oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) No response Lisa ? I can see your lurking Edited October 5, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 ok... There are A LOT of people in this country right now who's children and families benefited heavily from a lot of things and now seem actively encouraging the restriction of these benefits on the next generation... The 10p tax rate... Increased funding for the NHS Increased funding for the Education system Universal benefits for their children (trust funds, child benefits, maternity payments) Tax Credits Family Tax Credits Not saying all these things apply to you but Child Benefit is big one... Around a £1k per child tax free... That is big boost to anyones income. I agree and I am very grateful for it. You and your family took advantage of this benefit and now you don't only wish to remove the benefit from other families you wish to demonise them as well. It is VERY easy for you to sit back NOW and say well I could of afforded my children still... But ask yourself this, how much was child care ? How much was your mortgage ? How much was the cost of living ? The decision to have a child was made knowing that we could pay for the needs of the child. The country has changed a lot in the last 10 / 20 years... A one parent family earning £44k is not very well of at all... Specially if they have more than one child. Who is to say the effected family at one point could afford the kid and then dad died ? Surely if you have a child you should also be sensible enough to have some form of insurance in place just incase something happened to one of the parents? Its all well be an hard arse about these things but reality is always more complex...I agree and the system is so complicated that nobody fully understands it, the way this will happen when it comes in in 2013 will probably be very complex!!! Finally, do you except you might of been greedy to claim something you claim you don't need ? Fair question me thinks given your harsh stance...No What annoys me is the amount of people I see who have no intention of working, even though they could do, and they piss their benefits up the wall on smoking and other things and then complain when benefits get taken away. Once your kids are at school full time then you should either get a job or work volunteering, not sit on your arse all day!! I apologise for taking a while to reply to you but I am at work! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) I apologise for taking a while to reply to you but I am at work! So Lisa... You still think the removal of Tax Credits, Family Tax Credits, Child Benefit, State Education, State Medical Care etc etc Would of seen your child fully covered Maybe you are more wealthy than I am presuming Answer me, why did your family deserve a better start in life than others ? Your generation spent all the money (money you admit you didn't need) and now its the next generations problem ? Sounds familiar Edited October 5, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hornbloweroafc Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 If you are a stay at home mum, why can't you get off your bottom and do something whilst the kids are in school / nursery?! Have you seen how much nursery is nowadays? My wife as now gone back to work (part time) with our little lad (18 month old) at nursery for the last 6 months. Her wage pays for the nursery with only a few quid left over. She contemplated staying at home as it didnt make much difference to our income, thats why I can see why people at stay at homes! If she went full time it still wouldnt make much different. I for one am grateful for the child tax benefit and would say we need it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 Just about sums it up doesn't it? People who don't really need it, take it because they are entitled to it. Those on the dole, will of course say the same thing whilst getting free council tax, rent, school dinners, dental treatment, prescriptions, to name a few. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 Have you seen how much nursery is nowadays? My wife as now gone back to work (part time) with our little lad (18 month old) at nursery for the last 6 months. Her wage pays for the nursery with only a few quid left over. She contemplated staying at home as it didnt make much difference to our income, thats why I can see why people at stay at homes! If she went full time it still wouldnt make much different. I for one am grateful for the child tax benefit and would say we need it. Will you be effected by the cut ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 May be I'm a bit old fashioned, but anything the state can do to allow Mum to stay at home for the first 4-5 years of a child's life (while Dad, who is ideally "on the scene", goes out to work) is a good thing for the development and stability of that child. I'd even go so far as to suggest that this would contribute to a reduction in crime and anti-social behaviour in later years. At the moment, the choice seems to be dump your child on a nursery and work. This initiative doesn't seem to be the brightest way of delivering stability for the child and family. While appreciating the need to address the deficit, this seems to be another case of "all 40% taxpayers are loaded so let's hit them even harder". Don't forget they are already paying significantly more tax than everybody else, and invariably taking a little bit less out of the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) May be I'm a bit old fashioned, but anything the state can do to allow Mum to stay at home for the first 4-5 years of a child's life (while Dad, who is ideally "on the scene", goes out to work) is a good thing for the development and stability of that child. I'd even go so far as to suggest that this would contribute to a reduction in crime and anti-social behaviour in later years. At the moment, the choice seems to be dump your child on a nursery and work. This initiative doesn't seem to be the brightest way of delivering stability for the child and family. While appreciating the need to address the deficit, this seems to be another case of "all 40% taxpayers are loaded so let's hit them even harder". Don't forget they are already paying significantly more tax than everybody else, and invariably taking a little bit less out of the system. Having just weighed up this decision I find your comment interesting... Our baby is six months old... She will be cared for by nanny for two and a half days... mum a day (two half days) and daddy half a day, over a week, by us moving around our hours... We are lucky that we have jobs that allow us to do this... We figured although we would love to have mum care for her all the time, the things we can expose her to in life with the extra money outweighed the negative points. I think the fact that Nanny is caring for her and not a nursery helped us reason this. Its a very personal decision. And the research I did found evidence which suggested staying at home / going to work both had merits... It is a personal decision for a family to take in the end... In the end i think it was a compromise... We have still been criticised by some for our decision though... We could just about afford the mortgage etc on one wage. But what happens when I lose my job ? Always a concern unless you are in that top 1%... Still we could of got the mortgage protection and we had the savings to cover 12 months out of work, so we had a choice... I do however share the fear that this choice has been removed from the family. Equal opportunities in this world seems to have eroded a mother choice in this matter. The economy expects two parents to work now given the cost of housing / child care. Something deeply wrong about that. A lot of people simply don't have the choice... EDIT: By the way... Nanny = Grandmother Edited October 5, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 So Lisa... You still think the removal of Tax Credits, Family Tax Credits, Child Benefit, State Education, State Medical Care etc etc Would of seen your child fully covered Maybe you are more wealthy than I am presuming Well obviously with my children being genii and being treated in private hospitals this is something I don't have to worry about Answer me, why did your family deserve a better start in life than others ? They don't, they deserve the best I can give them. Your generation spent all the money (money you admit you didn't need) and now its the next generations problem ? Sounds familiar Have you seen how much nursery is nowadays? Yes, I pay for childcare. My wife as now gone back to work (part time) with our little lad (18 month old) at nursery for the last 6 months. Her wage pays for the nursery with only a few quid left over. She contemplated staying at home as it didnt make much difference to our income, thats why I can see why people at stay at homes! I presume she didn't stay at home because in the long run, she is better to continue to work? If she went full time it still wouldnt make much different. I for one am grateful for the child tax benefit and would say we need it. May be I'm a bit old fashioned, but anything the state can do to allow Mum to stay at home for the first 4-5 years of a child's life (while Dad, who is ideally "on the scene", goes out to work) is a good thing for the development and stability of that child. I'd even go so far as to suggest that this would contribute to a reduction in crime and anti-social behaviour in later years. At the moment, the choice seems to be dump your child on a nursery and work. This initiative doesn't seem to be the brightest way of delivering stability for the child and family. Both my children are in a very stable family even though they are often 'dumped' whilst I go out to work While appreciating the need to address the deficit, this seems to be another case of "all 40% taxpayers are loaded so let's hit them even harder". Don't forget they are already paying significantly more tax than everybody else, and invariably taking a little bit less out of the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) I think it is a shame Lisa can't see how own approach to all this can be viewed as selfish.. Oh well, I tried... Edited October 5, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ritchie Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 Is it just me or do the Tory's seem desperate for everyone to get married? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) Both my children are in a very stable family even though they are often 'dumped' whilst I go out to workI'm sure they are. And I was posting from a very generic (almost theoretical) standpoint. Apologies for any offence that I may have caused. It is a personal decision, as 0000 points out, and I also know that economic realities make it virtually impossible for a parent to remain at home with child for such a long period of time. Reducing the income of a family with one earner taking home less than a family with two incomes isn't something that strikes me as sensible though. Completely overhauling the whole benefits system, and throwing child benefit in to the mix - I'm all for. (From a personal point of view I'm very close to the 40% tax mark and could probably retain CB by upping my pension contributions if a pay rise or benefit in kind pushed me in to that territory). Is it just me or do the Tory's seem desperate for everyone to get married? Have they proposed anything helpful to encourage / support marriage? Edited October 5, 2010 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 Is it just me or do the Tory's seem desperate for everyone to get married? If you are talking about yesterdays decision then not really... It was an anti marriage idea really... The CB announcement yesterday would suggest it would be better for a lot of couple to split than stay together... Dad earns £50k Mum earns £20 to 0k If they were together they wouldn't get CB... If they split the mum would get it plus many more benefits... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ritchie Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 If you are talking about yesterdays decision then not really... It was an anti marriage idea really... The CB announcement yesterday would suggest it would be better for a lot of couple to split than stay together... Dad earns £50k Mum earns £20 to 0k If they were together they wouldn't get CB... If they split the mum would get it plus many more benefits... I've been reading it completely the other way round. Makes sense that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 I'm sure they are. And I was posting from a very generic (almost theoretical) standpoint. Apologies for any offence that I may have caused. It is a personal decision, as 0000 points out, and I also know that economic realities make it virtually impossible for a parent to remain at home with child for such a long period of time. Reducing the income of a family with one earner taking home less than a family with two incomes isn't something that strikes me as sensible though. Completely overhauling the whole benefits system, and throwing child benefit in to the mix - I'm all for. (From a personal point of view I'm very close to the 40% tax mark and could probably retain CB by upping my pension contributions if a pay rise or benefit in kind pushed me in to that territory). I thought the idea of scrapping child benefit and upping family tax credits would of been the most sensible approach given that the majority of families apply for tax credits etc... and if you don't then you probably don't need child benefit on the whole... This was considered but the Torys had backed themselves in a corner by saying they would not "scrap" CB... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 I've been reading it completely the other way round. Makes sense that though. Yup... I for one think marriage is a good stable thing for the majority of families and this needs to be recognised in both the benefit and tax system. The torys seems to be moving away from this principle they used to believe in though. Its the only bit of tory thinking I used to sign up to... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danoafc Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 I think it is a shame Lisa can't see how own approach to all this can be viewed as selfish.. Oh well, I tried... Jeez. The Oracle has spoken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 (edited) Jeez. The Oracle has spoken Not really... Just pointing out some truths... She was happy to air her own opinion... That is mine... Edited October 5, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hornbloweroafc Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 Will you be effected by the cut ? no as we have a mortgage together and dont earn £44k between us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 No, as usual you're mistaking your opinion for the "truth". I don't see anything Lisa has said as being remotely selfish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 No, as usual you're mistaking your opinion for the "truth". I don't see anything Lisa has said as being remotely selfish. Ah well, for the sake of an argument... I have presented my OPINION... I personally think that it can be suggested that it is selfish to claim a benefit you don't need and then suggest it is removed from other people... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 Not really... Just pointing out some truths... See was happy to air her own opinion... I love the fact that I am seen as selfish when in reality it's just a case of people having their own opinion, people don't always agree. I have never claimed claimed JSA, council tax benefit or income support. I went back to work when my daughter was 15 weeks and my son 24 weeks so did not claim my full entitlement to SMP (statutory maternity pay). I made the decision to go back to work even though I would've been better off at home claiming benefits than working. I work full time and do overtime to pay for my children, I am there for school concerts, coffee mornings, assemblies and every appointment my children have ever had which many of the other mums at school do not make, even though they don't have jobs to go to. I also do voluntary work which takes up a lot of my time. Yet I am selfish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 I love the fact that I am seen as selfish when in reality it's just a case of people having their own opinion, people don't always agree. I have never claimed claimed JSA, council tax benefit or income support. I went back to work when my daughter was 15 weeks and my son 24 weeks so did not claim my full entitlement to SMP (statutory maternity pay). I made the decision to go back to work even though I would've been better off at home claiming benefits than working. I work full time and do overtime to pay for my children, I am there for school concerts, coffee mornings, assemblies and every appointment my children have ever had which many of the other mums at school do not make, even though they don't have jobs to go to. I also do voluntary work which takes up a lot of my time. Yet I am selfish. I wasn't actually saying you ARE selfish... Just that a case can be made... I don't know or want to know enough about you... I just wan't you to think about it from a different prospective... Sorry if I wasn't making myself clear... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 5, 2010 Author Share Posted October 5, 2010 I just want people to realise the benefit they got from various things before they remove it for others... Its very easy to get caught up in this Daily Mail mindset... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 5, 2010 Share Posted October 5, 2010 I personally think that it can be suggested that it is selfish to claim a benefit you don't need and then suggest it is removed from other people... Can't agree. The state wastes enough of my money already. If I'm legally entitled to claim a bit back then I'll damn well take it. I'll spend it a lot more sensibly than any state run body in this country. I think it's pretty selfish of Governments to overtax, provide mediocre public services, run the country in to ridiculous amounts of debt due to their economic incompetence and then come back to the same people that they've overtaxed and say "more from you chaps please". 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.