oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 So les get this right... Two parents earning £86k (£43k + £43k) get to keep Child Benefit... Single parent earning £44k (or £37k if they have a company car or other BIK) lose Child Benefit... Welcome to the Tory Party Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 So les get this right... Two parents earning £86k (£43k + £43k) get to keep Child Benefit... Single parent earning £44k (or £37k if they have a company car or other BIK) lose Child Benefit... Welcome to the Tory Party Amazing!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 So les get this right... Two parents earning £86k (£43k + £43k) get to keep Child Benefit... Single parent earning £44k (or £37k if they have a company car or other BIK) lose Child Benefit... Welcome to the Tory Party WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Needs a bit more thought me thinks. Politicians are useless feckers. As ever, middle earners hit hardest to clear up the mess made by the last lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Something had to be done, fairly sure this isn't the right thing to do though. As it seems very unfair on single parents and those who are working part-time to help look after the little one (but the other person is making enough money). The radio was talking a lot about £50k (is that where this comes in, as I thought zeros figures seem more accurate). I think if they are going to do this it seems fairer to introduce a cap for two income households too (say £75k- or less depending on how tight they want to be). But this way is probably a lot cheaper to implement. If this is a sign of things to come then I can see a lot of means testing for benefits coming in (bad news for my parents). Plus, what about all the people who's earnings vary month to month, due to overtime, anti-social hours etc. However, I do like that they're going to stop people earning more from benefits than those who do an honest days work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 Something had to be done, fairly sure this isn't the right thing to do though. As it seems very unfair on single parents and those who are working part-time to help look after the little one (but the other person is making enough money). The radio was talking a lot about £50k (is that where this comes in, as I thought zeros figures seem more accurate). I think if they are going to do this it seems fairer to introduce a cap for two income households too (say £75k- or less depending on how tight they want to be). But this way is probably a lot cheaper to implement. If this is a sign of things to come then I can see a lot of means testing for benefits coming in (bad news for my parents). Plus, what about all the people who's earnings vary month to month, due to overtime, anti-social hours etc. Its actually £37k if you have a BIK like a company car etc.. or £37k + £7k allowance (£44k) if you don't... I find it weird as its an attack on stay at home mums... A group the Torys used to like... However, I do like that they're going to stop people earning more from benefits than those who do an honest days work. In principle I agree... Lets see how the execute it though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Its actually £37k if you have a BIK like a company car etc.. or £37k + £7k allowance (£44k) if you don't... I find it weird as its an attack on stay at home mums... A group the Torys used to like... In principle I agree... Lets see how the execute it though... How do you work that one out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 How do you work that one out? Well its simply a fact for a lot of families... and its even a bigger fact for a lot of core Tory voting families... There is a massive amount of families in the United Kingdom made up of one parent working and one parent staying at home were the single bread winner earns over the £44k bracket... Lots of plumbers and such like.. Basically the self employed... That said, the amount of income sharing you will see now will massively increase to combat the issue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 Well its simply a fact for a lot of families... and its even a bigger fact for a lot of core Tory voting families... There is a massive amount of families in the United Kingdom made up of one parent working and one parent staying at home were the single bread winner earns over the £44k bracket... Lots of plumbers and such like.. Basically the self employed... That said, the amount of income sharing you will see now will massively increase to combat the issue... See you have fixed it for the nation by giving me one answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 (edited) See you have fixed it for the nation by giving me one answer. I was talking about the 1.4 million effected by the cut... and I was talking about a big section of the Tory vote... Edited October 4, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 I was talking about the 1.4 million effected by the cut... and I was talking about a big section of the Tory vote... And I would wait until the full version is released before doing the oppositions job for them. It would affect me if my children were younger, but I still think it is a good idea. Ancient systems need reform in this country, this is the beginning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 And I would wait until the full version is released before doing the oppositions job for them. It would affect me if my children were younger, but I still think it is a good idea. Ancient systems need reform in this country, this is the beginning. ? While I can see the argument for Child Benefit to be removed from higher earners... The way this has been implemented is stupid. It should of been set on a family income and not on a single parents income for all the reasons above... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 ? While I can see the argument for Child Benefit to be removed from higher earners... The way this has been implemented is stupid. It should of been set on a family income and not on a single parents income for all the reasons above... Look if you listened to George Osbourne today he said and also IDS said that it is not as straight forward as it appears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 (edited) Look if you listened to George Osbourne today he said and also IDS said that it is not as straight forward as it appears. So go on.. Where are we all going wrong and I listened to the whole speech by the way... Edited October 4, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 If I knew that I'd be in the cabinet. All I have said is why don't you wait for the full version of what they are doing. It may be better it may be worse who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 If I knew that I'd be in the cabinet. All I have said is why don't you wait for the full version of what they are doing. It may be better it may be worse who knows? We can only hope... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 To have set the threshold at a family income instead of using an existing and simple measure would have required every household in the country to be means tested. Which would probably have cost more than this will save. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 To have set the threshold at a family income instead of using an existing and simple measure would have required every household in the country to be means tested. Which would probably have cost more than this will save. I appreciate this, but surely you acknowledge the unfairness of the current suggestion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 I appreciate this, but surely you acknowledge the unfairness of the current suggestion... There will always be 'casualties' where cuts have to be made. And they do have to be made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 (edited) To have set the threshold at a family income instead of using an existing and simple measure would have required every household in the country to be means tested. Which would probably have cost more than this will save. Bingo! Oh wait a sec, dont cloud the issue with sense. Even though its going to right royally me off when it kicks me in the teeth in a couple of years, I still sort of agree with it. Still a bit too bloody liberal for my liking. Now if they start bleating on about removing free nursery places I may get really annoyed.... I'd still blame the liberals though, of course... Edited October 4, 2010 by BigfinLatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 Bingo! Oh wait a sec, dont cloud the issue with sense. Even though its going to right royally me off when it kicks me in the teeth in a couple of years, I still sort of agree with it. Still a bit too bloody liberal for my liking. Now if they start bleating on about removing free nursery places I may get really annoyed.... I'd still blame the liberals though, of course... I don't accept mean testing has to result in the saving wiped out although it will certainly cost money to means test... The cuts are going to be very hard so it is important they are done in a fair way... This is the first big announcement and its been implemented in a very unfair manner... a Family on £80k can get it but another on £44k can't... Its not the cut, its the way it is being done... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 (edited) They may need to be careful about how they bring this in. £545 a year in Child Tax Credit is going next year. Play the sympathy card, and a young widowed mother with 3 kids who earns £45k is also going to have to pay about £400 a year more in National Insurance next year. Another £2,600 on top of that in child benefit pulled and it is a significant chunk of disposable income taken away from that family. And don't forget they're reducing the 40% limit by £2,500 next year. That's a 10%-15% pay cut for this particular example. And some company car tax rates are rising by 40% in 2012/13 as a result of Darling's last budget. We have gone through an absolutely ridiculous 13 years where a government has raped pension funds, dished out benefits to old duffers whether they're loaded or not and built a welfare system where it's financially better for parents to live apart than together. As if the pressures of life aren't hefty enough to start with. And no, I've not read the Daily Mail recently. Brown's failure to save a few quid for a rainy day (preferring instead to pi$$ it away on non-jobs in the public sector) was always stupid. Did he really believe he'd cured the nation of boom and bust? The hole he has left us with is disgusting (and he can blame the banks all he likes, but a recession is always inevitable and he should have prepared for it). While there is a strong case for ripping apart the welfare state and starting again - with a view to taxing workers less and not subsidising wasters - it is important that the impact on those who are genuinely working hard to do their best for their families is properly assessed. Espeically if Cameron expects to get re-elected in a couple of years when the coalition collapses, as it surely will. Edited October 4, 2010 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted October 4, 2010 Share Posted October 4, 2010 (edited) Means-testing. I didn't see the speech but how do you make a universal benefit non-universal without means-testing? I'm not against cutting middle-class benefits, but I've got a feeling that the mighty IDS - a deep, deep thinker - might get this all wrong. Good luck to him with simplifying the benefits system as well, especially if it's based on the less-eligibility threshold of national average income. He'll need it. How does he intend to cope with the London distortion? Edited October 4, 2010 by 24hoursfromtulsehill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 4, 2010 Author Share Posted October 4, 2010 Means-testing. I didn't see the speech but how do you make a universal benefit non-universal without means-testing? I'm not against cutting middle-class benefits, but I've got a feeling that the mighty IDS - a deep, deep thinker - might get this all wrong. Good luck to him with simplifying the benefits system as well, especially if it's based on the less-eligibility threshold of national average income. He'll need it. How does he intend to cope with the London distortion? Means testing takes into account income and savings... and usually from a family rather than individual basis... but its a play on words isn't it... If its not universal then its means tested by default I suppose... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.