Age 7 government child trust fund payments not being released!!!

MissMoneypenny

ultrawomble wrote: »

Read what I wrote in its context and it alludes to the fact that some people would prefer to make their own way in life - that may include that they believe that the NHS and state pension are superfluous.

You had the answer to this in post 248. Keep up.

ultrawomble

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

You had the answer to this in post 248. Keep up.

Do keep up - you've missed post 252

POPPYOSCAR

ultrawomble wrote: »

I take the extreme because it always starts at the thin end of the wedge. Once you start to remove a universal benefit the precedent has been set. The 'wishing for' is a turn of phrase. As you say, some people believe that they should make their own way in the world - fine if it works out, but what if it doesn't? What happens if there is no safety net? Finally, I would argue that the NHS and state pension are a provision for a great many of the population rather than a support. Without them they have nothing.

No one is saying there should be no safety net of course there should be.Some people find themselves in very difficult circumstances for various reasons through no fault of their own, and they should be taken care of. But the benefits culture is firmly rooted now in our society and 'the state' is some magical being that has pots of money to throw around. The 'state' is US the tax payer.I have no problem with my taxes going to help those is need, my problem is working so that the 'why should I work when I can get my benefits and do what I like brigade' can exist,and I have seen many of them around.I would give my last penny to someone truly in need.

Caroline73_2

My youngest son got the £250 CTF voucher. The same week my husband went to see the GP about a vasectomy. We were told they could no longer fund non essential surgery on the NHS so we had to go private. It cost £250. We would rather have had the vasectomy paid for by the NHS than have the CTF voucher.

Paul_Herring

Deepmistrust wrote: »

I think inflation has always been calculated this way. I don't think labour are any different in this respect.

House prices are excluded from any of the price indices when house prices are going up to keep inflation down. (e.g. Labour as the last incumbent.)

House prices will be included in the price indices when house prices are going down/remaining static, to keep inflation down. (e.g. What the ConDems are planning.)

ultrawomble

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

No one is saying there should be no safety net of course there should be.Some people find themselves in very difficult circumstances for various reasons through no fault of their own, and they should be taken care of. But the benefits culture is firmly rooted now in our society and 'the state' is some magical being that has pots of money to throw around. The 'state' is US the tax payer.I have no problem with my taxes going to help those is need, my problem is working so that the 'why should I work when I can get my benefits and do what I like brigade' can exist,and I have seen many of them around.I would give my last penny to someone truly in need.

But this thread isn't about some work-shy layabouts, it's about a universal benefit provided to a child (not the parents) by the government in the hope that after 18 years of investment it may be of some use to them as they start out in adult life. It's not even as though anyone can prove the idea has been a complete failure because the first CTFs won't mature for another 10 years.

Deepmistrust

dazza.mk wrote: »

So how do you define your 'cheap foreign goods', go home and throw out everything 'Made in China' and you'll probably end up reading a book by candlenight naked!

HUH? What on earth does that have to do with the point that the person made?

Deepmistrust

Caroline73 wrote: »

My youngest son got the £250 CTF voucher. The same week my husband went to see the GP about a vasectomy. We were told they could no longer fund non essential surgery on the NHS so we had to go private. It cost £250. We would rather have had the vasectomy paid for by the NHS than have the CTF voucher.

It shouldn't even be a choice between one or the other. It doesn't follow that once CTF's have been abolished that Vasectomy will be available free on the NHS.

POPPYOSCAR

ultrawomble wrote: »

But this thread isn't about some work-shy layabouts, it's about a universal benefit provided to a child (not the parents) by the government in the hope that after 18 years of investment it may be of some use to them as they start out in adult life. It's not even as though anyone can prove the idea has been a complete failure because the first CTFs won't mature for another 10 years.

But like so many other threads other things start to come up in the debate.

This is not a safety net for the needy.

As has been said before the country cannot afford to do this, the money would be better spent on the needs of today e.g. better education etc.

Deepmistrust

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

No one is saying there should be no safety net of course there should be.Some people find themselves in very difficult circumstances for various reasons through no fault of their own, and they should be taken care of. But the benefits culture is firmly rooted now in our society and 'the state' is some magical being that has pots of money to throw around. The 'state' is US the tax payer.I have no problem with my taxes going to help those is need, my problem is working so that the 'why should I work when I can get my benefits and do what I like brigade' can exist,and I have seen many of them around.I would give my last penny to someone truly in need.

The state is absolutely not 'us'. It should be, but sadly, it isn't. Even the government of the day doesn't have much control over the state. Why do you think their promises usually never materialise? Because when they final reach office, they have no chance, the institutions that comprise the state are very much in control. They are not 'us'.