Budget 2010: Budget 2010: Child tax credits up for one and two-year-olds

liam8282

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

That's what we do, but various people here seem to have a problem with that. They seem to think that my wife and I should, between us, work all hours and barely see each other just to be financially better off. What's the point in having more money if we don't get the chance to spend it together?

My comments aren't meant to be aimed directly at you, and each persons circumstances are different.

I am just trying to make my points in general.

I have a few problems with tax credits / benefits, the main being the system is wrong to start of with, people should not be better off through claiming benefits rather than working.

I can understand why people choose to claim benefits and not to work, why work if you can get more cash staying at home with your kids?

Another thing that irritates me that I mentioned before is, the people who don't work and get benefits, are also the ones that get free nursery places for their children. They say they stay at home to look after the kids etc, but as soon as they are nursery age, they have a free place and are in nursery most of the day.

Even if the free nursery places were given to families that work and have low incomes, that would be one improvement.

Also with all these people not working and not paying tax, it puts extra pressure on the people that do work. The retirement is age is steadily increasing, by the time I retire I will be lucky to see a state pension as all of those funds will have dried up as there won't be enough people paying tax. The tax rate is rising, no 10% starting rate on your income anymore. The VAT rate will be the next to go up. People might say this is not linked, but the money has to come from somewhere.

There are too many problems to list with the whole benefits / tax credits, so I will stop my moaning now!

JimmyTheWig

sh1305 wrote: »

Well, that's what most people did before child tax credits. Why should you get more money for having kids?

I believe the point of child benefit and the like is to help families out so that they are able to bring up children, which is a very expensive thing to do. If people couldn't afford children then there would be no-one to support us in our old age no doctors or nurses, no bus drivers, no plumbers, no-one paying tax to support our pensions, etc...

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I certainly don't have a problem with it, provided there are no extra tax credits to subsidise it (there were no extra Benefits at all in my day).

All we get are the non-means tested benefits (child benefit and basic child tax credit). If my wife _did_ go out to work (as many in this discussion seem to think she should) and we paid for childcare we would probably get _more_ benefits to help with the childcare costs. (Wouldn't be enough, and wouldn't really expect it to be enough, to make it possible though.)
So to answer your question, no we certainly don't get more benefits to encourage my wife to stay at home. But I think I've mentioned that before!

seven-day-weekend

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I believe the point of child benefit and the like is to help families out so that they are able to bring up children, which is a very expensive thing to do. If people couldn't afford children then there would be no-one to support us in our old age no doctors or nurses, no bus drivers, no plumbers, no-one paying tax to support our pensions, etc...


All we get are the non-means tested benefits (child benefit and basic child tax credit). If my wife _did_ go out to work (as many in this discussion seem to think she should) and we paid for childcare we would probably get _more_ benefits to help with the childcare costs. (Wouldn't be enough, and wouldn't really expect it to be enough, to make it possible though.)
So to answer your question, no we certainly don't get more benefits to encourage my wife to stay at home. But I think I've mentioned that before!

Fine, well if there are no extra Benefits I personally think your arrangements are ideal.:) As I say, that is what we did for four years.

Indie_Kid

Basic CTC is means-tested.

janninew

krisskross wrote: »

We did this as well. Husband worked full time days returning home at 5.30pm. I left for my 6-10pm job 10 minutes later. We were like ships that passed in the night, but needs must. No huge amounts in benefits in those days.

When they were all at full time school I worked night shifts while my husband carried on with days. Our children, our choice to have them, our responsibility to support them.

Its a shame more people in this Country can't have your attitude! I've just had my first child, I will be going back to work when she is 6 months old and the only benefit I will get is child benefit. Me and my partner waited until we were settled and able to afford a child before having one. I know I'm in a lucky position having a stable job, but I really feel if you cannot afford to look after your own children, you shouldn't keep having them!

This isn't aimed at people who have lost jobs etc through no fault of their own, just at people who make a living out of having babies!

JimmyTheWig

sh1305 wrote: »

Basic CTC is means-tested.

Yes, but only when you earn more than £50k, as far as I can see. Which to me sort of counts as not being means tested.
I.e. it wouldn't make any difference if my wife earned a few thousand or not.

JimmyTheWig

liam8282 wrote: »

the system is wrong to start of with, people should not be better off through claiming benefits rather than working.

I agree. It's just finding a way to achieve this that's the difficulty!

emweaver

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Don't you get nursery vouchers?

If by nursery vouchers you mean does my child get 15 hours free education a week from the age of 3, preschool to prepare her for school yes but thats for everyone including working millionaires!

krisskross

emweaver wrote: »

If by nursery vouchers you mean does my child get 15 hours free education a week from the age of 3, preschool to prepare her for school yes but thats for everyone including working millionaires!

So because you don't get cash in your hand does that mean you don't think it is any sort of benefit. If it wasn't in place you would have to pay for your child to go to nursery/playschool whatever you like to call it. We all used to pay if we wanted it for our children.

emweaver you obviously have not a clue about how well off and how much is provided for people with young children these days or yet how much it all costs!

So what if millionaires can get free nursery for their children. Do you honestly think many of them do?

seven-day-weekend

emweaver wrote: »

If by nursery vouchers you mean does my child get 15 hours free education a week from the age of 3, preschool to prepare her for school yes but thats for everyone including working millionaires!

But NOBODY got it thirty yars ago! That is what we seniors are saying. People these days get SO much money for having children. We got the basic Child Benefit and that is all. No savings. No nursery feees. Nothing to help with childcare. Zilch. Nada.