Dave's cuts are going be deep and they will hurt

[FellatioNelson]

I've been hearing this all day on the radio. I can't take the suspense any longer. They are going to affect the lives of 'every one of us'

I feel like a person wincing and clenching my teeth in anticipation of the big fuck-off needle the school nurse is wielding, and I'm next in the queue....

Come on then, what's it going to be?

it is frankly bizarre to only want to pay for teh services you need

if you become too ill to work, you will need a school aplce I rpesume?

If you become disabled you will need new saervices?

if you - oh so very many things.

if you say yes but all teh NI I have already paid.... I will say ha! Me too.

We pay for insurance. In teh event that it ahppens. If we pop out for milk and never come back after meeting abus; if our child is in an accident

if, as in some palces, the private school gores under tomorrow.

Any one willing to risk his or her life to save anothers is not fat or lazy and deserves a darn sight more than £30,000.

I agree sue52

The firemen round here are superb specimens emoticon.

Have we put anything on here that George Osbourne can use? I'm going to spend the next hour scanning the thread to see, then I'm watching Dr Who.

I heard today that there are plans to cut the age that child benefit is given from 16 to 13.

Surely, it would be better to means test the child benefit? Child tax credit will be capped at £50K per annum (unless it's changed since the new govt has been in power?). Wouldn't it make sense to cap child benefit in the same way?

Mamatomany, I sincerely hope that you have stashed away enough cash for you and your family to live on comfortably from now until your pension kicks in, in the event that you lose your income(s).

That is the only way that you can safely say that you will never find yourself in the unfortunate position of having to claim benefits.

Even then MC, it's ahrd to know what misfurtune really costs- decent quality nursingc are for example (as I know you relaise).

£2k a week plus usual expendityure

if you have that mama even if ouu both lost your incomes, then you are safe

Well that X the number of kids you have; i've 2 Sn kids, that can be anyone too I guess. DH's Aunt's children were invovled in a car crash and she lost 6 children, it's amazing what you can lose in a blink of an eye.

You are so right SanctimoanyArse, you can lose everything in an instant. That is why we must fight to keep state services, they are there for everybody who needs them and you never know when that will be you. When Dave's axe falls it can damn well fall on those who can afford to pay for it.

Child benifit is being looked at and the thought is to tax CB and stop paying it when the child gets to 13 aswell.

regarding the £50k thing. here is an example of how that will work out in London-all calculated on line and just to make a point that although it sounds like alot of cash, in London it does not go that far.

Take for example, one public sector worker who earns £50k exactly. After tax,and NI and paying back £188 pcm in student loans [and this is a non negotiable repayment amount lasting probably more than 4 years] that person takes home £2721 pcm.

Lets say, that person has two children and lets say there is no other parent around, just one...lets say there is one child at school and one younger who needs f/t care. that is around £1100 pcm [at least]. Rent in London varies but a two bed place where I live is about £1200 pcm. So after rent and childcare that family is left with a Staggering huge amount of £421 PCM [5052 per year] with no tax credits or child benefit. Of course if it were not for the student loan then it would not seem so bad, but then if it were not for the loan it works out at £609 pcm.

Anyway, just been onto entitledto.com and did the scenario where someone does not work with two kids and it said the same family would get £98 per week which is £424 per month [excluding housing bens, council tax bens etc]-if this is correct, I don't know.

Now lets go futher, imagine the Gove do want to abolish CHB as well as CTC's for those earning £50k then that is all they will get, plus a possible pay cut or/and pay freeze for three years...hmmm, it really is not that much when you take everything into account...

Child benifit is being looked at and the thought is to tax CB and stop paying it when the child gets to 13 aswell.

I certainly dislike the sexism of Ian D-S and very disappointed Frank Field is spouting it too - suggesting we want women at home (neve rmen of course - where is FF saying let's give new parents more CB so fathers can stay home for 12 years... so on say it FF but you won't because like most of the rest of them you're sexist to the core...)

Anyway 22nd June is our Emergency Budget day 2010 - a once in a life time or 20 year time span to do what needs to be done at a time when people will accept it. I hope they're radical enough but I bet it will just be the stuff we've heard about.

This is the problem with taking arbitrary numbers and saying if you earn this or that then you must be well off.

I'm on a good salary but my husband doesnt work - he looks after the kids (does a great job of it by the way, far better than I could). Therefore my good salary has to be stretched to feed clothe and house five people. Dont get me wrong, I am prepared to pay more to help clear the deficit but I dont want to find myself in narrow group which has to foot the whole bill so that no one else has to bother.

I thought it cost more to means test the child benefit which is why it has not been done. Stopping it at 13 and perhaps for your first 2 children only for everyone seems a good idea to me.

I do think that public sector workers deserve significantly more in London than elsewhere. When I taught up north we lived a very good life on my wage and I easily earnt enough to buy a house. It is a struggle where I am now and we will struggle to buy a house but London it is impossible.

I was a teacher in London and had to leave because I could not afford to stay. I wonder how much us teachers elsewhere would have to give up so London teachers could have another 10K on their pay. It would be worth it IMO.

But suzie to have a partner at home is for most of us a luxury. My dp only works part time so he can be at home for dd. We struggle because of that, second hand clothes, rented home etc. I don't expect the state to take into consideration such luxury decisions when deciding how we are going to dig our way out of this. My dd is not a pre schooler therefore having a parent at home is a luxury.

It would not be too hard to make it taxable so you declare it on your tax return (CB) but that may not be so popular. Means testing it woudl be very expensive to set up.

We'll see. FF's ideas may well not be adopted and CB will never cover the cost of full time childcare so it's a bit silly to suggest it allows a parent to give up a £20k a year job or pay for 3 nursery places of 3 children under 5 or a daily nanny so why bother suggesting it might help with that? It's there as a recognition by society that chidlren are not just an indulgence for us lucky parents who are lucky enough to have them but also that it does cost us quite a bit and the children may be useful workers... although the reason the planet is in a state is because mankind breeds so possibly there shiould be massive fines if you have anty children at all if mother earth had much to do with it.

Making cb taxable could work, but only if it is taxable on the person who receives it and household income is not taken into account; otherwise we have to revisit how we are taxed and allowances.

I think your statement about SAHPs being a luxury is a bit sweeping Katy - it depends on the level of the childcare bill versus the salary being lost, and the money you save by not working in clothing, commuting, cooking from scratch, not buying textbooks and school supplies. My ds is 14 and I have been a SAHM for 4 years almost now.

I don't think you would find many teachers willing either to reduce their salaries to pay extra to those who choose to teach in London. I would not have been happy to do that at all.

I am a teacher scary and I would be happy to do it if it could solve the problem of teacher retention in London.

Tbh scary I think having a parent at home is a luxury and am coming to see having more than one child as a luxury as well.

Maybe child benefit could be included with tax credits and given out that way for two children up to the age of 13 for those on low incomes.

£500k pa guarding Beatrice and Eugenie might be axed it says which is wise.

Ah Labour was spending £100k on fruit for ministers 13 years 5 minues £8 fruit a day. The Tories are now saying on a minister's salary bring in your own fruit. Good. 5000 extra rpess officers hirhed between 2002 and 2009 - £126m cost. Marketing and sales managers public sector increased 10,000 to 23,000. We are spendnig a fortune on people whos eobs don't really need to exist... quite. Even so even with this stuff it is minimal in effect.