Iuchi_Zien Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 They do put in why shouldn't they be allowed to take a little back? The state isn't there to act as a bank, it is there to provide the services we all require and provide a safety net for those who are unable, for whatever reason, to provide for themselves. You say they want something back? How about the free and comprehensive healthcare they will be provided with at the states expense? Or are we suggesting parents should pay for that because of their 'lifestyle' choice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyInRed Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I am gobsmacked at some comments on here about people who should not have kids. Who are you to play God? Do you think that your tax money doesn't go towards anything else? And there is never a 'right' time to have kids. You bring them up with what you have. If you get a tenner a week, they will cost you a tenner a week. But you gotta admit that if you got a grand a week, they would cost you a grand a week as well! I grew up in an extremely happy home, but we never had a spare penny and my mom used to have to make our clothes etc. Me personally, I would prefer to be poor, but happy rather than rich and sad. Make of this what you want. I'm happy with my hubby, 2 little boys and no extra pennies. could not have put it better myself - have sent PM to person who started thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Spyda Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 The state isn't there to act as a bank, it is there to provide the services we all require and provide a safety net for those who are unable, for whatever reason, to provide for themselves. You say they want something back? How about the free and comprehensive healthcare they will be provided with at the states expense? Or are we suggesting parents should pay for that because of their 'lifestyle' choice? Indeed, otherwise we could be saying the same thing about paying insurance. The money put in is there as a safety net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 The state isn't there to act as a bank, it is there to provide the services we all require and provide a safety net for those who are unable, for whatever reason, to provide for themselves. You say they want something back? How about the free and comprehensive healthcare they will be provided with at the states expense? Or are we suggesting parents should pay for that because of their 'lifestyle' choice?Oh right so taxpayers should pay their taxes for non taxpayers to take out but when it comes to themselves then they shouldn't be allowed it? Very magnanimous of you. You're quite prepared to take out of a pot you aren't contributing to - admittedly through no fault of your own and one you probably would contribute to given the chance - but the minute someone who is filling the pot dare say something you are quick to deny them the opportunity and condemn them for daring to say something. Theres a word for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuchi_Zien Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Oh right so taxpayers should pay their taxes for non taxpayers to take out but when it comes to themselves then they shouldn't be allowed it? Very magnanimous of you. You're quite prepared to take out of a pot you aren't contributing to - admittedly through no fault of your own and one you probably would contribute to given the chance - but the minute someone who is filling the pot dare say something you are quick to deny them the opportunity and condemn them for daring to say something. Theres a word for that. I'm taking out of a pot I've spent twenty plus years contributing to. I didn't choose to be laid off. So yes while I am in the situation I am in I am happy to take out of the pot. Just like you will be happy to take out of the pot when you become a pensioner I'm sure. AND I'm not going to let selfish 'people' demean me and make out I'm unworthy BECAUSE I have to accept benefits. My children will come first and selfish ...... who disapprove can Kiss my .....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I'm taking out of a pot I've spent twenty plus years contributing to. I didn't choose to be laid off. So yes while I am in the situation I am in I am happy to take out of the pot. Just like you will be happy to take out of the pot when you become a pensioner I'm sure. AND I'm not going to let selfish 'people' demean me and make out I'm unworthy BECAUSE I have to accept benefits. My children will come first and selfish ...... who disapprove can Kiss my .....!I don't disapprove of you or the fact you are on benefits. I do disapprove of the fact you would deny other people the same opportunity because they are taxpayers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuchi_Zien Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I don't disapprove of you or the fact you are on benefits. I do disapprove of the fact you would deny other people the same opportunity because they are taxpayers If I was working and still married I would not NEED benefits. To claim something you don't need is firstly missing the point of the safety net and secondly makes you no better than the 'feckless' parents everybody disapproves of. How many people claiming family allowance just stick it in the kiddies bank account. Is that what the family allowance was intended for? It seems to me just another example of the greed culture. If he's getting it I want it! If I can't have it why should anybody else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 If I was working and still married I would not NEED benefits. To claim something you don't need is firstly missing the point of the safety net and secondly makes you no better than the 'feckless' parents everybody disapproves of. How many people claiming family allowance just stick it in the kiddies bank account. Is that what the family allowance was intended for? It seems to me just another example of the greed culture. If he's getting it I want it! If I can't have it why should anybody else!You're missing the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missflirtuk Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 If I was working and still married I would not NEED benefits. To claim something you don't need is firstly missing the point of the safety net and secondly makes you no better than the 'feckless' parents everybody disapproves of. How many people claiming family allowance just stick it in the kiddies bank account. Is that what the family allowance was intended for? It seems to me just another example of the greed culture. If he's getting it I want it! If I can't have it why should anybody else!I wish I could afford to use my child benefit to put into a bank account for my daughter. I have to use it to buy her shoes or clothes. When she was a newborn it went on nappies and everything else newborns need. Thank goodness she wears big girl knickers now so I can use it to buy her jeans and tops as she is growing so fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missflirtuk Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 If I was working and still married I would not NEED benefits. To claim something you don't need is firstly missing the point of the safety net and secondly makes you no better than the 'feckless' parents everybody disapproves of. How many people claiming family allowance just stick it in the kiddies bank account. Is that what the family allowance was intended for? It seems to me just another example of the greed culture. If he's getting it I want it! If I can't have it why should anybody else!The point went that a way <<<<< you missed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.