Means testing benefits - disabled free parking and child benefit?

[hunkermunker]

This is following on from the disabled free parking thread...where it has been said that wealthy disabled people shouldn't benefit from having free parking.

Means testing people for benefits is expensive and involves lots of admin.

How do people feel about child benefit being means tested? After all, wealthy people have children, same as not so wealthy - and we all get the same x amount a week, don't we?

Oh god this is like 3 of my 'hooters' all rolled in to one.. I am stepping away now!

I'm not in favour of means testing child benefit. Would cost so much money not really worth it. Plus child benefit goes to the main carer. So it gives the main carer some independence - even if the sole breadwinner drinks and gambles all their money away, the carer will have SOME money left for food, nappies, whatever.
Plus it is inclusive - makes everyone (with kids) feel as if they get something out as well as putting in.

Bloody people having kids, they'll be expecting mother and baby spaces to be free next. Lying around doing nothing all day- get their fat arses back to work that's what I say.

Oh HOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTT

so if child benefit shouldnt be means tested, then can disabled still get their free parking at some places? (but not heathrow airport)

Why on earth would a disabled person need parking at Heathrow- they shouldn't be going on holiday.

I think this is going to be one of my hooter topics too, so all I'm going to say is

PARP

and then I'm walking away from the thread before it kicks off.

PMSL

there are a lot of people with integrity who know they don't need child benefit, and who choose either not to claim it or claim it and donate it to charity. and there are some (a minority)who are, perhaps, a bit greedy. if we had a system that prevented those greedy ones from getting their child benefit it would cost more than it,s worth. I think we have to shrug our shoulders and not worry about it.

CB is a recognition of the extra costs that having children involves.

And it goes to the main childcarer, ie in most cases the woman.

It's a guarantee (in theory) that as Edam says, even if the main income earner withholds their income from their family, the person in charge of the cb has money to buy food for the kids to eat. (When it was first introduced, it was a significantly higher proportion of a poor household income.)

The way to make it fairer, is to have a progressive taxation system. As progressive politicians have always said "tax the wallet, not the purse". Because it has always been recognised that in general, women are more likely to prioritise family spending on children, than men are.

Ha ha ha, lights touchpaper and stands back.

Crikey, it's bad enough having to 'prove' my ds is disabled enough to get a bit of DLA without having to cover up the swiss bank account!

If it's anything like the way Tax Credits are set up: NO! OMG, the fracas!

Parp!

If CB if a recognition of the extra costs involved in bringing up children, and DLA is a recognition of the extra costs in being disabled, and having higher rate mobility DLA gives you free parking then....... well........ Hmmm scrap the CB for the all the people whinging about free parking for the disabled!

Ah but did you know that if you dare to go out of the country for 8 weeks, for a long holiday say, then your child benefit is stopped? Yet you still have to pay your council tax.

And if you live in a caravan, you try getting any kind of benefit! For 3.5 months this is the state we were in, we didn't exist!

I don't need the child benefit so it goes into my bank account and immediately out into DSs' savings' accounts.

only if the child benefit to those below whatever line is drawn is doubled.

otherwise than that no. it just turns into another money saving thing for the govt to waste on something else - buy a new jag - start a new war whatever.

so if i was convinced that poorer people were going to get double the amount then i would e all for it

however as it stands we save it up and pay for a holiday

But presumably the child benefit will gradually reduce and we'll just be left with the child tax credit which is effectively mean tested. Certainly the CTC increases at a greater rate than CB.

I think all state funded benefits should be means tested. Going off on a tangent here but my FIL gets money every year for the extra heating in winter (is it the winter fuel tax allowance or something), the man is minted and does not need that money at all.

If we had a progressive tax system, that would take care of the "minted" ones.

WCL, I know someone who uses his winter fuel payment to heat his swimming pool.

WCL - on that basis I think it is fair to say that he will have paid for his £200 a year winter allowance several times over in taxes.
So shall we just net it off?

Why net it off?

He earnt the money, he payed the tax.

Surely the £200 which is like loose change to my FIL is worth more to the pensioner scraping by on next to nothing?

caligula please explain a progressive tax system so I can show off to all my real feminist friends about how "right on" I am!

I am not taking the mick btw, I would really like to know!

Colditz

Check this out:

www.bized.ac.uk/current/challenge/design.htm

Oh Gawd - progressive taxation, is basically the principle that the higher your income is, the more you are taxed both in money terms and in percentage terms.

So the lower your income, the lower the taxes you pay proportionate to that income. And the higher your income, the higher your tax bill.

Indirect taxes, such as VAT, weigh more heavily on lower income groups. If everyone has to pay 17.5% on a certain product, if you are earning 10,000 and you are paying 17.5% on a 1000 product (ie: 175), your tax burden is much much higher than someone who pays 175 who earns 500K.

Our tax system is fairly regressive - only 4 tax bands (0%, 10% (new, introduced by Gordon Brown within the last 5 years, can't quite remember when) 22% and 40%.) Although the tinkering with tax credits has made the system more progressive than it was.

A progressive tax system would have more steps according to income. And the big debate, is what the upper tax limit should be (the Lib Dems still talk about 50%, I think).

An accountant will now come on to tell me I am talking bollocks.