Should the tax and benefits system prioritise families? poll discussion

scootw1

shadej wrote: »

How did we get from the topic of families to just being married.
If you look back over all of my post you will see that I made no comment about married couples getting more. I have always mentioned families. So please dont qoute me in capitals for something I have not said. This is very pointless now.
You want the same benefits for you and your girlfriend as a man, his wife, and their children. Who is being selfish now? Thanks goodness the government will never see it through your eyes. So what if you dont get back exactly what you put in. The system benefits those who need help. Not because you put in you should get the same out. Thats like saying pensioners shouldn't get a state pention because thay have had their whole lives to work and they should have saved enough money. It does not work like that.

No wonder we have a Labour Government with people like you around.

KidMoe

shadej wrote: »

How did we get from the topic of families to just being married.
If you look back over all of my post you will see that I made no comment about married couples getting more. I have always mentioned families. So please dont qoute me in capitals for something I have not said. This is very pointless now..

You might not have meant it but re-reading your posts they still suggests an opinion that married couples should get more just because they are married. If that's not what you meant then fair enough.

shadej wrote: »

You want the same benefits for you and your girlfriend as a man, his wife, and their children. Who is being selfish now? Thanks goodness the government will never see it through your eyes. So what if you dont get back exactly what you put in. The system benefits those who need help. Not because you put in you should get the same out.

I'm not sure who that is directed to but my opinion is that, regardless of whether a person is married or not, or has children or not if they are struggling to get by then it's the right thing to do for society to support them until such time they are back on their feet.

I don't think that a family unit should automatically qualify for state help if they don't need it. I'd rather that money went to helping a single person out of work rather than paying for a week in the sun for a family who aren't struggling to get by.

I don't think this is a selfish viewpoint at all. I believe benefits should be means tested to a far greater extent than they are, and in my current financial position this would probably leave me worse off if I had children as I would most likely not receive child benefit. I'm arguing for a benefits system that helps those who really need it, rather than assuming that anyone who has kids requires state assistance. Pretty selfless, I would say.

shadej wrote: »

Thats like saying pensioners shouldn't get a state pention because thay have had their whole lives to work and they should have saved enough money. It does not work like that.

If a pensioner has a private pension that is more than adequate to support them they shouldn't necessarily receive the state pension in my view.

pinkkaz

scootw1, I don't know why you are arguing with shadej. He/she has obviously had a very blinkered upbringing and you're not going to change their mind....

Agreeing with what you're saying by the way. Even though I have married my boyfriend it was just an excuse to have a big party and celebrate with all our friends. Don't think that you should get more benefits because you're married or, indeed, have children. What a sad thing when you think children are "the meaning of life".

justthisonce_2

shadej wrote: »

Maybe not to you but to me and most other parents kids are our lives.
If you wanna spend your life alone then that's up to you. We where all once kids.
Children are everything. I really don't get you, wither you help a family with their mortgage or childcare its still help. In fact mortgage help would be more money.
In many families only one parent works but help is still needed.

Children are not 'everything'. There are millions of people living extremely happy fulfilled lives because they chose NOT to have children. Why would they be spending their lives alone because they do not want children?

I do have grown up children. They were never my whole life and still aren't.A large part of my life of course, but I do occasionally ponder on what direction my life would have taken had I never been a mother.

I think it is very sad if you think your life only has meaning if you reproduce.

shadej

justthisonce wrote: »

Children are not 'everything'. There are millions of people living extremely happy fulfilled lives because they chose NOT to have children. Why would they be spending their lives alone because they do not want children?

I do have grown up children. They were never my whole life and still aren't.A large part of my life of course, but I do occasionally ponder on what direction my life would have taken had I never been a mother.

I think it is very sad if you think your life only has meaning if you reproduce.

There it is bitterness, your angry at your children as you feel you wasted the best years of your life on them. Im very much the opposit, everything else in life to me comes second including my husband. My child is my world and if that makes me silly then so be it. The other comments I wont bother to comment on as it seems to be heading nowhere.

Dry_Flood

Wrong Forum

justthisonce_2

shadej wrote: »

There it is bitterness, your angry at your children as you feel you wasted the best years of your life on them. Im very much the opposit, everything else in life to me comes second including my husband. My child is my world and if that makes me silly then so be it. The other comments I wont bother to comment on as it seems to be heading nowhere.

Of course I am not bitter about the differences having children made to my life. They are part of what made me who I am, as every experience in our life helps shape us. I wouldn't like to be your husband though who obviously knows he comes in as an 'also ran' in your affections. The love we feel for an adult is totally differerent to the love we have for our children, it certainly should not be a case of loving one more than the other.

I CHOSE to marry my husband, he always has been the most important person to me. He is still here with me, the children have long made their own families, separate lives from us. This of course is how it is supposed to be. I would suggest you are rather more likely than me to be lonely later on in life.

harryhound

KidMoe wrote: »

I don't think this is a selfish viewpoint at all. I believe benefits should be means tested to a far greater extent than they are, and in my current financial position this would probably leave me worse off if I had children as I would most likely not receive child benefit. I'm arguing for a benefits system that helps those who really need it, rather than assuming that anyone who has kids requires state assistance. Pretty selfless, I would say.
If a pensioner has a private pension that is more than adequate to support them they shouldn't necessarily receive the state pension in my view.

Means testing causes poverty traps. Poverty traps keep people on benefits and that destroys their personal initiative.

"everything else in life to me comes second including my husband."
Men love their women, women love their children, children love their gerbils.
Love is selfless ?

shadej

justthisonce wrote: »

Of course I am not bitter about the differences having children made to my life. They are part of what made me who I am, as every experience in our life helps shape us. I wouldn't like to be your husband though who obviously knows he comes in as an 'also ran' in your affections. The love we feel for an adult is totally differerent to the love we have for our children, it certainly should not be a case of loving one more than the other.

I CHOSE to marry my husband, he always has been the most important person to me. He is still here with me, the children have long made their own families, separate lives from us. This of course is how it is supposed to be. I would suggest you are rather more likely than me to be lonely later on in life.

You are right, the love I have for my child and my husband is very different. I do love them both the same but my main priority is my son. My husband is a grown man who can take care of himself. My son however needs me to care for him day in day out and that to me is my most important role in life. I am newly qualified clinical psychologist and I want to succeed in my chosen career, but that will always take third place in my life. My child is first with my husband second. If you choose to place your husband before your children then I can only guess that your children have felt that effect and may hold that against you. If you were to ask my husband, I am very sure he would say that our child is his number one priority.

As parents we make a choice to have children and tax credits help us to care for them as best we can. the poll results confirm that tax credits is needed and most welcome. You seem scared of being lonely and will do your best to keep your husband happy, so he wont leave. If I end up alone because I now choose to put my child first then so be it. NO man will ever come before any child of mine.

shadej

harryhound wrote: »

"everything else in life to me comes second including my husband."
Men love their women, women love their children, children love their gerbils.
Love is selfless ?

Accept for in Justthisonce's case.

Woman loves her husband, husband loves his wife, no one love their children.