Call to end "middle class" benefits

[AtheneNoctua]

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8319646.stm

"It defines middle class as a household where every adult has an annual income of at least £15,000 and every child £5,000. "

maternity pay

I've said it before I thought the whole point of child benefit for all is it costs more to test it than it does to pay to everyone (also a nice way of ensuring the gov knows who is supposedly responsible for children I guess!)

Mind you child benefit for children living overseas, child trust funds, tax credits for relatively high earners, fuel payments/TV licences for people living in 1,000,000 pound houses

Although does that mean we can adopt what I believe is the US system whereby there is no increase in benefits if you carry on having children whilst dependent on benefits (admittedly would need wholesale reform of system re getting people back into work first)

I am fully in support of the benefits system and know that there are those that would find it hard to exist without it, and they are the ones that should be getting that benefit. But at the same time it does get my goat when you have a whole generation of people who believe that they should be paid for by everyone else as getting a job is just too hard. Well if that was the case then surely no one would have a job! If they are moaning about their education then perhaps some of them should have tried a little harder (as a majority of others did and have succeeded in becoming valued members of society who pay for the rest) after all, they got free schooling didn't they? Or perhaps it is just some who want an easy way out - I am not wanting to deny any of those who have had difficult upbringings but there are those out there who are actively encouraged by their parents to get pregnant and get on the housing ladder. Great example. I know that these are the small few but they do reflect on the whole benefits system if it can be diddled like that.

Unfortunately the many are sadly made to look bad by the few - and what suprises me the most is that these Jeremy Kyle lot are quite happy to continue flaunting it with the response of what are you gonna do about it? Surely more money should be put into finding the fraudsters so that those who really deserve/ need it get the benefit from it? However I think I am probably on a losing battle because if no one is going to prosecute fraudster MP's then they aren't going to go any further with those who are benefit cheats. And that is what gets my goat.

As I said initially this is a tricky thread, and will second those who say that someone is always going to lose out, unfortunately it always seems to be those that work the hardest, save when they can, attempt to own their own home, go back to work to help support the family after having children and generally try and make life better for their families. It is never the footballers who earn in a week more than the average family earns in two years from a double income, or the bankers who just keep getting richer, of the benefit cheats who work the system. It is blatant that those contributing to this thread will be the hardest hit again as always regardless of which party is in government. So to a life of fun and frollicks for all of us then!

Aargh council tax - how come my house (a 2 bedroomed house) which wasn't built when the council tax came in - is a Band B - when my neighbours house and half the street are in 3 bed houses and Band A! - I've contested it twice and still not got anywhere.

SingleMum01 I know the feeling! I live in Leicestershire in a 2 bed terrace, it's a nice area but not a very rich area my house is band B. My friend also lives in Leicestershire but not the same village as me has practically the same house but is band A, and what really annoys me is that my bin only gets empties once every 2 weeks whilst my friends gets done very week, so not fair!

Yes, scary teacher I'm trying to bring property size into it - its ridiculous to me that someone living in a tiny one bedroom flat has to pay the same community charge as the person in a five bed mansion next door.

In general people in large houses should pay more council tax than someone in a tiny crappy flat on a council estate

Wasn't it the conservatives who brought the council tax in? Say no more

Laurie - property size IS relevant now for CTAX, but I don't think it's fairer. Your person in a large house may be a widow who doesn't want to leave her marital home, and uses less in services than the people who live in the smaller flat. There is a presumption that size of house equates to size of pockets, and that ain't necessarily so.

SingleMum - Labour haven't got rid of it though have they, and it's Labour who have planned a revaluation. They've had 12 years to do something, and haven't, so more than methinks. Put the lot on sales tax perhaps as they do in the US, so those who spend more pay more.

1dilemma - I live abroad and get UK child benefit for ds. It's the way I get my HRP towards my state pension. We get it because crown servants can get it abroad. I could get the local one, but wouldn't get the HRP then.

But single people do sometime3s use the same ser4vices-- our neighbour gets a bin a fortnight, same as us 9and fills it too- haev yet to work out that one- spies lager tins- ah yes now I know )

And as we suffer from sapce poverty as a country, 'rewwarding'those who do live ten to a flat is probably something with positive aspects (if being sumultaneously wrong to encourage over crowding).

The problem Doodle with your post is the same as with all these threads- the way the term benefits claimants is used encompasses revceryone claiming. By that, assumptions about educatione tc don't work- I ahve a degree and am slowly doing an MA; none of the students on my degree (gard 2008) that I am in contact with have jobs yet (incluidng the large number who did PGCE in a shortage subject- dsperately wahted to do that but glad I coulnd't in the end. A lot of commitment to end up in subby work and on te dole).

Maybe I should start petitioning the media for at term meaning on benefits but not through choice, so excluding the disabled / carers / redundant / mothers of small children with working partners etc etc etc.

Oh hang on- I have one used a lot at home.....scrotes.

'Put the lot on sales tax perhaps as they do in the US, so those who spend more pay more

well thats not going to happen is it, they need peopleto spend to get industry and retail going again

Size of house does equate to size of pockets - just cos they have it in equity doesn't mean they should be allowed to pay the same as each person living in a tiny flat.

I think the widow should pay a fair tax for her large property and if she can't afford it it can be sold and go to a family that can.

It's just daft to think that someone living in a 5 million quid house should pay the same 'community charge' as one single parent in the council flat next door.

A huge lot of excellent points on this thread. It would be interestng for ny future Govt Minister/Cahncellor to read the reality of how the tax benefits system actually affects real lives.

What is very clear from everything said and from the large number of posts this matters a lot to everyone.

I just hope (perhaps a futile hope) that when the Tory Govt gets in they set fire to the edifice of tax and benefits and start from zero.

It needs to be fair to those who need welfare and it needs to provide proper economc incentives to work (not sticks to beat people back to work) and to provide incentives save for their retirement for the vast majority of people. The worst aspect of what we have is means testing that is a massive disincentive at the margn to do anything to provide for oneself as several posters have rightly pointed out.

It is sad to hear people effectively saying they would be better off living apart from their DH/DP/DW bause of the wy tax and benefits work. I know that it is true.

Why should the widow sell her house if she doesn't want to? Could the family that you posit afford the house anyway?

The person in the 5 million house would pay the same CC as the single parent, as the latter could claim for ccb etc.

Are you happy with the present system? There is no good way to collect local taxes, and someone will always be unhappy with it. I think, if an uprating had been done, then people would not have objected to CC, as the rates would have gone through the roof.

Sorry, would NOT pay the same as...typing too fast.

Well, I think the football clubs should pay a shedload more cash - instead of paying millions to young people for kicking a ball, maybe they could help support the country. The banks, and bankers could pay more - all bankers' bonuses to go to the state. Instead of building massive new stadia for the Olympics they could have used more existing facilities (this was suggested but discarded). Perhaps all MPs could try living on a so called 'middle income' for a bit (but without the huge expense account). Civil servants shouldn't have such huge salaries (at the top). The royal family should be more self-supporting.

There really are so many places and areas they could look at first, before hitting the already stretched 'middle incomers'. But no. Make the middle class pay as usual.

We pay SO much in tax. And yet, there is not a suitable secondary school for my children to go to (and this is in a city). The only option available is not an option iyswim - it gets something like 23% with 5 GCSEs, and friends who have worked there have said 'never ever send your child anywhere near that place.'

Riven - or the Govt could be cleverer with how it raises tax and how it spends it? To say that benefits have to come down or tax has to go up is oversimplifying things massively. Lily is spot on - there are plenty of other areas that they could target without hammering the 'middle income' earners even more.

"By THEFRINGE Thu 22-Oct-09 12:16:22
So people in council houses and flats do not get their whole rent paid? That must just be my imagination "

No, they don't. Some do, if their income is low enough, but it works exactly the same way as with private tenants. I know a bank manager earning over £40k who lives in a council house with his family. He does not get HB (rightly).

Why on earth is he taking up a council house? This is another bugbear - social housing should only be available for the lowest income earners. If you increase your wages then you move on - and you certainly don't get the right to pass your house onto your dependants or buy it. Absolute nonsense.

He was allocated the property when he was a low wage earner, then moved from hospitality to banking. Council/HA tenancies are assured tenancies - tenants have a permanent right to stay unless they breach tenancy regs.

riven, i'm sure that's true about the schools, but the stark truth is they don't, and that's not going to change, and I'm not prepared to compromise my children's only chance at education. So I don't know what we will do - hope for a miracle I think.

if they remove the cap on uni fees then that really will be stopping intelligent children from accessing higher education.

Scary I think crowned services and armed forces are exemptions though seems perfectly reasonable why to me.

I'm not sure that sending all kids to state schools would have that much effect, given that only about 7% of the population go to private schools.

I really am mystified as to why social housing isn't subject to the same rules as other benefits ie once your circumstances improve then you lose the right to it. No wonder it's so hard to get social housing.