to think that child benefit cuts are

[mumsfretter]

understandable even though we personally lose as a family, again! However, I resent people who are much much richer than us getting winter fuel allowance still.

Aibu that the two benefits should have been cut together on the same basis or not at all.

Of course because being rich really makes someone a more loving parent

If only the rich can afford to breed who will get to be tomorrow's Plebs, eh?

CB is for the child.

I think its unfair on single parents.

I think the Household income should dictacte how much benefits you get as a family.

You should never have had them if you cant afford them

Every child should get CB, it's a universal benefit.

No disabled or elderly person should freeze this winter.

Maybe instead they should close tax loopholes and tighten up on tax avoidance instead.

Never heard of circumstantial change, condom failure, contraception failure, marriage breakdown or mininum wage then Reky?

Not that simple Reky - what if you can afford them but one is profoundly disabled a s you have to give up work to care for them?

What if your spouse dies?

What if you are too ill to work?

Should no one have children just in case?

so if you suddenly can't afford them because your husband is an adulterous shit should you give them away?

Come on Reky answers?

Bionic - be careful dh isn't setting up a personal service company as he could have paye/ni calculated for him. Make sure he works for other people/ companies and not just one entity.

I agree it isn't fair but remember If 2 parents are working there are likely to be higher childcare costs than for those with one sahp.

I disagree with the stories in the daily mail about not surviving on £7k a month without it. I wish I had that sort of money.

People feel entitled to it. I agree move to means testing but imagine the paperwork. But I dread to think of the mess come January when this all starts

I hope life never turns around and slaps you in the arse Reky. Nice view from your high horse?

As I understand it, CB is not so much a 'benefit' as a tax break for people with children, recognising the extra expenses incurred in raising children. Children are future tax payers, of course it's to everyone's benefit to ensure children are raised, treated and educated as well as possible.

Now I agree that the better off are in less need of tax breaks, so I'm in favour of a cap. But it should be based on household income, not individual.

The tax folk are always bleating that they can't separate out household income when it comes to childcare benefit etc (a system which would help prevent lower earning partners - usually women - from being unable to afford returning to work), but seem to have managed just fine in this instance. I'm baffled by it. Is it because this is a benefit rather than a tax credit? I've never understood why child benefit and tax credits were separate anyway. Combine the two and be done with it!

Do you have children Reky? I have noticed you on several threads and you do come across as a bit rude. I am sure that is not your intention.

The child benefit cut is stupid, because it costs quite a lot to administer. Whether you agree with child benefit or not, the present proposal is unworkable. It simply does not make fiscal sense because more people will have to fill out self assessment and the policing cost. Only 15% of families are affected by this change, but the income of all families will be scutinesed.

This policy discourages people from bettering themselves. For example there little moviation for my husband to do over time or take more responsiblity at work. My husband has decided to up his pension contributions to keep us under the limit.
There are plenty of other legal ways that families can reduce their taxable income.

I believe that the inland revenue will lose as much money as they potentially save. There are not many families with someone who earns more than 50K. This measure will affect the behavoiur of families close to the limit. Prehaps more seriously it will punish families whose parents choose to live together. Single parent families are far more expensive to the state and surely its only right to encourage families to co habit or marry. There is fine line between astute tax planning and outright avoidance. Wealthy families tend to contain bright people.

I don't want to see means testing of the winter fuel allowance or bus passes as it will be expensive to admininster. I feel the best way to claw back the money would be to charge a higher rate of income over 30K for pensioners.

I feel that all sections of society should pay towards the deficit. The present govenant has put an unfair amount of the cuts on families. I would like to see income tax put up rather than extreme cuts.

Upper middle class families bleating about losing child benefit is a smoke screen for the suffering of disabled people.

The sooner we kick out the tories/ libdems the better.

I think it needs to be means tested ie when a partner has upped and left his/her oh with the children, what the combined wage is, how can it be fair for one earner on £46k to lose out while two can earn £49k each and still claim?

I do partially agree with Reky (awaits torrent of abuse) in my line of work I see so many ppl who use the welfare system as a lifestyle choice popping out child after child pleading poverty whilst going out every weekend and having a constant supply of booze and fags smartphones etc all the while complaining their 'benefits' aren't enough, maybe i should pay more tax to fund their constantly growing broods and luxury lifestyle? They chose to have five kids to different dads no-one forced them yet the taxpayer foots the bill when its the parents responsibility to clothe feed and house their children - not everyone else's

CB often goes to the mother, for this reason I don't like the idea of cutting CB. For many women (with twats for partners) that will be their only money. It sends shivers down my spine thinking some married women will not only lose the only money they have control over they may also lose pension / NI contributions.

And yes, cutting CB for higher earning single parents is the lowest of the fucking low.

I've already lost quite a bit being a very low earning single parent, and will be losing more. The cuts do seem to be aimed at women .

It should remain universal or scrapped for all. Means testing means that those who work to support their families are penalised and can actually have a lower take home pay than those with multiple children on benefits.

Children should be the responsibility of the parent/s that chose to have them, have a welfare state that covers a short period in between jobs etc but sheer madness to have a system that allows people to not work for years on end and pays out more for breeding. Those who work dont get awarded a pay rise for having a child so why should those who arent supporting their children (or rely on top ups) get one?

My children's father should indeed 'take responsibility' for the two children he walked out on.

But it's so much easier to bash me, isnt it Pinkie?

Child benefit should not exist. Why the hell should government pay for you to have a child? You choose to have a child, so you pay for it

Because enough babies need to be born to pay taxes in future to maintain a stable society. The UK birth rate is currently well below the level required for this. The country will be in crisis if the government does not address this and then everyone will suffer.

All benefits should be means tested, as we as a country clearly do not have the funds to afford benefits for all, they should be targeted where they are most needed. That's disabled people, those with young children struggling to feed clothe and house them, regardless of whether they work or not, and the elderly who no longer have the means to support them adequately.
I could claim benefit for my 2 kids despite being very comfortable financially, that seems very unfair to me as that money could and should be taken by people who really need it.

My ExH could afford to pay the exact same amount to his DCs each month as the child benefit we receive, and I think that (a) he should be made to do that, (b) the sum saved to the state should therefore go to someone in very real need.

But on-one in government wants to take on the Feckless Working Fathers lobby, do they?

I don't know anyone who lives a 'luxury lifestyle' on benefits.

Did you mean to be so rude?

They could easily do it via the tax credits forms as they are done on household income (which p's me off as dp and I are considered a couple for tax purposes even though we aren't married but we are not considered a couple in other ways).Then the 49k/50k situation wouldn't arise.

It should be universal - tax it back if nec. The Welfare State inc NHS isn't just for the desperate,it indicates a social bond, instead of individualism and competition.

Linerunner - how am I bashing you? Is it my fault your partner left?? I was simply making the point that its a parents responsibility to bring up their children not the tax payers.

If child benefit always 'benefitted' the child I'd agree with it completely but sadly from what I've seen (work and socially) that's not always the case. Out of interest did anyone see 999 what's your emergency a couple of weeks ago? Mums and dads queuing at midnight to get their benefits (many in pjs) then heading to the off licence to get booze and fags not milk nappies and other essentials, whilst police worked night and dealt with their domestic issues