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

ICB - accidents do happen. Maybe an insurance company could offer an insurance policy against such accidents? Circumstances do change, like redundancy as you said - and that's when the welfare state is supposed to kick in, because then it is a NEED.

There will always be arguments on either side and there isn't an answer that will suit everyone. But there has to be an element of 'seen to be fair' about it, I think.

It is pocket money on the scale that they are collecting it lisad123.

If a high earner has two children they are losing something like £2600 a year. How many families are affected, 1 million? Locog had a budget similar to that for the Olympic Games and costs for that neared 11bn in total

Were the people who are in opposition to this change also in opposition to the many cuts that have been brought in which have affected people who earn a lot less than 50k?

YES!!!!

Ok thanks :)

Typical DM fodder to get your blood boiling and start ranting. Don't read it!
I personally think Child Benefit should only be paid to low income families, of course I was happy to get it for my one DS and put in a separate account which paid for football season tickets, but if it had been scrapped then I would have thought fair play.

aufaniae sorry can you expand a bit? I'm not saying it isn't an atrocious idea I would just like to know why you think that?

benefits should be for people that need them

I would far rather lose my "pocket money" and see the money (and it will be alot whatever people say) go on

more nursery places for 2-3 year olds
more social workers
better army equipment
whatever!!!!
bla bla

I actually think its quite disgusting that people that are comfotably off are protesting about it

I can only dream of earning 50k but I'm old enough to see that this is just the start :)

I objected to the introduction of university fees and look where that is now!

you are not being unreasonable in saying that she shouldn't get child benefit. The woman in the interview says:

"will soon be worth only £1,752 a year. "

That is 3 months salary for me so there is no "worth only" - I rely on that money or my children would not get the food and clothes they need. She needs to be more realistic.

YABU unreasonable calling her a greedy b*tch though, there is no need to resort to name calling because she has a different opinion to you.

voice insurance against getting pregnant....I like that idea :).

Mind you the form would be a little invasive....asking as it would have to about frequency of sex, favourite positions, previous history of contraceptive failures....maybe there would be no claims bonuses too :)

It's a Daily Mail wind up AGAIN.

I am finding this thread a bit depressing really.

So many posters seem to have the view that if you work and study hard you automatically do well in life financially.

It seems such a blinkered view and makes me wonder who it is they know and socialise with?

There are many many people who are degree educated who are in relatively low paying jobs, either because they are unable to find work in their chosen field [not everyone has contacts, family connections, or an old boys network to fall back on] or their profession is low paid such as nursing or in another science related field. How about a median wage of £17,000 for an archeologist?

Are we saying that these people do not have valuable skills that benefit society and do not work hard and so are not entitled to a fair share of the doughnuts?

But the woman in this article is unbelievably entitled in her attitude. So she earns £50,000 and her husband significantly more? But she needs the help of the state to buy shoes in Clarks and what's more feels it's her right to have it?

I am willing to bet that the author of this article knows no-one who is struggling a low wage, has never volunteered at Crisis at Christmas time, has no understanding how some of the poorer members of society often through no fault of their own rely on help and assistance from the state.

This woman however views it as a perk that she and DH are absolutely entitled to due to the immense value of their work [as a DM journalist ] and the money they pay into the system in taxes.

To not be given this money is punishing and discriminating against her children. FFS, she should see how some children live, with no heating or shoes that are too small because new ones can't be afforded.

Unfortunately there are too many people in modern Britain with Marie Antoinette attitudes who have not a clue in how how some people are forced to live and also lack the humility to recognise their own ignorance.

Thank you ob

I do think it should be done by household income, as everything else is. But,"it's useful for buying the never- ending supplies of stationery" if you can't manage to buy a few pencils on £100k+, then there is no hope for you. Is that the sound of the world's smallest balloon starting up?

Violin, not balloon

I think it's very depressing that the Government appear to have found a level that the majority of people thinks is a lot of money and that it's OK to remove a universal benefit from that group.

I find it even more depressing that people don't seem to recognise that this is just the start. Once the initial stage has been accepted then that level will drop.

How many times do we read on MN that xxx is a massive salary? It will keep dropping don't worry. Eventually it will end up just being a means tested benefit which is OK in itself but it isn't what Family Allowance and later Child Benefit was intended to be.

I'm not affected by any of this and there will have to be a huge fall in the levels for it to affect me but I still think it's very wrong when there are clear examples of wasteful 'housekeeping' within the tax system. Sort that out first

Why can't cb now just be based on the income of the person claiming it? The whole assessing "household income" is spurious if two earners on 45'00 and household income of £90k are entitled to claim, but next doors household income is over 30 k less and they can't.

Equally the joint earners may have older teens so no childcare costs, whereas the single earner household can't afford it as they have no access to the childcare voucher scheme.

The trouble is that to make it fair would cost more in means testing than it would be worth to save, which is why they are looking for quick hits, like the idea of no higher rate tax claimants.

I only skimmed the article but the "greedy bitch" made few valid points there.

By twisting public opinion so what could be next? Why should we pay for little billy to go to school when his mum earns 75k and I don't? Ooooo greedy bitch!

And it's happening at the other end of the spectrum too.

A real culture of hatred of anyone on benefits is emerging, it's worrying.

Perhaps it should be taken off single earners over £60000, and household income over £70000 or £75000.

Why is she greedy? She and her husband would have paid considerably more in tax and NI than they take out of the system in the form of child benefit. She is subsidising through her tax and NI, lots of child benefit payments to families that have never worked. I think that is something to be applauded, not punished. She's less greedy than all those women who have children they know they can't afford and rely on the taxpayer to feed and clothe their children.

I think this thread is a perfect example of how beautifully the Tory policies will pit one sector of society against another.

Exactly Northernlurker! I totally agree

I realise the thread has moved on now, but this...
MrsBucketxx
"When will mn stop this. its blatent discrimination against thise who have studied and work hard for a living."
"jobs that require a degree arent low paid FACT."

You are wrong, FACT! Both me and DH have worked very hard for very little pay in the past. He was made redundant from his minimum wage job 3 months ago, so I guess we're scroungers now eh? And my sister, worked very hard to put herself through uni, were guess what she also studied hard. She then did a PGCE, she currently works in an office full time on minimum wage.

Can I just point out that we will be affected by this, so I am not arguing based on 'side'