Child benefit income cap criticised by mother whose household income tops £100k

[malfosse]

And bumming rent boys.

Thats one way of not recieving child benefit.

 

[Mrk]

If some of you had your way Britain will only be populated by the children of professional footballers and, tory politicians. Imagine all those little suarez' falling all over the place.

That doesn't sound too bad, actually. Apart from the Suarez bit...

 

[malfosse]

That doesn't sound too bad, actually. Apart from the Suarez bit...

England would have a better chance of winning the world cup.

 

[bluebottle]

Thats one way of not recieving child benefit.

surely its the most obvious way of benefitting from a child?

 

[malfosse]

surely its the most obvious way of benefitting from a child?

Oh my word.

 

[Mrk]

Englang would have a better chance of winning the world cup.

England could be the only nation to enter the competition and we still wouldn't win it.

 

[malfosse]

It's good to see the 3 political heavyweights are all over this thread now.

 

[bluebottle]

Oh my word.

So i have heard.

 

[evilwebby]

The truly ironic thing about welfare spending in the west is, while it'll help people maintain an (artificially) higher standard of living now, the next generation will be crushed under the pile of debt that has been accumulated to pay for it.

People claim that welfare is compassionate, and in some ways it is, but what isn't compassionate is condemning the next generation to a deflated standard of living just so you can have a better time of it when you're alive. We need a system that provides a minimum standard of living and nothing more, if you want to help working people, don't give them benefits, just tax them less or not at all.

One of the biggest problems with welfare is it is the ultimate example of short-termism.

Yes agreed - while I am against redistributing from one group to another, if we are going to do so, we should keep the redistribution amongst the current generation and run balanced budgets. But the political will for this doesn't exist, so we end up running huge deficits and raising money by taking from from yet another group - the future. They have no voice, no vote, and we are selling them down the river. It is nothing short of inter-generational theft, and immorality of the highest standard.

 

[Dell Boy]

Sorry if this pisses people off but I believe in universal benefits full stop. For example, children's allowance and pensions should be a right for everyone. I'll declare at the outset I'm a Labour supporter and I hate the idea of some poncey millionaire houswife trousering a kid's allowance to pay for her foot spa or something but it's about the principle for me. accepting any type of means testing for benefits is the thick end of the wedge and next you'll find pensions are getting hammered for those old biddies with a big house and no mortgage. There are plenty of other ways to look at wealth/tax distribution without this. Also to add I'm no died in the arse leftie, I run my own business and pay plenty in tax

 

[Mrk]

Yes agreed - while I am against redistributing from one group to another, if we are going to do so, we should keep the redistribution amongst the current generation and run balanced budgets. But the political will for this doesn't exist, so we end up running huge deficits and raising money by taking from from yet another group - the future. They have no voice, no vote, and we are selling them down the river. It is nothing short of inter-generational theft, and immorality of the highest standard.

Mark Littlewood makes the point better than I can:

[video=youtube;mLptPry3-Hs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLptPry3-Hs[/video]

 

[evilwebby]

Sorry if this pisses people off but I believe in universal benefits full stop. For example, children's allowance and pensions should be a right for everyone. I'll declare at the outset I'm a Labour supporter and I hate the idea of some poncey millionaire houswife trousering a kid's allowance to pay for her foot spa or something but it's about the principle for me. accepting any type of means testing for benefits is the thick end of the wedge and next you'll find pensions are getting hammered for those old biddies with a big house and no mortgage. There are plenty of other ways to look at wealth/tax distribution without this. Also to add I'm no died in the arse leftie, I run my own business and pay plenty in tax

The idea that you can tax the "rich" (however you define that) enough to pay for everyone's wants and needs is just a fantasy. That's the mantra- if only we could "soak the rich" and somehow make them pay their "fair share" then all our problems would be solved. Firstly, there are simply not enough rich people to go around. Secondly, high earners are already paying more of the tax burden than ever before. And thirdly, if you tax them too much you destroy their incentive to earn and they will just up sticks and leave. Look at the flight of high earners from France. Raising taxes has never worked in creating wealth and raising living standards; leaving it in the pocket of people always has.

The course of history has shown us that by far the best engine for improving living standards - especially for the poorest in society - is not socialist income redistribution, but free markets and capitalism.

Also, where have you been for the last 3 years? Pension annuity rates have already been hammered because of the Government's monetary policy. Nobody seems to mention this, but again it's a huge transfer of wealth by stealth to protect the middle-class homeowners who overborrowed during the housing bubble whose votes the politicians desperately fight over. It is just one modern day example of price-fixing that has knock-on consequences and hurts the people that it is supposed to help.