An end to the free swim for kids and over 60's

meerkat2007

dizzie wrote: »

Well Meerkat - if we didn't support children to some degree through the provision of free basic education etc, then we wouldn't have the next generation of taxpayers to keep the economy going and pay for education, health, defence, pensions and goodness knows what else.

If we could all pay less tax, we'd all have more to save...but not everyone is so disciplined. I had a work colleague once who had a very good family income...and the philosophy that she would live a queen now and save nothing at all so that she could be dependant on the state and get every benefit she could on retirement - very irresponsible in my opinion!

Then, besides the irresponsible people who could save but chose not to, there are the misfortunate people who suddenly find themselves at the mercy of the state through sudden ill-health / disability...who, even if taxation was much lower, would almost definitely not be able to financially support themselves for the rest of their lives.

The truth is, you and I just don't know what could be round the corner Meerkat...so although I'm frugal and save what I can in the hope that I'll be as financially independant as possible in retirement...I am glad to be supporting the next generation of taxpayers (so that they can support me if my circumstances require it later on )....as well as the pensioners of today

Having said that - I do think that today, Osbourne should have scrapped child benefit for higher earners who don't rely on it. I'd put myself in that category. Although bringing up children isn't cheap - I can afford to pay for what my two boys need without government help...and I think that rather than paying me child benefit, the money could be better used elsewhere at such a difficult time.

I have no problem with my taxes supporting those who can't work through ill health or disability, or who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own and need support until they find their next job. Truth be known, I have no real objection to paying for kids to be educated, but why should I have to subsidise the fruit of other people's loins by being taxed to pay for child benefit, child tax credits and working family tax credits?

LittleVoice

dizzie wrote: »

Having said that - I do think that today, Osbourne should have scrapped child benefit for higher earners who don't rely on it. I'd put myself in that category. Although bringing up children isn't cheap - I can afford to pay for what my two boys need without government help...and I think that rather than paying me child benefit, the money could be better used elsewhere at such a difficult time.

I don't think you have to accept Child Benefit. In fact, don't you have to claim it - if you didn't initiate a claim and provide details for the payment then you wouldn't get it and the money could be used elsewhere.

dizzie

LittleVoice wrote: »

I don't think you have to accept Child Benefit. In fact, don't you have to claim it - if you didn't initiate a claim and provide details for the payment then you wouldn't get it and the money could be used elsewhere.

Well when our children were younger, our financial circumstances were different - much, much lower wages and we were paying for hubbie to do postgrad education - so I did claim child benefit. After that,it comes automatically. Maybe I should stop claiming it - but instead we donate it (and more besides) to several charities so we can be sure that it goes to a worthwhile cause and is less likely to be wasted in the "ivory towers".

After all, I don't think the government would have been able to do anything different in the budget today just because I wrote and asked them to stop paying us child benefit - so no-one would benefit just from my child benefit sacrifice (most other people on middle incomes wouldn't give it up either because they are too interested in keeping up with the Jones's...not like me in my 9 year-old Skoda who couldn't give a damn about stuff like that). But when you give it to charity - you get more of a sense that it will make some difference to someone.

Soubrette

margaretclare wrote: »

I listened to the Budget speech in full. He said that he has considered means-testing child benefit, but given that he wants to cut public spending, such means-testing would mean the setting up of a whole new department to deal with it, not what he wants to do.

Surely there is already a whole dept means testing child tax credit - so you'd think the info would already be there.

Sou

Dobiesmon

Hi
Where I live I don't know what the 60 plus get free as I am only 58 but my grandson is charged £2.20 for a swim and he is only 5

dizzie

In our local pool, an adult pays £3.70 for a swim (reduced to £2.30 for a concession) and a child pays £1.60. They also do a 15 swim ticket which works out a bit cheaper per swim and then they do memberships which I think are a great idea for people who want to swim regularly, because once it's paid - you can swim as much as you like for no extra cost.

An adult membership is £24.00 per month (worthwhile if you swim 7 times or more in a month); Adult Concession monthly price is just £14.50 - about £3.60 per week...for as much swimming as you want - again I think this is excellent for retired people (the monthly fee for a child membership is £11.75 - which again is very good).

Tanith, did your pool not have a similar membership scheme before the introduction of free swimming? If so, you may still be able to swim as much as you like for less than the price of two single swims per week. If not, could you not get a group together to lobby your local council to provide such a scheme? It works to everyone's advantage - councils are assured of a fixed monthly income, whereas keen swimmers get real value for money.

Jennifer_Jane

Before the free swimming, I used to go anyway and prefer to pay the cheaper annual amount, which has a concession anyway. I loved the free swimming, but it was only for two years (a pre-Olympic thing, I understand, but with health benefits). I will swim because of the health benefits and if it costs me a hefty (for me - I'm on a monthly BSP of £85 plus a fairly limited Company Pension) amount, then so be it. That's my main exercise. Sometimes we have to take responsibility for our own health.

I agree with Errata and others who always felt it was a vote ploy. And it was always going to go in April 2011 anyway, I'm sure. A pity, but there we are.

Our pool started off with armbands and warning us we could only stay in for an hour (phew!) but at the 12:00 time we are mainly older people. At holiday time the school children come in and crowd around in groups or just muck about instead of lane swimming! It's the public swim time and you just have to swim around them. I swim lengths but count time rather than lengths, so if I have to stop in the shallow end because there are children there and start my new length from a yard or two down, then that's irritating but everyone has a right to be there.

Just also remember that some people who are apparently chatting may also be doing aquarobic exercises. Its' a super sport and I will continue to take advantage of having a public swimming pool (even if it was built in the 70's and needs major refurbishment.

LittleVoice

dizzie wrote: »

. . . - but instead we donate it (and more besides) to several charities so we can be sure that it goes to a worthwhile cause and is less likely to be wasted in the "ivory towers".

And remember Gift Aid so that tax is reclaimed by the charities.

dizzie

LittleVoice wrote: »

And remember Gift Aid so that tax is reclaimed by the charities.

Ah, no problem Little Voice - we have that sorted. All set up on regular monthly standing orders and with Gift Aid. Great for higher rate taxpayers since you can claim back the difference between the basic and higher rate bands on your self assessment...which means you can afford to give more.:)

tanith

Dizzie we do have a concession scheme which costs £2.70 a swim so I am going have to limit myself to one or two swims a week from now on... they don't do a monthly ticket but I will take a further look at what they offer .. I shall continue my swimming as its one thing that helps with my arthritis without me having to take time to recover.. but on a fixed income of reduced SP and a small company one I have to watch my spending... hey ho!! I just wish that my prediction that Free Swimming would be stopped hadn't come true quite so fast... so much for this government and its new 'Schools Olympics', (wonder how much thats going to cost in teachers input and money) they take away free swimming for kids... how does that make sense?