Tackling the Welfare budget

25 Oct 2012

Really pleased to see the Tories taking the first step towards completely reviewing the welfare system.
Personally, I never undersrtood the need (at all) for child benefit because unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford. The plan is to cap child benefit for two kids but somehow I don't think that will be the end of it.............
If a single mum has three or four kids and she does not get child benefit after the second one, surely all that will happen is that she will get social support in some other way? This will just affect regular working people I think because the people who choose the welfare state as a lifestyle will just pick up extra money with another benefit.

25 Oct 2012

welfare should not be a lifestyle choice it should be there for those that need help or those that are unable to work

25 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford.

You've obviously never watched the Jeremy kyle show lol

25 Oct 2012

When you establish this utopia can you tell me so I can move in.

25 Oct 2012

as was stated today on five live, the amount this would re-coup would be very small. Its just political bluster to pander to the Tory right wing.
Do you honestly think that people, think to themselves.... oh..lets have another child so we can get an extra £13 a week child benifiet !!!
Surely if you really want to save a little money, then means testing would be better and would yield more savings. There are an awful lot of families from very wealthy backgrounds that don't really need this money.
The biggest losers, should this be introduced will be the children of the poorer family. Is it right to penalise that child, because the parents may indeed be irresponible, in bringing them into this world.

25 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
Really pleased to see the Tories taking the first step towards completely reviewing the welfare system.
Personally, I never undersrtood the need (at all) for child benefit because unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford. The plan is to cap child benefit for two kids but somehow I don't think that will be the end of it.............
If a single mum has three or four kids and she does not get child benefit after the second one, surely all that will happen is that she will get social support in some other way? This will just affect regular working people I think because the people who choose the welfare state as a lifestyle will just pick up extra money with another benefit.

Dare I ask, what benefits you collect presently?

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
Really pleased to see the Tories taking the first step towards completely reviewing the welfare system.

By that you mean taking money from the poorest in our society? When measures like this are taken it is always going to target the people who need the money the most. Typical Tory hype. Instead of reviewing the welfare system what about starting with the tax system, that lets those very same Tories escape paying their share of tax? Perish the thought of a Tory targeting their rich chums eh?
So much easier to grab the money from the welfare system eh Too Hot?

Quote by Too Hot
Personally, I never undersrtood the need (at all) for child benefit because unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford. The plan is to cap child benefit for two kids but somehow I don't think that will be the end of it.............

Or it seems that is what you hope for. Have a look if you can be bothered as to why child benefit was brought in, and why it was and still is in most cases, paid to the Mother. Still I bet you don't need the money eh Too Hot? I hope you pay your tax on time.

Quote by Too Hot
If a single mum has three or four kids and she does not get child benefit after the second one, surely all that will happen is that she will get social support in some other way? This will just affect regular working people I think because the people who choose the welfare state as a lifestyle will just pick up extra money with another benefit.

Let me guess......Nice detached house, nice car, two holidays a year, reads the Times. :sleeping::sleeping: How very judgmental of you and a typical Tory supporters views.

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Paddy
Really pleased to see the Tories taking the first step towards completely reviewing the welfare system.
Personally, I never undersrtood the need (at all) for child benefit because unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford. The plan is to cap child benefit for two kids but somehow I don't think that will be the end of it.............
If a single mum has three or four kids and she does not get child benefit after the second one, surely all that will happen is that she will get social support in some other way? This will just affect regular working people I think because the people who choose the welfare state as a lifestyle will just pick up extra money with another benefit.

Dare I ask, what benefits you collect presently?
None.

26 Oct 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
Really pleased to see the Tories taking the first step towards completely reviewing the welfare system.

By that you mean taking money from the poorest in our society? When measures like this are taken it is always going to target the people who need the money the most. Typical Tory hype. Instead of reviewing the welfare system what about starting with the tax system, that lets those very same Tories escape paying their share of tax? Perish the thought of a Tory targeting their rich chums eh?
So much easier to grab the money from the welfare system eh Too Hot?
There are many things which are unfair but at least the Government are going for both ends of the spectrum.

Quote by Too Hot
Personally, I never undersrtood the need (at all) for child benefit because unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford. The plan is to cap child benefit for two kids but somehow I don't think that will be the end of it.............

Or it seems that is what you hope for. Have a look if you can be bothered as to why child benefit was brought in, and why it was and still is in most cases, paid to the Mother. Still I bet you don't need the money eh Too Hot? I hope you pay your tax on time.
My ex wife claimed for everything that she could (and still does) and refused to go back to work full time as it would have cost her more in lost benefits than she would have earned in income. This is not right, never has been right and never will be right. I don't care what the reasons were as to why child benefit was introduced - it seems weird to me that the State should pay you to have children. I pay a great deal of tax Star and hence I have a right to moan if I think that it is being misappropriated.

Quote by Too Hot
If a single mum has three or four kids and she does not get child benefit after the second one, surely all that will happen is that she will get social support in some other way? This will just affect regular working people I think because the people who choose the welfare state as a lifestyle will just pick up extra money with another benefit.

Let me guess......Nice detached house, nice car, two holidays a year, reads the Times. :sleeping::sleeping: How very judgmental of you and a typical Tory supporters views.
What on earth has my lifestyle got to do with anything other than knowing what is right and wrong? I was taught that if I want the good things in life I have to work hard for them - so I did. I enjoy what I have and everything was hard earned. I don't accept that my kids will have to work even harder than I did just to afford to move out and rent a flat - but if my daughter were to get pregnant - she could get a flat straight away. This is not right.
Going back to the point, if it is deemed right that the Government is to support families for having children (which I don't agree with, but hey...) then I think it is at least right that it does not go on ad infinitum. The proposal as I understand it is that child benefit will be paid for the first two children - but no more than that. Why is that such a bad thing? Normal working people have to take decisions on everything in life according to their income and most make entirely logical and responsible decisions. This concept of personal responsibility to oneself and to society is what the Government are trying to promote.
PS - I don't read any Newspapers anymore and you missed out the other car, three motorcycles and another holiday

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
PS - I don't read any Newspapers anymore and you missed out the other car, three motorcycles and another holiday.

pmsl. Typical star, always aiming low :lol2:
Wait till he hears that I've applied for the Winter Fuel Allowance which, following a recent ECHR decision, that nice Mr Duncan-Smith now has to pay me :grin:

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
Really pleased to see the Tories taking the first step towards completely reviewing the welfare system.

By that you mean taking money from the poorest in our society? When measures like this are taken it is always going to target the people who need the money the most. Typical Tory hype. Instead of reviewing the welfare system what about starting with the tax system, that lets those very same Tories escape paying their share of tax? Perish the thought of a Tory targeting their rich chums eh?
So much easier to grab the money from the welfare system eh Too Hot?
There are many things which are unfair but at least the Government are going for both ends of the spectrum.

Quote by Too Hot
Personally, I never undersrtood the need (at all) for child benefit because unless you are completely stupid you should not bring children into the world that you can't afford. The plan is to cap child benefit for two kids but somehow I don't think that will be the end of it.............

Or it seems that is what you hope for. Have a look if you can be bothered as to why child benefit was brought in, and why it was and still is in most cases, paid to the Mother. Still I bet you don't need the money eh Too Hot? I hope you pay your tax on time.
My ex wife claimed for everything that she could (and still does) and refused to go back to work full time as it would have cost her more in lost benefits than she would have earned in income. This is not right, never has been right and never will be right. I don't care what the reasons were as to why child benefit was introduced - it seems weird to me that the State should pay you to have children. I pay a great deal of tax Star and hence I have a right to moan if I think that it is being misappropriated.

Quote by Too Hot
If a single mum has three or four kids and she does not get child benefit after the second one, surely all that will happen is that she will get social support in some other way? This will just affect regular working people I think because the people who choose the welfare state as a lifestyle will just pick up extra money with another benefit.

Let me guess......Nice detached house, nice car, two holidays a year, reads the Times. :sleeping::sleeping: How very judgmental of you and a typical Tory supporters views.
What on earth has my lifestyle got to do with anything other than knowing what is right and wrong? I was taught that if I want the good things in life I have to work hard for them - so I did. I enjoy what I have and everything was hard earned. I don't accept that my kids will have to work even harder than I did just to afford to move out and rent a flat - but if my daughter were to get pregnant - she could get a flat straight away. This is not right.
Going back to the point, if it is deemed right that the Government is to support families for having children (which I don't agree with, but hey...) then I think it is at least right that it does not go on ad infinitum. The proposal as I understand it is that child benefit will be paid for the first two children - but no more than that. Why is that such a bad thing? Normal working people have to take decisions on everything in life according to their income and most make entirely logical and responsible decisions. This concept of personal responsibility to oneself and to society is what the Government are trying to promote.
PS - I don't read any Newspapers anymore and you missed out the other car, three motorcycles and another holiday

No suprises there at all.
Well thankfully the decisions are not yours to make, as if they were ALL child benefits would be stopped putting families in even greater peril of poverty. Also I would presume that anyone who dared to fall into the unemployment trap, should have no help at all as it ain't your problem and how unfair is it to give people benefits.
You have already openly supported the view that any support for families 'I don't agree with, but hey ' attitudes. Surely you would agree that high taxpayers and companies should pay the right amount of tax, before taking away money from the poorer end of society?
As I said already, a typical lop sided Tory view on how to clobber the poor, whilst leaving their rich mates in business to escape paying their right amount of taxes. When you have a Government who wants to take money from the poorest and then has the Chancellor going first class train travel with a plebs ticket, well hypocrisy has nothing on these new Tory toffs.

26 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
PS - I don't read any Newspapers anymore and you missed out the other car, three motorcycles and another holiday.

pmsl. Typical star, always aiming low :lol2:
Wait till he hears that I've applied for the Winter Fuel Allowance which, following a recent ECHR decision, that nice Mr Duncan-Smith now has to pay me :grin:
If the law states it is your right to claim GnV, why would I have a problem with that? That is like saying because you live abroad then you are not longer entitled to your pension. It is money that you have paid in for over years and years of working.
But your comment reminded me of a story about a lottery millionaire who also decided to claim for their winter heating allowance. Morally people with plenty of money, who do not need the allowance , take it anyway. Yes they are legally entitled, but how they sleep at night astounds me. Now will come back some smarty comment from you stating you sleep very well thank you blah blah blah.
If the ECHR were to be paying for their decisions I would be ok with it, but as always people like them make crazy decisions, without a care in the world who pays for it as long as it is not them. A bit like paying child benefit payments to kids from abroad who have never set a foot inside the UK, but because a parent works here. Go to Poland and work and the pro rata costs would be about 75p a fortnight.
Oh and Duncan Smith is just like all the other Tory toffs, with not a clue of the real world that that most others work and live in. Sandhurst as well? Well I never.
The day when the UK is out of Europe is getting closer by the day. The ECHR should stick to more important issues, not whether a pensioner who has plenty of money and lives abroad should be part of the courts rulings that they get fuel allowance even if they are in a country like Australia where it is never cold enough to warrant putting their heating on. loon

26 Oct 2012

I'm just wondering what too hot has done with all the child benefit paid out for his kids over the years? innocent

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Trevaunance
I'm just wondering what too hot has done with all the child benefit paid out for his kids over the years?

By all accounts, his ex wife stole it....

26 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
I'm just wondering what too hot has done with all the child benefit paid out for his kids over the years?

By all accounts, his ex wife stole it....
She may well have done when she was his ex, but what about when they were married??? As I stated already GnV the benefit was and usually still is paid to the Mother, but when Too Hot was with his now ex, she would have had the money by right and spent it whilst they were living together. For tax purposes it would have gone down as joint income.

Quote by TooHot
My ex wife claimed for everything that she could (and still does) and refused to go back to work full time as it would have cost her more in lost benefits than she would have earned in income. This is not right, never has been right and never will be right. I don't care what the reasons were as to why child benefit was introduced - it seems weird to me that the State should pay you to have children. I pay a great deal of tax Star and hence I have a right to moan if I think that it is being misappropriated.

So when she was YOUR Wife, she still claimed and you as a unit took the money ! Is it just me or are people with such high morals, the biggest hypocrites of all??

26 Oct 2012

Quote by star
So when she was YOUR Wife

Se was never my wife star..... I can honestly say I never had the pleasure of Too Hot's ex

26 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
So when she was YOUR Wife

Se was never my wife star..... I can honestly say I never had the pleasure of Too Hot's ex
:laughabove: Funny that one.
It is funny though how when you are with someone you can't get enough of them, and then when they part they would not touch her with their worst enemies one. :rascal:
Still I have always wondered who gets the child allowance. rotflmao

26 Oct 2012

My ex wife and I were poles apart in attitude towards "rights" and "responsibilities." She was very keen to know, understand and claim her rights but not that keen on accepting responsibilities. I was unemployed twice when we were married and refused to claim unemployment benefit because I felt that having no income would make me more determined to find something else quickly. The truth is I didn't really know much about benefits at all and I did not know about a number of benefits that she was claiming throughout our married life. Believe it or not, I only found out about child benefit during our divorce and my lawyer laughed at me when I expressed surprise that people got money for having children. It was more laughable because one year I had earned over £100,000 and she had still been claiming this benefit.
I did not claim unemployment benefit because I had savings and felt that claiming would reduce my determination to find another job and as for child benefit - I was (and still am) incredulous that such a thing even exists.
On another point about George Osbourne - I have another Headline for you:
"George Osbourne gets issued Second Class rail ticket from expenses and upgrades to First Class out of his own pocket - SHOCK"
You have fallen for the story written by an irresponsible journo who failed to verify the story before releasing it. George Osborne would have his travelling expenses paid for like all MP's and they are now only entitled to 2nd Class rail fares meaning that they upgrade out of their own pocket. Big story - NOT when you get the facts right.
Edit to add - My current wife who I have been with for getting on for ten years shares my attitude to work and reward. Looking back I don't know how or why I ever felt any kind of attraction to the ex at all when we had so little in common in respect of fundamental beliefs.

26 Oct 2012

I have some empathy with Too Hot here. I too was once unemployed (a millennium ago) following my own principles when I told my boss to go fuck himself when he complained about losing his driving licence under the totting up system for speeding. Not a wise thing to do but, hey - I was young and impressionable at the time. I too felt principled enough not to claim benefits but spent my time wisely finding another job in another industry, which I managed to do quite readily as I had the right mindset and went on to bigger, greater things that might not have been otherwise possible.
No regrets here.

26 Oct 2012

Quote by too hot
Looking back I don't know how or why I ever felt any kind of attraction to the ex at all when we had so little in common in respect of fundamental beliefs.

Don't beat yourself up over it, she was probably just a good shag.....
bolt

26 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
Looking back I don't know how or why I ever felt any kind of attraction to the ex at all when we had so little in common in respect of fundamental beliefs.

Don't beat yourself up over it, she was probably just a good shag.....
bolt

Not even that - far from it

26 Oct 2012

So you earnt over 100k and still claimed benefits?

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Trevaunance
So you earnt over 100k and still claimed benefits?

And why not?
If the benefits system permits it, what's the problem?

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Trevaunance
So you earnt over 100k and still claimed benefits?

If you read what he wrote you'll find out HE didn't....

Quote by Too Hot
The truth is I didn't really know much about benefits at all and I did not know about a number of benefits that she was claiming throughout our married life. Believe it or not, I only found out about child benefit during our divorce and my lawyer laughed at me when I expressed surprise that people got money for having children. It was more laughable because one year I had earned over £100,000 and she had still been claiming this benefit.
I did not claim unemployment benefit because I had savings and felt that claiming would reduce my determination to find another job and as for child benefit - I was (and still am) incredulous that such a thing even exists.

Clues are there if you can bother to look ...

26 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
Wait till he hears that I've applied for the Winter Fuel Allowance which, following a recent ECHR decision, that nice Mr Duncan-Smith now has to pay me :grin:

See......Now that's something I don't agree with.....
No problems what so ever with pensions being paid out to those who have moved abroad but a Winter Fuel Allowance ?

26 Oct 2012

Quote by GnV
So you earnt over 100k and still claimed benefits?

And why not?
If the benefits system permits it, what's the problem?
I have no problem with people claiming benefits they are entitled too, but to then bemoan the need to pay those same benefits to people who don't have the same level of income seems hypocritical.

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Trevaunance
So you earnt over 100k and still claimed benefits?

And why not?
If the benefits system permits it, what's the problem?
I have no problem with people claiming benefits they are entitled too, but to then bemoan the need to pay those same benefits to people who don't have the same level of income seems hypocritical.
Now what did I say earlier about morals and hypocrisy?

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Steve
So you earnt over 100k and still claimed benefits?

If you read what he wrote you'll find out HE didn't....

Quote by Too Hot
The truth is I didn't really know much about benefits at all and I did not know about a number of benefits that she was claiming throughout our married life. Believe it or not, I only found out about child benefit during our divorce and my lawyer laughed at me when I expressed surprise that people got money for having children. It was more laughable because one year I had earned over £100,000 and she had still been claiming this benefit.

Clues are there if you can bother to look ...
Yes the clues are there for those that look. They were a couple and therefore his lifestyle was supplemented as well wasn't it?

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Trevaunance
Yes the clues are there for those that look. They were a couple and therefore his lifestyle was supplemented as well wasn't it?

All depends on what she spent the money on ....

26 Oct 2012

Quote by Too Hot
The truth is I didn't really know much about benefits at all and I did not know about a number of benefits that she was claiming throughout our married life. Believe it or not, I only found out about child benefit during our divorce and my lawyer laughed at me when I expressed surprise that people got money for having children. It was more laughable because one year I had earned over £100,000 and she had still been claiming this benefit.

And I thought my 22 year old Daughter was naive rolleyes

Quote by Too Hot
I did not claim unemployment benefit because I had savings and felt that claiming would reduce my determination to find another job and as for child benefit - I was (and still am) incredulous that such a thing even exists.

I am suprised that there are people like yourself still around. I bet you did not even know that rather wealthy people can move abroad and still claim for a winter fuel allowance in the UK eh? What utter rogues. :twisted:

Quote by Too Hot
On another point about George Osbourne - I have another Headline for you:
"George Osbourne gets issued Second Class rail ticket from expenses and upgrades to First Class out of his own pocket - SHOCK"
You have fallen for the story written by an irresponsible journo who failed to verify the story before releasing it. George Osborne would have his travelling expenses paid for like all MP's and they are now only entitled to 2nd Class rail fares meaning that they upgrade out of their own pocket. Big story - NOT when you get the facts right.

Is that correct then? Was he on official business then? If not does the taxpayer still pick up the tab for rail travel? He made a mistake and only another Tory supporter would see nothing wrong in what he did.

Quote by Too Hot
Edit to add - My current wife who I have been with for getting on for ten years shares my attitude to work and reward. Looking back I don't know how or why I ever felt any kind of attraction to the ex at all when we had so little in common in respect of fundamental beliefs.

Yes am sure I am not the only person wondering that. Bad judgement on your part then? Still i still wonder where all those years of child benefit went that YOUR Wife was claiming for YOUR kids on? I mean as you did not even know she was getting any benefit at all for your kids. Sorry but you would have to have lived on the moon to not know she was getting child allowance. This whole story seems so far fetched that you would have to be a very silly billy to make it up.