Child Benefit
 

I heard on todays news that from this week Child Benefit is to be restricted to 2 children. At Long Last !!!!! Course I dont suppose it will apply to the folk who already claim for 10 or 12 children just new claimants. Still it is welcome step in the right direction dont you think ?

Re: Child Benefit
 

Got a baby due anytime, third child every bit would have helped as well.

Oh hang on 6th April it kicks in, right curry for tea !!!!

Re: Child Benefit
 

When you say "step in the right direction",are you suggesting that it should be capped at one child or scrapped altogether?

What about those who find themselves having triplets, or other multiple births?

Your winter allowance may be next :hidewall:

Re: Child Benefit
 

Should there still be any child benefit? Should people have a child if they are not in a financial position to support a child without expecting others to pay towards its upkeep?

Re: Child Benefit
 

I'm sure you're aware that some folk have unplanned children,it's not the child's fault...is it?

Re: Child Benefit
 

Thats a damn good question, reason i had only 2, is cos it woulda been very hard to support more, with wages around here.

Re: Child Benefit
 

More often than not its can't be bothered.

Re: Child Benefit
 

In this day and age there is no excuse for having children if folk cannot afford to them.As for my comment ' A step in the right direction' I just think it is time something is done to reduce benefits so that they cannot be relied on in stead of folk getting off their backsides and working to keep their own families. My generation had personal pride and felt it their duty to provide for their families, taking any job that they could get. Ofcourse if folk were on the dole and they were offered a job and they didnt take it their dole money was stopped .

Re: Child Benefit
 

Tonight on BBC News there was a woman with 7 kids saying her benefits had been reduced, well beggar me, how many "Unplanned" were in those 7?:rolleyes:

Re: Child Benefit
 

What about if some poor soul was inpregnated via a sexual assault and decided to keep the child?

Re: Child Benefit
 

So is it a administration problem?
There's always some that take the Mick and the media will always try and demonise them while folk like to play armchair judges.

Re: Child Benefit
 

No there shouldn't, at least, in a world where everyone is responsible for their actions, unfortunately too many folk don't consider having a small number of children to be something they should be responsible for.

Of course it's not the child's fault, however irresponsible parents shouldn't get a free ride.

I also only had the two, anyone that wants more should be free to have them so long as they are prepared to take on the financial responsibility to feed clothe and educate them, it should be no-one elses responsibility.

Unfortunately that isn't the way it works, those that don't give a sod about anything tend to be the ones that ignore birth control, after all, society will take over from their lack of responsibility!

Re: Child Benefit
 

Its more a case of armchair dickheads.:rolleyes:

Re: Child Benefit
 

Now that is something I can agree with.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Nothing to do with it, that is just you trying to side track from the main problem.

Re: Child Benefit
 

You breed 'em, you feed 'em! Personal responsibility seems to be a thing of the past where some of these "Families" are concerned. Added to that there are quite a few who have multiple kids from multiple partners, why the hell should those who go grafting to care for their own families have to stump up (via their taxes) for the lazy & feckless?

And we've not even started talking about the rest of the world who've come to good old Blighty, bringing their brood, the sick, lame & lazy, all with their hands out & haven't paid a penny in & are never likely to either! :mad:

Re: Child Benefit
 

If you cannot afford the upkeep of children, then you should not have them.
Why should the government be responsible for financially supporting children...that is the job of parents.
Contraception is freely available for all...and most people are educated about prevention of unwanted pregnancies.
Jason as for your comment about a child conceived through sexual assault or abuse, well that is a ludicrous comment.
If someone is subjected to such a thing and then they decide to continue with the pregnancy, they are taking responsibility for the child.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Correct, the welfare state was brought into being in the 1940s to help the genuine poor people of this country, not as an excuse to give the work shy the same benefits, ie, unlimited children, cars, holiday's, meals out etc, as the folk who have worked for them all their lives and this comment comes from a one time staunch socialist and lifetime union member. (one time meaning up until the so called new Labour and war monger Blair took over).
End of rant, Your's, Taddy.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Accyexplorer says my fuel allowance may be next to be cut. Well maybe it will but while I am being paid at least I know I have contributed all my working life to the system always paid a full stamp unlike most of the folk claiming far more than the fuel allowance who have never paid so much as a penny in the kitty.

Re: Child Benefit
 

don't know how you can call them work shy, stealing charity boxes, mugging pensioners, house breaking, shoplifting, having a child every year or two. This is a standard CV of a time served scank, its hard graft supporting a drink and drug habit, cant support kids as well.

Re: Child Benefit
 

I have a couple of points id like to raise, firstly this is for child benefit right? Is this the child benefit that every family is entitled to whether you're not working or on £100,000 a year?
Should be means tested rather than limiting the number of children per family.
Secondly, there's an awful long time from planning how many little cherubs you can afford to have to when the soul sucking leeches become financially independent, a lot can happen, people lose their jobs,partners leave, become abusive, get Ill or even worse. Should those left alone with children and the children themselves really be made to suffer because of those that abuse the system ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Child Benefit
 

The £100,000 is a sticking point. If you have 2 parents earning £49,999 each totalling £99,998 per year you will get full child benefit. If however you have one parent earning £60,000 and the other parent decides to stay at home and look after the children then you get nothing.

If you are in employment and earn between £50,000 and £60,000 you get a percentage of the full child benefit, you can thank the Tories for that. You also have the pleasure of filling in a tax return every year even though your company pays your tax by PAYE. Again thank you Tories.

Re: Child Benefit
 

I watched the Panorama programme last night on the subject of the Benefits cap.
In the main those who were featured expressed an 'entitlement' and seemed to be blind to the causes of their so called poverty.
Most of those featured had mobile phones, (and you are going to tell me that a mobile phone is a necessity if you are seeking a job, or claiming benefits...well, that may be true, but most of them seemed to be smartphones.)
There was only one single father who we saw going for an interview...he neither smoked nor drank.
There was one woman who railed at the government for putting her in poverty....she had seven children.All being cared for by someone else.
Where was the father/fathers of these children? Why wasn't some contribution for their care being taken from him?

How is it fair for someone to stay at home and get £20,000per year when there are parents working and not earning that amount?
Those working parents are contributing in taxes(however low a rate) and NI contributions.
Those on benefits do not pay any taxes(apart from those levied on purchases) or NI contributions.

I had only one child and one of the reasons for this was that I couldnot afford more than that.(there was NO child benefit for most of the time my daughter was growing up...and when I was eligible for it I never claimed it. I believed that the funding of my child was MY responsibility, not that of the government.

Re: Child Benefit
 

You've just put my thoughts into words Margaret.
I'm in total agreement with you.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Its like someone rightly said earlier, "Responsibility has gone out the window":rolleyes:

Re: Child Benefit
 

So this is what used to be called family allowance then.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Oh well missed the deadline :( better higher the retirement age now cos I'll be working forever :D

Re: Child Benefit
 

Yes that's it.

Re: Child Benefit
 

You must be really old because child benefit/family allowance/child tax allowances/family income supplement etc has been around in one form or another since 1909 (also between 1798 and 1805 but I know you're not that old :p )

Have a read of this interested page explaining where it all started Where it all started « Policy « Child Benefit

Re: Child Benefit
 

The issue I have with family allowance isn`t people on low income claiming for more than 2 children it`s those on high income claiming it when they don`t (or shouldn`t) need it, a family earning £100,000 a year still claiming it is just greedy.

Re: Child Benefit
 

How do you know the financial situation of someone based on their earnings? Means testing for child benefit was ruled out years ago as being too expensive and complex to administer.

It's not that many years ago the equivalent of child benefit was only available to working families. Maybe that's the answer as a way of helping working families with child care costs so they can stay in work.

Re: Child Benefit
 

I don`t, but someone earning £2,000 a week shouldn`t need to claim an extra £20 a week but they still can.

Re: Child Benefit
 

No I am not really really old,but some government changed the rules at one point and we were not eligible(for the life of me I cannot think what the reason was) but then another government came in and we became eligible to a paltry amount(it would not have kept a kid in bubble gum) so I never claimed it.
I have claimed only twice in my life....dole during the three day week and a period of three months sickness benefit after a major op.
I paid into the system from the age of 15 to 55.
These people on this program last night have been drawing benefits as an entitlement without any appreciable work history.

Benefits should NEVER be a hand out...only a hand up.
It should not be more lucrative to be on benefits that be in work.
Why would you turn out for 40 hours a week if you thought the government would give you £20,000 per year?

Re: Child Benefit
 

I know from personal family experience that circumstances can change, that illness and disability can come into the equation...and the children should not suffer.
But if someone tells an interviewer that they spend £40 per week on fags and beer, but they can't pay their rent and go seeking a hardship payment, then I am sorry but they are NOT putting the needs of the children first.
This family were under threat of eviction. Neither parent worked or had done so for a long time.
They needed to learn how to budget I could feed a family well with fresh food for the money that chap spent on fags and beer(ok some of the stuff might have been whoopsied, but they would be eating stuff more substantial than a frozen pizza).

Re: Child Benefit
 

I`m sure most of us know people like that but not everyone who claims family allowance is, and is this the way to cut that out? I doubt it myself.

Re: Child Benefit
 

I didn't say that everyone is like that, but I was saying that it should never be more lucrative to be on benefits than to go out to work.
There are many families who claim tax credits that they have EARNED by working.
I was brought up to believe that if you don't work then you can't expect there to be grub on the table.
I grew up poor, there were seven children in our family, but my mum worked at three jobs to feed us when my father was too ill to work because of war injuries.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Don't forget the grandma who has her four grandchildren , she drives a car and I think she said she gets £400 plus a week and is moaning she is hard put to as being a relative to the children should give her different benefits, feels like shooting herself as she is too old for all this. Why did she take the children in then. Oh yes, she only spends the benefits on the children .......in arrears with the rent , cant afford it.

Re: Child Benefit
 

It appeared that she did not consider putting a roof over the heads of her grandchildren something which was for them.
She said she had nothing to live for...er, well what about the children that you accepted responsibility for?
I don't get it at all, most of those in the program were shown driving around in what appeared to be well kept vehicles(apart from the builder with a band hand, four children and a £40 fags and beer bill).

It is NOT the responsibility of the tax payer to fund a lifestyle which many of us would aspire to.
There was very little evidence of budget responsibility in those featured in the programme, but a lot of tears. As my mother always says 'Scrike, you'll pee less'.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Well I am glad I did not see the programme Margaret because it would have sent my blood pressure through the roof. As for Neil saying Family allowance or like has been around since 1909 . I was an only child and left school in 1960 and my mother was never given any money and she always paid a full stamp. I think there may have been payments for a second child but definitely not for a first.

Re: Child Benefit
 

It seems to me that a vast majority of those on benefits have their priorities wrong. Large TV sets, big cars, cigarettes and booze all seem to rank higher on their agenda than healthy food ,clothes and shoes for their children. With the likes of Lidl and Aldi selling fresh veg and fruit for 29p I see no reason why they cannot feed a family and still pay their rent.

Re: Child Benefit
 

It did not do my blood pressure any good
Yes, you are right,there was nothing for the first child back then.
There have been many tweaks by successive governments, the best one was where the mother got the money.

Re: Child Benefit
 

The TVs and the devices(in some cases, though not those last night) may just have been bought before the family fell on hard times.
Those last night had not worked for years. So it is unlikely that their smartphones were from when they were working.

There seemed to be no desire to find work...and they only had to be employed for 16-21 hrs per week to get the benefits cap removed.

The man who got a job with Barclays could not start as he had no child care facilities, but two of his children looked to be in their teens. Had they no grand parents who could fill the gap while the father got home?
Yes, I know that many grandparents still work, but with ingenuity and the will, you can usually find a solution...unless you don't want one.

Re: Child Benefit
 

If 1 parent earns £60,000 you get nothing, if both parents earn £49,999 each you get full child benefit.

If you earn £60,000 per year you will take home £818 per week and pay £335 in tax/NI


2 parents earning £50,000 each will take home £1,414 and pay £508 in tax/NI but still get full child benefit.

What I'm trying to explain, poorly it would appear is that a family with 2 parents with one working can loose out with the current child benefit system compared to 2 parents working but earning a lot more money.

Re: Child Benefit
 

You aren't explaining poorly just answering a question I didn't ask.
This is the bit that I find wrong -

Should they really be entitled to child benefit when they are on so much money?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Child Benefit
 

They have paid into the system...and while they may not be in NEED of the money it is what they are entitled to.
Those who do not work, but rely on benefits to live, contribute nothing in the way of taxes or NI contributions ( their only tax contributions will be for whatever they choose to purchase with their benefits).
It really is NOT FAIR that some parents will pull their tripes out to feed and clothe their children but earn less than what is being handed to claimants.
You have children, then it is your job to support them and provide for them financially.

Re: Child Benefit
 

You are correct. Our first child was born in '59 and we did not receive Child Allowance until the second one came along. We received allowance for him and also for the third, which I believe was the maximum number. Came in very useful for a junior rank in the RAF. Bearing in mind that when I went from Junior Assistant Works Engineer in Burnley to Aircraftsman 2nd Class in the RAF I suffered what was then a substantial reduction in pay - and stayed as such for almost 18 months whilst I went through recruit and trade training. No regrets though as that period of hardship certainly bore fruit for us, but will always remember the Child Allowance and our gratitude for it.

Re: Child Benefit
 

That's why I think it's wrong and they should look at the combined income of both parents if they are going to look at income at all.

Re: Child Benefit
 

A WARNING, mainly to those of you that claim you don't watch much television, whenever you watch a documentary they will always show the absolute extremes!

95% and possibly more of what they depict aren't that bad, they have to show the worse to justify their own stupidly extreme wages.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Yes, Less. I know there is a bias when programs are made(and after all it was a BBC program and they usually never miss a chance to lambast Tory policies)..otherwise no one would bother watching. At least the interviewer asked some pertinent questions.
It was not all about child benefit, but about the capping of benefit claims.

It still doesn't make it fair for those claiming money from the state at a rate which would require them to be earning something in the region of £24,000 per year to have the same amount of disposable income...that is where the injustice lies.

Re: Child Benefit
 

So the more money you earn, the more you put into the system, the more you should be able to claim benefits.
The less money you earn, the less you put into the system, less benefits you should be entitled to.
Seems a backward way of working to me, rich getting richer, poor getting poorer.

Re: Child Benefit
 

No, it isn't the right way(and it was always so... The rich get richer and the poor are always going to be with us), but neither is it right for some families to be working full time and bringing in less money than those who are sitting on their behinds(having children they cannot afford to feed and support)and getting more money in handouts than those pulling their tripes out to make sure they can feed their children.

No one ever promised that life would be fair.
In life it is a bit like playing a trombone...the tune you get is dependent on the effort you exert...it is no good expecting a fancy house, a nice car, fags and beer and fancy holidays if you are not prepared to stir your stumps and make it happen.
Being an adult means you have choices, but all of them come with consequences and responsibilities.
You cannot abdicate these and expect the rest of society to pick up the bill.

Re: Child Benefit
 

That isn`t what i`m saying Margaret, what i`m saying is if cuts are to be made to child benefit it should start with the people who claim it but don`t need to, people who an extra £20 a week is nothing but claim it anyway rather than those who rely on it, and I`m not talking about those who abuse the system, I`m talking of those on low income who an extra £20 a week makes a real difference to their lives.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Yes, I know what you are saying, but I think it could be delivered in a better way. Perhaps it would be more use to give free child care places rather than money.

Child care is expensive and if parents received that instead of money then it would incentivise working and would free up some of their current cash to make life better for them.
If the political will is not there to determine where the need is greatest, then it will not change.
If the benefit were means tested, it still would not necessarily reach those in most need as they may not apply for it because of te scrutiny it would direct to their financial affairs.

Re: Child Benefit
 

I think you can already get help with child care, my daughter goes back to work this week after having a baby (first one so not at skank level yet), and she has mentioned it.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Yes, there has been 15 hrs child care free for 3&4 year olds...this has been doubled to 30 hrs.This is Ok as far as it goes, but I was thinking that there is precious little child care for children after school at reasonable cost. And other than after school clubs there is nothing for older children. In most cases grandparents step in and fill the bill. This is usually( well from my experience) at no cost to parents.
If we want parents to benefit society by working, then either employers need to be offering working hours that are more flexible(and I know in reality this is not always possible) or there needs to be more support for families.

Congratulations on becoming one of those 'G' things.(a grandparent)

Skanks are those in society who do not recognise their responsibilities( only their rights)and usually do not work...so your daughter does not fit the criteria and I would think that she never will.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Thanks, but i`m one of those a few times over now (if you count step children, which I do). :eek:

Re: Child Benefit
 

How did we manage in the '50s/'60s without free childcare? Child allowance for 2nd and 3rd child and that was it. Husbands worked during the day and wives worked evenings, or paid for a child minder and worked during the day, or the husband did his day job and then went and worked evenings. Perhaps we had a different mindset then

Re: Child Benefit
 

I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Work was seen as honourable and no-one wanted to be on the 'nash' or the parish...it was seen as a failure and folk were embarrassed.
What couldn't be afforded was not bought.
My parents had a strong aversion to going into debt for anything.
We didn't often get new clothes.
The only time I remember being fully kitted out was with school uniform and this was bought at the Co-op with the summer 'divi' and the rebate from the gas meter.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Done similar myself, evenings at hollands pies Monday-Friday on agency then my regular weekend nightshifts taking half a days holiday on friday so that I didn`t miss the shift at Hollands. Friday was a killer 4-11.30 then cycle over to Blackburn for 2nd half of my shift for my regular job 1-7. Did that for about 6 months to catch up after a while on sick (Broken Leg).

Re: Child Benefit
 

Wow! self service physio eh?

Riding a bike after breaking a leg, these days you could have had two years off on full benefits instead.
:eek:

Re: Child Benefit
 

4 months was long enough, it aint all it`s cracked up to be.

Re: Child Benefit
 

Cracked? Cracked? You malingerer, you told us it was broken!

Re: Child Benefit
 

I wondered if anyone would "see what I did there", well done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Child Benefit
 

Nothing gets past our Less, especially if it's alcoholic! :D