Should the tax and benefits system prioritise families? poll discussion

happyinflorida

We have the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in the UK - we also have the biggest benefits system. I know the 2 are related.
I speak to so many people who have more than one child who have no partner or have had several partners and several children. I get very angry about this. Far too many women do this.
Women should not follow in their mother's footsteps and take the easy route, having child after child to avoid going out to work and get more benefits.
So many of these women smoke too. It really makes me angry.

System

I think they should focus on need, and not on families.

From personal experience, an ex-senior work colleague used to use her child tax credit for exotic holidays for the family!
Think Barbados, Florida... As you can guess clearly in need :rolleyes:

Did you know that foreign (EU) workers can claim child tax credits for children that are not even resident in the UK with them! This in not an immigration issue, I have no problem with people working, but claiming should be restricted to children living in the UK.
I could go on...the tax credit system is a complete joke, and out of control.

I have relatives that are live on benefits (with children), and they get cheques for this/cheques for that. It seems the more money they get they, the more they spend on ciggies, booze and crap for themselves/kids. They also get "priority status" for various things for having children in tow.

I don't have an issue with helping people like education, medical care and childcare.

But I think its gone too far... I feel like a Right Wing Tory now :rotfl:

justthisonce_2

XRAT wrote: »

Dear Justthisonce,

Isn't that a contradiction in terms? If there is no next generation.., who are you aiming to pay with all your hard earned savings?

We, as a country, do need children. If only for the government to use them as cannon fodder to protect the whole country. We don't just need them as nursing staff for the elderly, we need them as a society.., farmers etc. etc.

OK I will rephrase. Enough children will be produced without the need to provide incentives to ensure overproduction. If people had to pay the costs associated with having children without Government handouts then I am sure we would see a huge reduction in the birthrate.

Jim_Manchester

'Family' is a meaningless word because any group of people can claim to be a family.

1980babe

I for one believe children cannot help themselves, but are aided and guided by their parents. All benefits are claimed on their behalf.

I really wished I had a crystal ball a few years ago to see how my life would pan itself out. Not too good to be honest, so when I see comments about parents not having kids unless they can afford them it really does rile me as you never know whats around the next corner.

Agent_C

My partner and I are childless by choice. I view having children as a lifestyle choice, and one that people should be able to afford before they make that choice.

At the end of this month I'm going back to University. This is something I've wanted to do for years, but it's taken me several years to save up enough money. Aside from a 25% reduction in our council tax, my partner and I will get no help, even though it leaves us on a low income. No grants, no benefits - I don't even qualify for free prescriptions and dental treatment because my savings are too high. But why should I get any help anyway? After all, it's a lifestyle choice I'm making.

I have a friend in a similar situation who is also returning to full time study. However, she'll get far more. She'll qualify for income support, and get her rent and council tax paid in full. She'll get free prescriptions and other health benefits. Her fuel bills will be capped. There might also be other grants that she can get from the University. And all this is because she made the lifestyle choice to have a child - she has a teenage lad at college (so he'll be able to get the EMA as well).

Does this seem fair to anyone?

arrymc

every one who contributes to tax should all benefit equally, having kids is your own choice if you cant afford them dont have them its pretty simple.
if we didnt have so many wasters and spongers we wouldnt need the benefit systems and taxes would be lower, meaning everyone has more money!!! problem solved!?

no one should get any help unless its an extreme circumstance people should just get out there and work its easy, theres something for every one to do some where,
i know its not that simple but still i wish it was :mad:

cathymaker

I'd like to see help go to those families that really need it and forget the rest. I was stunned to learn the other day that families with a combined income of up to £58k can get working tax credits. £58k! Can that be right? Try getting any help for anything if your're single with no kids, working full time, and earning just 12k. You'll get absolutely nothing apart from 25% off your council tax.. I've got numerous friends now who have had failed marriages, the kids have left home, and it comes as a total shock to them how difficult it is to make ends meet when there's just one of you paying the bills. They're the same people who used to think that I must be loaded as I only had myself to look after. Not one of them believes that now - they ALL say they were better off financially with 2 incomes and 2.4 kids. People who need help should get it. Whether we have children or not should not be the criterion on which this is judged. So much emphasis is made of the poor struggling families that most of them are better off than they even know!

ceridwen

Well - I've been following this debate with interest. What surprises me is to see there is still so many people who think that money should be paid out to someone just because they have children - some of it isnt even means-tested.

Having children is a CHOICE!

Why should someone be paid out money because they made a choice to have children - when others have equally great (if not greater) financial needs but get much less (if any) help towards their needs (the word to emphasise here is NEEDS). I have personally watched people who are quite clearly too ill to work and seen them told they will have totally inadequate incomes to live on and not being given the help they needed by Social Services and/or the N.H.S. - being ill is NOT a choice - so those people who are genuinely ill do need help and should receive a reasonable amount.

Also - many unemployed people are genuinely unemployed (as opposed to just not wanting to work) and benefits levels are much lower than when I was unemployed years ago - and I only just managed to live on the money then. So - benefits are clearly not enough to live on now. Fair enough to give an amount of benefit that is clearly literally not enough to "keep body and soul together" to someone who is on benefits by choice - but many people are unemployed against their will and really trying to get a suitable job and they also are receiving this "too low to live on" level of benefits.

And yet....families can claim Tax Credit money even if they are on a very generous salary thank you!

I repeat my point - no-one forces people to have children these day. Every child born here these days is a wanted and planned child (as otherwise the woman would have used the most effective contraception available to her and - if that didnt work - had an abortion). No-one is forced into being a parent - errr...perhaps I'd better correct that....no woman is forced into being a parent (as some men still are - by partners who dont consult them before getting pregnant).

Financial help available should match the society we live in. My parents claimed the child benefit, etc available to them for my brother and myself - because we were both accidents (as that was the 1950s - when accidents still happened). My father wouldnt claim money if they had us now - as we would both be planned and his finances sorted out accordingly (now that the Pill and legalised abortion are here).
I'm not saying abortion is an easy option - but it IS what you do if your contraception has failed - I wouldnt have hesitated for one second and booked the appointment instantly if ever my contraception had failed. However - I had decided not to have children - so I made sure I never ever got pregnant in the first place.

dmg24

Coveredinbees!!!! wrote: »

I voted H but if I do happen to have a child I'll change that to A thanks

This is the problem - the me, me, me mentality. Coveredinbees does not think that families should be prioritised because they do not have one, but if they did, then they would expect to be a priority. Seems a tad selfish to me?

I don't see why any one 'group' should be a priority. Yes, children need to be cared for, but then don't we all?