I give in...
You can't make folk see what they don't want to see...
Without giving away too much personal information - I had a very well paid job but one which mean't I worked abroad but was paid from the UK.
For the record - I did not claim benefits, I did not know child benefit existed, I did not expect that "we" (as in she) would have been able to claim anything because I was so well paid. When that job "finished" I did not claim unemployment benefit on that or another occasion later either and could not understand my ex's antagonistic attitude towards me for not doing so until my divorce lawyer told me that she would have been able to claim more if I was registered unemployed.
Niaive? Quite possibly - I never had a need for any kind of social support - I worked away from the UK most of my adult life and therefore was not aware of it and what it was. My first introduction to it was when my ex fell out with me big time cos I would not register as unemployed.
Anyway - going back to the original point. This is not an attack on poor people it is just a statement saying - think - can you afford it? Most intelligent working people think that way and so I guess that the idea is to make everyone think the same way. AS it happens, I don't think the poorest would suffer with this because there will just be another benefit that will be claimed instead of this one. REmember too that this is not proposed to be a decision that will affect everyone today but on a given date in the future for new borns from that date. Current families would be ringfenced.
all this brings me back to the point,
Do you think people really have another baby, so they can get an extra a week !! By doing away with child allowance for anything above 2 children, will not stop Adults from being irresponsible. Also lets remember these children will grow up to be the next generation of tax payers, and be paying for our pensions !!!
The amount that would be saved is so small it is daft...this is a statement to pamper to the right wing, and keep them happy and quiet for a few weeks.
The real way forward, as everyone above seems to agree, would be to means test the allowance, so that those on a high income would not be eligable.
So the facts are that Mr TH was working outside the country earning 100k and presumably paying the correct level of UK tax. ExMrs TH was living in the UK and may or may not have been earning her own income, but was certainly claiming child benefit and perhaps other benefits.
I can see how Mr TH may leave the arrangements to his Ex Mrs because presumably he wouldn't be able to deal with initiating the claim from overseas. But I find it extremely hard to comprehend that Mr TH did not even know that child benefit existed, it just seems absolutely incredulous to me.
And regardless of whether Mr TH knew about it or not his household benefited from a cash injection of per year presuming he only had two children.
However we are starting to squabble over someones personal life and I think we should get back on topic:
CB Is a universal benefit, everyone and I mean everyone in the UK is entitled to it if they are responsible for a child under 16 or under 20 in certain circumstances. I personally see no issue with this but I do agree that there should be some form of control because we are all aware that there are a small minority that use welfare as a lifestyle choice. And to echo another poster I don't believe that people have children just for the sake of an extra per week.
At present CB is payable at per week for the eldest child and for each subsequent child, a step down of per week between the first and all the subsequent children.
Why not apply the same step down in payment to the third child (therefore a payment of ) and no payments for any further children?
See above post at 2:45 Trev. I think the rules were different at that time but yes, we are basically agreed on the same point.
Will one of these help, Trev? :giveup:
I have to say that I didn't know about WFA allowance until it was pointed out elsewhere. It's a bit like the saying "knows the price of everything but the value of nothing". Some people of a certain age and genre (or socio-economic group) genuinely know nothing of a benefits culture, as TH says, because they lived an alternate lifestyle where people made their own arrangements to cover 'eventualities' in which the State played no part.
Sadly, those days are gone. Exploitation of the system to the full is now the watchword. It's not so much about how you can get back into work but how you can fool the system into believing that you are a victim and deserving of a continuing stream of benefits. If some people would use their ingenuity to 'exploit' the system as much they could in gainful employment, the Country would stand in much better stead!
No, because I don't believe I have the need for one.
Although a Tricolour could come in handy if you have one to spare, off to france in the morning.
Treogan, Brittany and Paris for Disney :bounce:
As an aside,I find it rather galling for politicians to be looking into the welfare system to try and limit money paid out, yet it was only a matter of months ago when a lot of these very same politicians on 65 grand a year plus, were effectively stealing money from the taxpayers of this country, with expenses for duck ponds and the like.
So people on a huge sum of money already, then steal more money and now are dictating that people should lose some of their money, and usually it is the poorest that suffer the most. Really hypocrisy in this country is absolutely astounding at times.
The politicians trying to make these changes just like Duncan Smith, have no idea whatsoever about poverty, and wondering where the next meal is coming from. I believe that there should be a lot more ' normal ' people in politics as some of these Tory toffs are stuck in a time warp. Born into wealth and privilege and tell the poorest we are going to stick a tax onto your pasties and sausage rolls. Twats.
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: 
;) 
