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.

Pumpkin - ill come back in 18yrs and prove my point if it makes you happy

You can if you like, but whether you're still together or not would "prove" nothing.

You seem to have a problem grasping the fairly straightforward concept that nobody can "know" the future.

Like I said hours ago you come across as dim, Pinkie.

"Pumpkin - ill come back in 18yrs and prove my point if it makes you happy"

I would hope that in 18yrs time you will be a damn site less arrogant and have developed some empathy.

Why should my taxes fund your savings account? Your only 30ish, you can't have paid all that much tax.

My guestimate (based on 20 years in the financial services) is that she's paid approx £100k in tax at most. This is enough to fund ante-natal care and birth plus 5 years of education (or 3.5 years if she claims 18 years of CB) and assumes she hasn't benefited from any other tax funded services until now. I wonder how she's going to fund the rest of her child's education and healthcare seeing as she believes it's wrong for other taxpayers to fund her choice to have a child ?

Linerunner, I initially thought you were a bit harsh and trigger happy earlier in the thread. I now realise my dim-dar was experiencing a power outtage and I tender humble apologies.

The 29 in Pinkie's moniker is clearly a cunning reference to her IQ.

combined me and dp have paid 30yrs tax and ni and only ever used drs services so about time we got a slight return

Really? You've never used the roads? Public transport? Used a library? Visited a museum? An art gallery? Enjoyed peace and law and order? Been involved in a sport? Didn't see any of the olympics? Walked in a park? Sat on a clean beach? Never watched the BBC or listened to radio? No wonder you are so far removed from the realities of life.

no one is being negative. Single parents do just get on with it every single day. Why do you assume they are unhappy??

none of that is relevant. No one is attacking you for being happy or declaring that your husband will leave. But it does happen to people. People get sick, die etc etc...there is a thread on here you would do well to read; I forget the posters name (is it expat?) her 8 year old dd has died of leukemia after being in confinement in hospital for 8 months. Hospital 2 hours away from their home, 2 other children. Were given benefits, whilst not working during his time and are now being asked to repay

shit things happen to people. And you think they shouldn't have children????

I can think of many reasons why people shouldn't be allowed to have children. Amount of money doesn't figure in it at all

I cant believe you have he audacity to then declare that you will be claiming CB, because you are entitled to it!!

Sweet Jesus Pinkie, you've shown yourself not to be merely naive and slightly judgemental but an out and out hypocrite. People shouldn't claim CB - except you are going to claim yours but it'll be for your child, of course, so that's ok then. Who do you think the rest of us are claiming it for, our fucking goats? .

pinky has my goat kitty

Hello, Pumpkin. Thank you for that understanding.

My goat left me with 3 kids because my negativity was getting on his goat :(

Pinkie wait until your husband of 17 years has a complete personality change and decides to leave, give his job up and emigrate after he got his equity out if the house just after your mother dies so you lose your whole support system in four months. His friend gave him the idea. Why should he have to support his two kids? As many did we pick ourselves up and get on with other things. My only state benefit - child benefit. I am a real burden on the state for my feckless choice of husband who I loved for most of our marriage. Obviously I would never wish the same on you but I would suggest you are not so smug.

Oh, and I still think that Working Feckless ExHs should be made to pay equally towards their children's upbringing and that working men should not rely on the state to bail them out of their parental reponsibilities.

Don't see much parliamentary froth about that, do we?

I won't ever need the relationships board that's what real friends and family are for

some people don't have family. some people don't have friends.
some people consider people on that board to be real friends
some people like to get a wide range of opinions from lots of people. RL friends cannot rival MN for magnitude
Sometimes RL friends don't have the life experiences/ professional experiences to help
The relationship board has helped alot of people. I don't think its being dramatic to say that the advice and support given there has probably saved peoples lives

Getting back to the original question. Dave and George do not want to lose the grey vote but hardworking families are fair game as we do not vote as much as the pensioners. Shame on us. Austerity measures have bitten us all and will make all future generations more cynical of politics in general!

I think it's crazy that a lone parent (most of whom are women) on a living wage in London will lose a benefit that a couple who are doing pretty well for themselves in Hexham will get.

92% of lone parents are women and as they are the one party losing most by this policy this in indirect sexual discrimination. An employer would be hung out to dry if they did the same. At the same time it underestimates the contribution by non working over halts in the community. Helping in schools, community groups and with the elderly. Most of the parents I know who do not work due to wealthier other half to a lot in state schools that help all our kids, running clubs and going on trips. How much of a saving is that?

I suppose the assumption is that for the majority, it will be a couple who have chosen for one parent not to work. Hence no childcare fees and only one lot of tax being paid.

Of course that doesn't take into account single parents or parents who have no choice (e.g. a child with disabilities for whom childcare is difficult or impossible).

They could also be assuming that a single parent is likely to be getting some amount of child support from the NRP. Again, though, that is making a huge assumption, as we all know.

Indirect discrimination is one when party loses out more than others due to the nature of the policy not whether it is better for the majority. For the same reason companies were forced to open pension schemes to part-timers. The vast majority in the schemes were full time because the party losing out we're predominantly female any restriction on hours was deemed to be indirect discrimination. How is this any different?

Bogey - calling me a nasty bitch and telling me to fuck off? I think you need a good look in the mirror at who the nasty one is after hurling that abuse. Very childish of you. The relationships board is the same as here, disagree with someone and they'll start a witch hunt when you try and defend yourself that's why I turn to ppl in rl

Losingtrust - again another assumption that cause you're husband left you my dp will leave me? Why so negative? My best friend left her husband at 25 never once did she preach 'it could happen to you'

Why can hardly any of you stand to see someone happy and doing well for themselves?? It's as if its not allowed

Flamin - I pay road tax, and council tax that entities me to public services (police, schools museums etc) and to use the road, I avoid public transport unless I have to.

Gordy - not a busy day at all tomorrow and this pregnancy lark doesn't make for good sleeping patterns so no bed yet

Fox - where did I say other ppl weren't entitled to cb but mine was? I said it should be means tested and partly believe it should never have existed ie ppl would have made do had it not been there

Linerunner - constructive post there well done

Pumpkinpositive - my cv and job suggests otherwise on your iq opinion

I never made the assumption that your partner would leave you and I honestly hope he doesn't. It is a shame the posts got personal but we need to move on. At the end of the day this is essentially an anti family and female policy not just for single parents but every woman who loses this income.

Does anyone remember a really shit song by Dean Friedman? Something about '...And you can thank your lucky stars ... that we're not as bright as we like to think we are...'

So many of you have said your oh's left so could mine, in other words I shouldn't get too comfy?

Yes he could leave, I could leave him, we could all get hit by busses tomorrow or the world could end, doesn't mean any of it will happen and I won't think like that I live in the here and now not the past or future.

I agree that the cb is there for a need but no-one needs to have countless children for the taxpayer to support, as working ppl we know we can't have more than two or three and wont yet there's families who haven't worked in over a decade living for free child after child while others scrape by working, that's the side of it that riles me not those in genuine need of assistance

But it's the working fathers who should be fully assisting their children, surely?