home
in

Child benefit - are the changes fair?

Last post Wed, Oct 13 2010, 7:42 PM by carl30. 45 replies.
Page 1 of 4 (46 items)   1 2 3 4 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  Wed, Oct 13 2010, 7:42 PM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    shaz 1949:There is always choice. Have you not heard of birth control. And it is free. Why pay people to populate an already over populated planet. We are humans not animals for breeding.


    lol, what a stupid comment. Look between your legs, thats for reproducing, we all have one, and we are all driven to use them

    The student that served you at the supermarket, the kid that delivers your paper, the universtity students that are going to develop the cures for cancer in years to come need to start somewhere, their parents pay national insurance, why shouldn't these children be allowed some assistance?

    the governments decision is along the right lines, however its not as black and white as to just give a cut off point, an assesment by case is required, such as with the tax credit situation
    • Post Points: 5
  •  Tue, Oct 12 2010, 10:56 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    There is always choice. Have you not heard of birth control. And it is free. Why pay people to populate an already over populated planet. We are humans not animals for breeding.
    • Post Points: 20
  •  Fri, Oct 08 2010, 10:44 PM

    Re: Demand household income based cuts

    Well said huckster, the only question is wether they'll back down gracefully (merge cb cuts with IDS's universal credit scheme - which incidentally they seem to be quibbling about already - even more incompetence) or stubbornly go ahead all the while chanting 'It's the right and fair thing to do'.

    Contrary to reports yesterday btw (Sky News, Sun), suggesting 83% of population is behind cb cuts, the truth is 83% is for cuts it in principle, but approximately half of that is against how the cuts are being implemented...http://today.yougov.co.uk/politics/child-benefits-reaction. Objective reporting as always :)

    • Post Points: 5
  •  Fri, Oct 08 2010, 6:55 PM

    Re: Demand household income based cuts

    I have no problem with any government making changes to the welfare state that make it less costly to administer. But they must do this so in a fully considered way as a programme of change, that has steps that deals with any anomalies.

    To make announcements in the way this government has, makes them look very incompetent.

    The Tories look like they have a problem with women and children, which I am sure was not their intention.

    • Post Points: 20
  •  Fri, Oct 08 2010, 5:57 PM

    Re: Demand household income based cuts

    Not only that, if the tax break for marriage couples is introduced that's even more admin and overhead which apparently is inconsequential. IDS further goes on to talk bout a 'new credit scheme' which replaces all benefits in 2017, so why spend money amending the existing one for 2013 only to change it all again in 2017. As you said they'll be no savings made at all ....how much did the last major (incomplete) "upgrade" cost? 12billion I believe (NHS computer system). Government needs to stop its hastiness and work on a implementing the fairer, means-testing system IDS is talking about.

    CHILD BENEFIT CUTS: Stop chancellor from unfairly targeting one-parent & single-income families http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/unfair-childbenefit-cuts/

    • Post Points: 20
  •  Fri, Oct 08 2010, 3:18 PM

    Re: Demand household income based cuts

    For what it’s worth, I don’t believe ANY benefit should be universal (child benefit, bus passes, heating allowance etc), the whole system should be based on need.

    But, what really winds me up about this decision is the added admin Osbourne has created.

    Child Benefit is pretty simple (even by Govt standards) – i.e. every parent gets it, so fairly low admin. From 2013, the HMRC will be involved and will have to advise DWP who gets the benefit. He also managed to increase the scope for errors etc.

    Osbourne has added an extra layer of admin and bureaucracy, and therefore expense – any savings will soon disappear.

    • Post Points: 20
  •  Fri, Oct 08 2010, 9:09 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Ah well - multi-millionaire Tory Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, agrees with you and says "Poor should stop having children." That's going to go down well!
    • Post Points: 20
  •  Fri, Oct 08 2010, 8:25 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    I am not concerned with the philosophy of Adam Smith in this case. I am concerned with the blatant unfairness of public money being paid out as a reward for having children.

    I would like some 'free' money like this to help with the running costs of my car - but it sure ain't gonna happen.

    Child benefit is essentially vote buying, and watch the Labour party promise to give it all back in their efforts to fool the people into giving them another opportunity to bust the economy even further.
    • Post Points: 20
  •  Thu, Oct 07 2010, 8:47 PM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Hi Skywalker, Thatcher based her ideas on the philosophy of Adam Smith who said, something like, if the rich and others at the top end of society are doing well, it will pass down along the line; thus the poor may benefit but, the poor will always be poor. I'm sure you know all this but others might not.
    • Post Points: 20
  •  Thu, Oct 07 2010, 11:43 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Hi Zeb,

    I saw that on Newsnight, culture minister Jeremy Hunt said: "The number of children that you have is a choice and what we're saying is that if people are living on benefits, then they make choices but they also have to have responsibility for those choices. It's not going to be the role of the state to finance those choices."

    Not at all sure what I think about this, it's such a complicated issue. You're right, people who've never worked and have more kids than most families can afford shouldn't be rewarded, however, children are vulnerable and you don't want to punish them for their parents' decisions.

    Felicity

    • Post Points: 29
  •  Thu, Oct 07 2010, 11:33 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Just to throw another spanner into the works.

    Did anyone hear the news report this morning that suggested that benefits maybe capped so that a "large" family could not earn credits and benefits that would exceed an average family income. Obviously this is to get the message to the baby factory families that there is more to life than a subsidised £30k income for lying on your back.

    While I absolutely agree that it is a choice to have children, I also believe that the state is not responsible to fund a lifestyle that only removes from the state and does not contribute anything to the country in return.

    • Post Points: 20
  •  Thu, Oct 07 2010, 10:02 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Skywalker

    It is all about getting the balance right between 'individual' and 'state'. I don't think any country has achieved an ideal balance!

    The country that is rated the 'best place in the world to live' is France. They have a high quality health system, higher state* benefits and a lower retirement age* at which they receive a pension. Also France was not affected as much as other G7 countries in the recent financial crisis. However, it is true to say the the French are now having to make changes to avoid a growing national debt. e.g. recent protests about increasing retirement/pension age from 60 to 65. *(compared to other G20 countries)

    In regard to the UK, both Labour and the Tories have failed to simplify the state system to make it work for people i.e. a leg up and not a hand out. If you have a 'client state' with thousands of pen pushers to administer complicated rules, you are not getting best value for taxpapers money or actually helping people in the long run.

    My issue with the Tories in the past, is that they appeared to ignore the people that needed help and just looked after their own. I have strong views on the failures of the Thatcher government, who I thought showed a callous disregard towards the genuine poor, particularly the elderly.

    • Post Points: 35
  •  Thu, Oct 07 2010, 9:23 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Thanks for your response Skywalker. However, you do have a responsibility and public money has to be spent on our children otherwise, as a previous subscriber has mentioned to you, we would be trying to live in a world devoid of doctors, dentists, craftsment, artists, etc. etc. and would be the worse off for this lack.
    • Post Points: 5
  •  Thu, Oct 07 2010, 7:38 AM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    Leo35,

    having children *is* a clear choice. I'm not "telling others what do to" I am simply saying that the choice to have children should not be subsidised with public money.

    Huckster,

    I don't think it's entirely fair to label people with kids as 'vulnerable'! Hehehe Although I quite understand that the little minors might fray the nerves somewhat!

    Tories are capitalist in nature and certainly don't subscribe to the Labour 'cradle to grave' mantra, which is basically unsustainable in all economic models.
    • Post Points: 35
  •  Wed, Oct 06 2010, 4:16 PM

    Re: Child benefit - are the changes fair?

    People do not 'choose' to have children. This is the sole purpose for which we are put on earth - to reproduce. If everyone thought like you, that would be the end of the world. You are free to choose not to have children yourself, but please don't tell others what to do.
    • Post Points: 35
Page 1 of 4 (46 items)   1 2 3 4 Next >