Tories scrapping child benefit for people who earn over £44,000

[HeadingNorth]

It's about time...even then 26k tax free equates to about 40k taxed doesn't it?puts them in the top 10% of "earners"...

 

But 40k taxed would not include child benefit or tax credits.

[mj.scuba]

It's about time...even then 26k tax free equates to about 40k taxed doesn't it?puts them in the top 10% of "earners"...

 

Chancellor George Osborne has announced plans for a maximum limit on the amount of benefits one family can claim.

 

He told the Conservative Party conference it would be set at the amount "the average family gets for going out to work", which is about £26,000 a year.

 

The cap will apply to the combined income from jobseekers' allowance, income support, employment support allowance, housing benefit, council tax benefit, child benefit and child tax credit.

 

This gets me ragged off. Why set it at the average? On £26k benefits they will still be on far more than some working families that are well below average earners. They should set it the same a minimum wage.

[natjack]

but thats the problem. £45k is middle income, your average family gets that ergo what is the point in giving them money where does it come from? Most benefits payments will come from the taxes off middle earners. Whats the point in giving them some of their taxes back. Its entirely pointless.

It's better than giving their taxes to someone else as tax credits or giving it away to workshy people and them getting nothing out of it themselves. They've increased the tax threshold and now they're taking it away from something else, so no benefit for families?

 

In the South East, £45k goes hardly anywhere, as someone else said. I don't think they've thought this through very well. I've got no kids myself, so I'm arguing from the viewpoint of a taxpayer with no vested interest.

[mossdog]

Blimey! What I could do for my child if I earned £44k. Wishful thinking. Not sure how anyone can think that it costs this amount to raise a child, and so require extra benefits. I raise mine on a fraction of this. Maybe those who find raising a multiple-children family should think twice about having multiple children, if they are concerned about the cost.

Exactly!........where did indiscriminate breeding come in and personal responsibility go out? You should not consider having children unless you can afford the cost.Also two people were the cause of the birth of a child,so two people should be responsible for its welfare.Single parenting with the state picking up the tab for the absent partner all the time needs stopping! We just cannot afford the luxury anymore!

[Babooshka]

Not really because people cut their cloth to fit, someone on 40 grand may have no more disposable income than someone on half that amount.

 

Depends where their spending-priorities lie, doesn't it? All my money goes on bills, and my son. Are you telling me that someone who earns 40k but is living the same lifestyle as me, for example, has the same disposable income as me? I think not... and if not, then I ask the question 'where is their non-disposable income going?'

[truman]

But 40k taxed would not include child benefit or tax credits.

 

I'm not sure what your point is?

[Babooshka]

You clearly have no idea how much it costs to send our kids to Birkdale. Quite honestly, it only because of the child benefit that we are able to put petrol in the Mercedes these days.

 

Ha ha ha ha. Quite!

[llamatron]

It's better than giving their taxes to someone else as tax credits or giving it away to workshy people and them getting nothing out of it themselves. They've increased the tax threshold and now they're taking it away from something else, so no benefit for families?

 

In the South East, £45k goes hardly anywhere, as someone else said. I don't think they've thought this through very well. I've got no kids myself, so I'm arguing from the viewpoint of a taxpayer with no vested interest.

 

it shouldnt be going to work shy people at all but the solution to that is not to give money back to people who are pretty well off.

[Mister M]

I can see where you're coming from here.

 

However, as some one on a higher salary I don't mind losing out on the child benefits, providing the savings are used to benefit the whole nation; not just some family of 'breeders'.

 

We should go further and limit the number of children that a family can claim benefit for to 2. We need to discourage breeding for the sake of extra benefits.

 

If one (as in you and not the nanny state) can't afford to raise one's own children then, perhaps the state should intervene in a slightly more draconian way. I hear that housebricks are quite cheap at B&Q

 

I think one of the problems with this is that Britain has an aging population, where more people will be needed to support those who are frail, elderly and in need of pensions, care etc. So the birth rate needs to rise to meet this demand.

[Aries22]

At least they have the guts to do something. Better to hit the rich rather than the poor.