "greedy bitch" in a thread title. However.

The whole point of child benefit that itnis a universal benefit paid directly to women. For women it is the only money they have that has no strings attached, of that they have to ask a man for. To means test it would completely change the nature of the benefit- and would be so expensive to administer that I doubt it would save much to the exchequer in the long run.

Better a few people who don't need it get it than many who have it as their only lifeline don't get it any more.

You are wrong Seeker, it is not always paid to the woman. You can opt to have it paid into the father's bank account. Which blows the 'lifeline' argument out of the water.

It's very true that this is the begining, in a couple of years the threashold will reduce and then reduce again until this benefit is only paid to the poorest families and then of course it will be removed.

The government are playing us off against each other to give us all less. How can i feel sorry for the benefit claiments ( who live in poverty) when i have lost my CB? It's a good tactic.

It is shameful, if we lived in france we would be out rioting in our masses, we let them trample over us. Lie to us and cheat us.

When will mn stop this. its blatent discrimination against thise who have studied and work hard for a living.

YABU

makes me sick that you have less you get more WTF whats the insentive to go and get a well paid job,

dh earns over this but we will be changing our share options in his company so i can still claim legally.

Ms Average - I for one am happy to pay. It is a sad and selfish society that does not provide for its poor. There are a minority of people who remain on benefit, don't intend on getting a job, smoke, have several children and even more partners and while we trot out the over repoted cliches are migrants (illegal and economic) taking the jobs of hard working British people who only came here to take advantage of the NHS and free school meals. However the vast majority of claimants are working UK residents with fewer than 3 kids.
The CORE and ONS stats are aviliable on line for those that want to take a look I would link but my tablet is not playing nicely today.

The payment of benefit to those in work reduces the amount that we have to pay for goods and services created in this country by removing the need for employers to pay a working wage. Would you pay 30% more for your Starbucks, petrol, groceries etc. All of these services rely heavily on low paid workers to serve you.

MrsBucketxx, plenty of low-income parents have studied and worked hard. It is insulting of you to suggest otherwise.

yes i would, i dont mind paying for a service/goods knowing they are hoingbtopay for someobes lively hood.

not to smoke drink sit at home etc.

"You are wrong Seeker, it is not always paid to the woman. You can opt to have it paid into the father's bank account. Which blows the 'lifeline' argument out of the water"

But it can be and usually is, paid to the mother. And is not connected to anyone else's income. Unlike any other benefit. Don't be deliberately obtuse.

jobs that require a degree arent low paid FACT.