Go to navigation
It is currently Fri Dec 09, 2016 5:28 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 87
What do we make of the child benefit proposal? Though small, it goes a long a way. One person working is quite bad enough. With no jobs out there, this will be quite hard or what do you think?


OOBmum


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:35 am
Posts: 317
Location: England
Another example of taking from the successful and giving to the 'Poor'....Absolutely outraged


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:28 pm
Posts: 2439
What proposal has been made? I heard the cuts are still going ahead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 12:20 pm
Posts: 313
I don't think the proposed changes are very fair at all. One family could have a joint income of, say, £75,000 and receive the benefit whilst another family earning £45,000 will receive nothing! This is all because one person is a higher rate tax payer in the household.

I think the person receiving the benefit should be assessed for eligibility. In other words, if that person is a higher rate tax payer, then they don't get the benefit. If they're not, they should regardless of what their partner may be earning.

Many families will be penalised because of this threshold whilst others better off will still benefit. Where is the logic in that? I must be missing something here.

Of course, these are only my views and I am sure that other people will beg to differ! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:44 pm
Posts: 357
I'm a single parent (just) higher rate tax payer. With this, together with the removal of tax credits and increased mortgage costs, (and static salary for 3 years) I can no longer afford my son's indie school fees. So the tax payer will now be reponsible for paying for him - and many others in the same situation so the so called savings will cost the country more.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:21 am
Posts: 2125
I can't understand the problem they have with means-testing of households. They seem to manage it for everything else - especially student loans and grants!

_________________
Marylou


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 87
I thought this was just me. I don't see what good this will do except put marriages under unnecessary strain. People wanting to separate as they might be better off which in turn will put the housing sector under more strain? Both parents under pressure to go out and work which makes kids less better off. I am of the opinion that the country will lose more than it can hope to gain by this cut. Or what?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:20 pm
Posts: 4660
They also seemed to be able to assess people's income when it came to child tax credits so I too don't understand why they can't do the same now.

We too are in the same position as faitaccompli (except we luckily don't have indie fees to pay - but nearly did :shock: ) single income, etc, etc. Yet I know of loads of double income families earning 70/80 thousand between them and they STILL qualify for the child benefit. How anyone in their right mind can say this is fair defeats me, it really does.

It's not so much that I don't want the benefit withdrawn for higher rate tax payers, I know cuts have to be made somewhere and we all have to pull together (although people usually base their spendings on their income and to whip all this from under their feet when so many people are committed to outgoings truly isn't fair) but I think it might work more fairly if they assess the income of the family and take it away from ALL those families earning over a certain amount (I dunno, say £75,000 - it could be any figure really). I wonder if in that way they'd actually save more money?

Or perhaps to be fairer they withdraw the benefit from future parents over a certain wage bracket thereby continue paying those already qualified for it.

It's certainly a tricky one and someone, somewhere will feel hard done by that's for sure!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:45 pm
Posts: 4608
And while we're at it, I really can't see why childcare is paid for out of taxed income - a particular bugbear of mine!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:35 am
Posts: 317
Location: England
I never use the police, fire or ambulance service. Didnt ask army to invade other cultures country etc. Can chuck all my rubbish in recycling centre and so on and on and on....Yet me and OH are taxed to the hilt, what do we get back in return in terms of tax return, sweet Football Association. It wont be long before we have our own saxon spring here..


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016