The End of Universal Benefits - Manx Child Benefit

[orchard]

if you go down the road of non-universal benefits then administration costs more and you create an us and them situation, i think child benefit should still be universal

There might already be 'an us and them situation' mate. You're probably right about admin, but surely the info's readily available for those in the employment of other parties.

 

[steken1]

Quadruplets would **** you over, like.

Just leave one in an apartment alone while you go for a meal, sorted

I'm for this massively.

I'd have it as 2 children maximum and no couple/person earning 35k could qualify.

Would cut benefit tourism and make us look less attractive to those with nothing to offer.

 

[neil999]

Just leave one in an apartment alone while you go for a meal, sorted

I'm for this massively.

I'd have it as 2 children maximum and no couple/person earning 35k could qualify.

Would cut benefit tourism and make us look less attractive to those with nothing to offer.

it would have zero affect on that as you can still claim other benefits if you on a low income, if you earning a decent amount you arent gonna be influenced by child beenfit stopping

 

[Deleted member 28206]

Just leave one in an apartment alone while you go for a meal, sorted

I'm for this massively.

I'd have it as 2 children maximum and no couple/person earning 35k could qualify.

Would cut benefit tourism and make us look less attractive to those with nothing to offer.

35k per couple? Are you serious? That's less than £1k a month each to live on.

 

[steken1]

35k per couple? Are you serious? That's less than £1k a month each to live on.

How dya work that out?

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

I don't agree that there should be a cap on child allowance.

It's always been a universal payment, that was non means tested.

Taking a universal benefit off those who are paying the most into the system that pays it, seems somewhat ironic to me & has been mentioned, will almost certainly increase the admin costs, possibly beyond the level of the net saving.

If they want to re-evaluate child allowance, fair enough, but scrap the thing & redistribute the money to those who need it more effectively, rather than this lazy option of a top end cap.

 

[Big Fat Sam]

this x90,000

State Support for all who genuinely need it. No State Support for those who can look after themselves.

Thoroughly agree.

Also mandatory sterilisation for those who are living in counsel housing with no jobs but have loads of kids, i.e. those clearly sponging off the tax payer.

 

[neil999]

I don't agree that there should be a cap on child allowance.

It's always been a universal payment, that was non means tested.

Taking a universal benefit off those who are paying the most into the system that pays it, seems somewhat ironic to me & has been mentioned, will almost certainly increase the admin costs, possibly beyond the level of the net saving.

If they want to re-evaluate child allowance, fair enough, but scrap the thing & redistribute the money to those who need it more effectively, rather than this lazy option of a top end cap.

nailed it

 

[zebedee]

Also mandatory sterilisation for those who are living in counsel housing with no jobs but have loads of kids, i.e. those clearly sponging off the tax payer.

hahaha Classic!

There'd be an additional benefit added though to offer lose of the cost associated.

 

[orchard]

*Or just have a season where those with fire arms can hunt humans freely on council estates to keep the vermin down.*



*sarcasm font btw

 

[Mrk]

I don't agree that there should be a cap on child allowance.

It's always been a universal payment, that was non means tested.

Taking a universal benefit off those who are paying the most into the system that pays it, seems somewhat ironic to me & has been mentioned, will almost certainly increase the admin costs, possibly beyond the level of the net saving.

If they want to re-evaluate child allowance, fair enough, but scrap the thing & redistribute the money to those who need it more effectively, rather than this lazy option of a top end cap.

Surely it's more ironic that we tax them, then give them a small amount of it back to them and expect them to be grateful?

I'm sure given the choice more people would opt to pay less tax and receive no 'universal benefits' rather than pay more and have some given back to them.

 

[Allezfan]

I'd have it as 2 children maximum and no couple/person earning 35k could qualify.

Would cut benefit tourism and make us look less attractive to those with nothing to offer.

2 births maximum and I'd agree.

But I know someone who got pregnant with triplets at 18 and she got less benefits for the third triplet than for the first on the basis of hand me downs, etc. It was hellish for her.

It's unfair to treat twins the same as two seperate conceptions. Make it births rather than children and it's much fairer.

 

[steken1]

2 births maximum and I'd agree.

But I know someone who got pregnant with triplets at 18 and she got less benefits for the third triplet than for the first on the basis of hand me downs, etc. It was hellish for her.

It's unfair to treat twins the same as two seperate conceptions. Make it births rather than children and it's much fairer.

Yeah, suppose.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Surely it's more ironic that we tax them, then give them a small amount of it back to them and expect them to be grateful?

I'm sure given the choice more people would opt to pay less tax and receive no 'universal benefits' rather than pay more and have some given back to them.

My point was that making those who contribute the most, ineligible to receive a universal state payment & seeing that as 'the right thing to do' is somewhat perverse thinking.

I wasn't advocating anyone contributing less though.

The idea of child allowance is outdated & needs to be looked at. Take the current total pot & find a more equitable way of redistributing it, without consuming a sizeable %age with some cumbersome, heavily resourced system.

 

[formerly manx toffee]

Anyone prefer it if we let Manx people have full child benefit and revoked their island's tax haven status?

Not sure what you mean. I pay my taxes my friend and the child benefit is paid from my taxes so.....

Anyway, I think it is probably a big thing and whilst I agree with it paying for university tuition will go fully next and that will hit the lower paid far more greatly in the long run.