Child benefits

#1
Here we go....


Bored of good earners dripping about the new benefits changes. Why should someone earning that much money be getting money from the government anyway? It has become an expectation. People treat it as a right, just because they have bred. Another welfare gravy train.

Fully appreciate that those fallen on hard times or low earners need it and rightly so. But tossers who factor it into their annual wages can go **** themselves in my opinion.

Oh and before Poirot pipes up, I have no kids.
 
#2
Here we go....


Bored of good earners dripping about the new benefits changes. Why should someone earning that much money be getting money from the government anyway? It has become an expectation. People treat it as a right, just because they have bred. Another welfare gravy train.

Fully appreciate that those fallen on hard times or low earners need it and rightly so. But tossers who factor it into their annual wages can go **** themselves in my opinion.

Oh and before Poirot pipes up, I have no kids.[/QUOTE]

I can let you have a couple cheap.

On a serious note quite agree, but the way they have implemented it is not fare. If two incomes in a family add up to the cut off sum on a single income then they too should loose it.
 
#3
You tight twat.....how can I treat myself er I mean kids to the new digital Scaletrix without a hefty handout from the government....remember whilst they are shovelling it into my bank account, Clare ******* Short isnt financing nuclear subs and AK47s to the third world in the beleif it's for tinned milk and tractors.
 
#4
Why should they be penalised when they are probably paying a hefty wack in tax, it seems only fair to me that they should get something back?

No round trip ticket for me thank you very much.
 
#6
Why should they be penalised when they are probably paying a hefty wack in tax, it seems only fair to me that they should get something back?

No round trip ticket for me thank you very much.
Tax isn't a ******* saving scheme! It's not a case of "I've paid my way, now I want some back". This is not communist Russia.
 
#10
Some of these posts are getting like a cross between Marie Antoinette's famous quip and excerpts out of the script of scrooge.
 
#16
My main concern is not that higher bracket tax payers are losing out- it's that once something is legislated, any number of successive governments can start to chip into it.
You watch the income limit go south until they abolish it all together.
What I truly do not understand is why the government of the day (and those before and those that will come after) insist on punishing their own citizens so much when there have been oodles of suggestions as to how to reduce the deficit in simple ways that do not affect millions of people....and all the wrong groups of people !

Has anyone actually checked recently whether the national deficit is actually decreasing ? Or are they simply robbing Peter to pay Abdullah, Waynetta, and Eloise from Brussels.
Truly....with all the wealth this country produces (it must or we wouldn't give so much away to other nuclear powers like Pakistan in 'aid') ; where the fcuk does it all go ?
 
#17
No ones playing. Surely there must be angry parents out there????
Ok I'll bite.

While I won't deny that I don't need Child Benefit because I earn a good wage, and in this financial climate I have no problem with the idea of those who are comfortable losing some or all of it, I would like to know why families with a higher income than mine continue to recieve it all.

My SP(SM) takes my pay above the 50k threshold (meaning we either opt out or I pay back about 35% in tax), but my wife only works part-time so our joint income is less than 60k.
An oppo of mine earns marginally less (keeping him under 50k) but his wife works full-time bringing their joint income up to nearly 80k. They continue to receive the full amount.

How does that work?
 
#18
Ok I'll bite.

While I won't deny that I don't need Child Benefit because I earn a good wage, and in this financial climate I have no problem with the idea of those who are comfortable losing some or all of it, I would like to know why families with a higher income than mine continue to recieve it all.


My SP(SM) takes my pay above the 50k threshold (meaning we either opt out or I pay back about 35% in tax), but my wife only works part-time so our joint income is less than 60k.
An oppo of mine earns marginally less (keeping him under 50k) but his wife works full-time bringing their joint income up to nearly 80k. They continue to receive the full amount.

How does that work?
Simple maths and some one screwed up, sodding education system
I get no childen at all under new scheme did not get any before either kids to old
 
A

angrydoc

Guest
#19
I can only guess its because working out who is living with who and assessing their tax liabilities is beyond HMRC. It's easy for those in stable marriages - for those living with partners where the partner frequently changes, it would be very hard for HMRC to keep up to date bit would run the risk of becoming a tax on stable marriages/partnerships.

Could be a load of crap - just my thoughts.
 
#20
It is not about the money...

... its the method. As well as has already been mentioned, one earner on £60k loses all of it but two earners on £45k each keep it all. Add to that, the fact that the Government are reclaiming it back by insisting on those in the bracket (£50k-60k) complete a tax return AND that HMRC have not got the codes in the tax computer to make the adjstments to PAYE from Jan 13 and you get the cluster-f*ck that this has become.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top