To be seriously worried the new govt are looking at cutting child benefit...

[cherrymama]

to 'middle class' families?What does that mean?We both work but have four kids and losing that income will seriously affect us...so please tell me IABU and that it won't happen!

theroseofwait - surely if you went to uni 4 years before me, you got a grant?

People who earn enough to keep their families themselves should not have benefits, that's who.

I think the media have given the general public a totally distorted view of people on benefits.... especially single mums. Its kinda understanding why benefits claiments get a hard time. This is why there needs to be a complete overhaul on the benefits system so that the people who need them get them and those that are playing the system are made to work and pay a tax contribution.... then perhaps people like riven would get a decent amount to stay home and care rather than search for jobs which wont fit around their lifestyle and care commitments.

trouble is too tired, before you hit about £60k everyone with kids is entitled to some form of means tested benefit. Sooo, basically nobody can afford kids if they are teachers, care assistants, cashiers etc? Or is it a cse of getting rid of all means tested benefits and just seeing who sinks?

Riven, don't get me started on the Royal Family. Talk about money being wasted ....

I too am by some of the attitudes here. Too many of us have got used to a standard of living we just can't afford and way too many of us, especially women (isn't it always) are suffering and will continue to suffer while others live it up and point fingers at the poor. It's not the poor, the ill, the carers, the single mothers etc... who fucked up the economy. It's the bankers who resist regulation and extra taxation at every turn and the better off who cannot accept that we have to pay more tax if we want good state services.

Yes, yes, yes, Labour should have done more to restrain the banks. I agree, but that doesn't change the basic fact of their guilt.

Agree with you again MBLB.

Imsonottelling "flockwallpaper, then why not just say "everyone who is struggling should be supported"."

Because it isn't what I mean. It would be lovely if everyone in the UK had a comfortable standard of living but state money doesn't exist to support that. The UK is nearly bankrupt. If there has to be cuts, I want the most vulnerable to be supported over and above everyone else. What is wrong in wanting real priorities for government spending?

No, the system is wrong. I am entitled to a means tested benefit, but I don't need it. OK perhaps I am lucky with smaller than average outgoings, but we are actually able to live within our means without the handout.

Just because people are "entitled" to CTC benefit doesn't mean they need it. It can't really be means tested because it only goes on income, not outgoings or savings.

I do get grants.... they mostly go on travel expenses as it costs me £25/30 everyday im there. Also spend a lot on books, materials, computer software etc. Have to be able to draft by hand as well as CAD and I go through an alarming number of pens which are about £7 a pop.... those are the cheep ones too. one guy on my course payed £50 for one pen thats a weeks worth of shopping for me!

'Sooo, basically nobody can afford kids if they are teachers, care assistants, cashiers etc?'

Sorry but £60K is not the income of a family of two care assistants! please explain a bit more, grumpy I'm not getting it. I am very interested in why these numbers don't stack up though.

tootootired, yes the system is wrong I agree. If I had a tenner for every person I know that had spent their health in maternity grant (or whatever it's called) on a posh new pram I would be quite flush now. I would much rather the money went on people that really need it.

One of my favourite ways to bring down house prices would be to make council tax actually proportionate to what the property is actually worth.

A £3 million pound house round here pays £2,200 a year in council tax - a £250,000 pound house pays £1,300.

That'll soon bring down property prices.

I think the spiralling costs of housing and energy have a lot to answer for.

Yes laurie good idea

And charge higher council tax/taxes on second homes, not less.

Can I opt out of paying state pension for bitter, hateful old women, too?

I don't want my tax money to fund their lifestyle choice of not working till they drop.

actually tootired i just renewed our ctc and they DID ask if he had any new savings or any other income including interest from savings etc when declaring our income, so you do have to declare savings as part of your income when applying for ctc/wtc, or you did three days ago!

it is really tricky, i dont feel entitled to help by the system but we get ctc because my partners income, depsite working long hard hours is still low, even if i worked as well we would still struggle to get by and as it is i cant get a job that is compatible with his shift work and rota support etc.

things obviously need to be means tested but you dont wnat to be stingy with your means testing, nor do you want to be handing out money that we cant as a country afford.

but i do think that on the whole i would much rather we paid out to the few who do play the system than not have a benefits system at all.

i also think there seems to be a lot of misinformation and judging etc of those who receive benefits.

and i do agree that housing and fuel costs along with the cost of living in general is not helping, these have gone up, but in many cases wages have not gone up in proportion to this, hence people are struggling.

i do also agree that maybe some people do expect too much in terms of what they deem necessary, ie holidays, games consoles etc, these are luxuries and i have to say a holiday is not something we can afford.

Yes true you do declare the interest from savings as income, but that's piffling ATM!

It is tricky, I was thinking about the LibDem Fair Society

What is more fair - you give the same to everyone rich or poor so the rich can't complain?

• or you look at people's circumstances and top up where necessary so everyone at least has the basics of life covered?

I think the second but "fair" is a misused term IMO.

'It is not compulsory to fill the form in and some people don't.'

People whose children are born in the UK, but not entitled to UK or EU nationality, cannot get it.

So there are more than a few who do not, because it is considered a public fund and if you or your spouse/partner are not entitled to claim these, then you can't get child benefit.

Income-based Job Seeker's Allowance is also taxable. I found that out when BIL was on it (thankfully he found a job soon thereafter).

PS tried camping 4madboys?

yep i think the second as well, that you top up where necessary so that people dont live below the poverty line etc.

i have paid tax before children and my dp pays tax, at times he has paid a high amount, less now due to his job but i am MORE than happy to pay tax on the basis that we are currently benefiting from the system and will be happy to pay when we dont need the help as it will benefit others that do need it.

surely that is part of living in a democratic society, we all support each other and we all gain in the long run from a more civilised and 'fair'? society?

"'It is not compulsory to fill the form in and some people don't.'

People whose children are born in the UK, but not entitled to UK or EU nationality, cannot get it.

So there are more than a few who do not, because it is considered a public fund and if you or your spouse/partner are not entitled to claim these, then you can't get child benefit. "

No I mean UK people with UK children - it's not compulsory to fill the form in and some people don't.

They do not use the child benefit data as their means of keeping tabs on the children in the country I'm sure - there are compulsory ways that those records are maintained ie birth and death registrations. These things are legal requirements. Claiming child benefit is not a legal requirement. Not everyone who is entitled to it claims it. (Although most do).

from here take up of child benefit is 98%

the people who do not claim it are not denied services because of this

I would imagine that once you're in the system it's a PITA to get taken off, which is probably what happened to the person further up. The system has probably been set up assuming that people who claim will continue to do so, with a set of cancellation criteria that doesn't include "person doesn't want free cash any more".

Of course I could be wrong but it's an incomplete picture and I'd be very surprised if that was the data that was used when establishing whether people were entitled to services etc.

I havn't time to read the whole tread, but near the start, I noticed someone who had a joint income of 50k was moaning about how they need the child benefit to get by.
I would love to know why??? Our joint income plus WTC, CTC AND CB is roughly £16000 and we get by ok. We're not loaded, and we need to save up for things, but we're not poor either. So it really pisses me off when people who earn loads more than us, moan that their CB could be stopped.
I personally think that CB/WTC/CTC should only be for people with incomes less than 25K or 30K, cause if we earned that we would get by alot better than we do now, without having to really on state help!