to think that a girl called Jack should stick to budget cookery tips and NOT bash

[LordElpuss]

people who are losing their child benefit

Guardian article

Goodness yes, she should get back into the kitchen

oops posted too soon!

She writes "But you carry on, all 165,000 of you, because you clearly really need that £20 a week more than the seriously disabled woman needs £14 for a spare bedroom for her overnight carer"

Indeed. But the disabled woman isn't going to get her spare bedroom back just because the 165,000 "middle class" are losing their child benefit - which might be more than £20 a week depending on how many kids they've got. And how does she know if they need it or not?

It's ok to bash the middle remember, they're the rich, so that's allowed.

Her whole attitude towards high tax payers is sneery and it's obvious she's set put to be controversial. It's also not benefit fraud to continue to claim cb, just so long as it's paid back through the tax system. (Although I strongly suspect that the whole thing will quietly collapse when the cost of administering the claw back and publicity costs are realised). It's not ok to bash those who clam benefits, but it's ok to bash those who pay large tax bills to find those benefits that are being claimed? She's just as bad as Cameron and co, it's divisive and utterly ridiculous, setting one group against another whilst those who quietly ship their fortunes offshore pay next to nothing.

She is talking more about the disparity of treatment between the very poor benefit claimants and the slap on the wrist finger wagging at the middle class who have lost their child benefit. She has a point. Any fine incurred will be paid. Sending in the form does not seem to be imperative, because the consequences can be dealt with.

It's worth remembering that with her blog she began as an anti-poverty campaigner. The recipes is what she's become well-known for, but that was a sideline. It isn't surprising that she's beginning to use the unexpected fame as a platform. It also isn't surprising that, to someone who has lived on such a reduced income, 50K seems like more money than it might seem to someone earning that amount. (I wouldn't know!)

well I think its fair. why spend loads giving people a benefit they dont really need

if you need cb on that wage then you are doing something wrong or are overstretching yourselves

shrugs

As ArthurCucumber said, she began as an anti-poverty campaigner, talking about her experience of living on a very low budget, with a strong political emphasis. The recipes are her sideline. So she is continuing to do what she has always done.

I'll look properly later, but there's an academic article somewhere about everyone having. Vested interest in the social security system meaning a country runs better because everyone receives a monetary benefit and doesn't begrudge anyone else receiving a benefit, whereas this divide and conquer attitude drives a wider gap between rich and poor and creates a less cohesive state.

I hope she isn't going to get too involved in the politics of it all

She is and always has been about the politics of it all.

Agree with bearleftmonkeyright

The majority of people aren't complaining about losing CB, they are complaining about the unfair way it's being done on a single earner basis only, not on a household income.

It's her personal blog, and quite explicitly states her anti-poverty activist-ness, so she can talk about whatever she wants really, and it's actually pretty relevant to her interests.

i also agree with bearleftmonkeyright.

People who are on 50 grand a year do not actually take that amount home as they pay 40% tax to subsidise those who others who don't.

We only kept our cb after they revised the amount you could earn. Its the only money I get that's actually in my name so yes we do need it thanks very much

Her recipes are shite as well-wouldn't feed a mouse in my house.

I agree with mrs t p.

She should get back in the kitchen and stop worrying her little head about politics

Thanks for explaining how income tax works pinupgirl

Well, as a human being, I think she generally has the right to comment on anything she damn well pleases. Do you only have opinions on matters directly related to your day job?

No one seems to think that Jamie Oliver isn't entitled to an opinion.

Her recipes are shite as well-wouldn't feed a mouse in my house.

Please tell me you're being ironic?

I love these threads. Nothing more heart warming that listening to earners in the top 10% whinging and explaining their "super valid" reasons for needing child benefit.

Even if you think her recipes are shit, cheap recipes like that are essential to poor people. They have helped me a lot and I think what she's doing is fantastic BUT I can't help thinking that it might make some people think 'see, they can survive on almost nothing, why do the poor need more than £10 a week for food when she manages' which is damaging

Opalite it's awful that advice and resources which are helping people survive can end up being used as a stick to beat them with. It's such a horrible Catch 22 situation, the advice is invaluable, but then people just point and say 'look, it's possible'

Why is a woman who expresses a political opinion categorized as a 'girl'?

And why is her name of any relevance at all to your argument - wtf does in matter what she is called, she's still entitled to express her views - or are you worried that because her name is Jack she's pretending she's a Man, so she can sneak up in disguise and have an opinion?

why is it the only money in your name?
do you not have a joint account?
is that not your choice?