To think this misses the point about costs of childcare?

[adsy]

"Critics have complained that homes where one parent stays at home to look after children will not benefit."

This is in response to the new scheme where parents will get 20% of childcare costs paid for by the government.
I'm a CM and all for subsidies of any sort to help out parents, but other than the odd day when you might need to go for an interview etc. I can't see why a stay at home parent needs to get childcare subsidies or am I missing a major point here?!

Oh she has now Baker. The crunch bit her too. She was telling me the other day. She even had to sell her island

Indeed I am Rufus I am having the lapel badge engraved as we speak;

"I am clearly bright. An internet twerp said so"

Baker, I am not. The basic rate tax in the UK is 20% - and NI is another 12% on top of that. Okay that's 32% not the 33%, third, I suggest for a tax rate but it's just about that. I think some people have no idea how high tax rates are in the UK!

HMRC
Basic rate: 20%

£0 - £32,010

Higher rate: 40%

£32,011 - £150,000
Additional rate: 45% from 6 April 2013
Over £150,000
HMRC NI 12% rate at www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/nic.htm

If you earn under £7k though you don't pay tax or NI but for most workers their tax/NI rate is 32%.

(I sold the island because I got a good offer and fishermen kept coming too close to it and wanted to pay off a a bit more of the divorce debt. I did not need to sell it. In fact I was looking at another one yesterday - 98 acres, N Ireland, about £100 000 although I want to wait a few years before buying another - www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/donegal-island-at-an-82-discount-1.1916501 )

Green grow

But not everyone is as fortunate as you

Believe it or not there are places in the uk were a 10k a year job would be considered a good salary (as opposed to zero salary)

Last time I check the tax structure wasn't 33% as a starter, it was 20%, then 40 then 45 - NI, vat etc don't count in this argument

I'm speaking as a higher earner whose background is virtual poverty (with love), I look back at what my father earns and feel ashamed in comparison, he still has to work despite being a pensioner

At the end of the day, you are lucky statistically no matter what you think

A felt rate???

Flat obviously

Oh and this on 10k can't survive on 10k, and like it not have to be topped up - it's not how anyone wants to love I'm sure but it's too late to tax them all 33% and leave them all to starve!

Oh how terrible. I can't imagine that level of hardship.

The Chancellor should have stepped in and saved her from the brink, funding it by making people earning 12k a year pay a third of it in tax. Who needs food anyway?

Live or love, bleedin smart arse phone

Greengrow in order for a flat rate to work fairly you would still need some concept of a personal allowance which your flat rate doesn't take account of as stated. It could work but the pa would probably have to increase to be tax neutral on low earners who's effective tax rate at present will be nowhere near 33%

Iam I think NI does have to be included. It's payable in broadly the same way as IT. And it's not like it's kept separate by the Treasury for spending on the NHS or Pensions. It's a bit of a con that the basic rate of IT is 20%. It is too all intents and purposes 32%. But it does allow the government to shout about 20% tax rates.

Greengrow

You are muddling my little brain

The other day, on the thread from the OP struggling and being underpaid Child maintainence, after you had told her about your £million divorce, you said;

(Just to be clear I sold the island at Easter to pay off some of the divorce borrowings which had topped £1.3m to pay off his demands so I am no longer an island owners. It is not fun being overdrawn, with no savings and owing £1.3m although I never expect anyone to weep for me on MN.)

Greengrow, I'm afraid you are forgetting the personal allowance of £10k

arsenic

One day I hope to earn one of those badges!!!

(I really doubt it though )

Believe it or not there are places in the uk were a 10k a year job would be considered a good salary (as opposed to zero salary)

So true.

In fact for some people, some sectors, some jobs anywhere in the country that is the going rate.

Oh crikey
It has kicked off over the last day !

One thing :
"Words on a page"
Always wise to take some things with a pinch of salt, especially if what they are posting is to "win" the thread and is easy to discount if you look at it more closely.

Hoe do you propose greengrow to ensure that vulnerable people in society would be cared for?
or did I misinterpret what you were saying?
Yes a reduced tax rate would benefit me but I dont want it,I want to live in a society that looks after those who are too ill to work etc.

The bit I like is "fishermen kept coming too close to it" - what and trying to make a living, how very dare they?!

arsenic are you arguing that the demand side for labour is the only factor in the labour market? A skilled workforce is vital for the productivity of the country/ therefore success and more jobs? It isnt as simple as 'there arent jobs for everyone'

No toby i'm not. I'm pointing out that there are more factors than peapod wants to consider.

A skilled workforce is vital for the productivity of the country/ therefore success and more jobs?

SAHPs usually ARE skilled (and experienced). They are simply taking a few years (usually) away from paid employment. Long term SAHPs are not a large group.

To those saying to families who have lost CB(when others on more are keeping it) should appreciate how lucky they are perhaps you should extend that to everybody.

I am utterly sick and tired with people(and I include Tory MPs)making digs at those on £60k saying it means wealthy when they carry on doling out CB to those on more and free childcare help and free food to those on an awful lot more.

Either £60k is wealthy or it isn't.If it is every family with a combined income of £60k should count their blessings, lose CB and certainly not get other universal benefits.

It's all circumstantial

But yes it's a lot more than the average

You are looking at it from your household perspective and your households is 1 worker

Of course not everyone on 60k is wealthy but they undoubtedly wealthier than someone on 10k

What am I being asked?

The lowest rate of tax/NI in the UK is 32%. How can anyone dispute that? i said above that if you earn under £7300 you don't pay tax or NI but that's the allowance. the tax rate for those within the bands, the very lowest in the land is 32%.

There are lots of distortions of course. Your single mother on £13k a year may well vhae as much cash as a single mother on £20k a year because the state pays housing benefit and tax credits to the lower income mother thus in our cloud cuckoo land tax and benefits system £13k can be the same as £20k in terms of net income. It's ridiculous.

Labour for a brief period had a band of 22% tax/NI but that was abolished. The starting rate of tax/NI is 32%. Why would anyone ignore national insurance? That's just weird and shows you've been conned by the state into forgetting the massive additional 12% everyone over the £7300 ceiling pays in NI.

(Arsenic, what are you asking me? I have never said I earn the minimum wage).

That's fine but there needs to be consistency,something this gov is severely lacking in.

If all families on combined £60k had lost CB and they means tested help with childcare to the same ceiling and either raised the fsm threshold or capped them at £60k I actually think the Condems would have garnered a lot of support.As it is they've just pissed a lot of people off.

Still no skin off my nose,the less support they get the better.Won't be long until the next election.

Indeed. A lot of stay at home mothers whose husbands earn over the threshold are cross because the couple next door both earning £40k kept their CB. I suppose those of us who would like more women to work might see a benefit in disincentives to staying home being increased. Also most decisions about women's rights to own property, to work etc have tended by the state to be on economic grounds, even if the state pretends it is on moral grounds so if the state would prefer two workers on £13k or £20 full time both parents, rather than one on £40k then it will take decisions to encourage those parents into the workplace full time. We shall see. It does tend to be economics which drives these changes.

This Government has upset women at all ends of the income and class spectrum, not least because even after recent window dressing changes it still has a pathetic percentage of the cabinet who are female. We are half the electorate.

Agree on that.

However I don't agree with a few publicly educated men taking away and socially engineering choice from women very much living in the real world.

Really looking forward to seeing DC attempt to smarm his way into the affections of the female electorate a few months nearer the election.

I suppose those of us who would like more women to work....

Most women do work.

Women bossing other women about OTOH is a most unedifying spectacle. This relentless over-concern about how other people should be living their lives is just strange.