Should child benefit be means tested?

Plasticman

delluver wrote:

How about an equal income for all regardless of what you do? See what I mean?

That's what some people here seem to be advocating. Take more from the better off, remove their benefits (child benefit etc), give more to those without. I'm all for supporting the vulnerable in our society and ensuring that everybody has a reasonable standard of living. Bashing those on higher incomes - who are paying for those who aren't - doesn’t seem the right way forward to me. I also don't agree with your comment about people on low incomes not having children. Everybody has the right to have a child but they also have the responsibility to support them. I don't believe that tax payers should be funding other peoples lifestyle choices.

delluver

Plasticman wrote:

I agree with this. I have a friend who can't understand why I don't have any money left at the end of the month. He lives in a council house and has low outgoings. I own my own (basic!) house with a huge mortgage and the maintenance cost etc that go with it. He has more spare cash at the end of the month than me. His family get a good payout of tax credits - we get very little. Doesn't feel very fair to me. Having said that, I don't think means testing outgoings is a good plan. The system is way too complex already!

Means testings outgoings is a bad plan, I agree, but it's just to make a point to those who are going on about fairness when everyone lives in a different situation. Yes there are people who abuse benefits, then people who need it that receive it, and others who really need it who can't even claim.

I know the high mortgage, basic house feeling, yet we don't complain as much as those with a bigger house with a lower mortgage. Wish we could afford a second car, or even a new one as ours is on it's way out, but we don't complain - you just have to get on with it and hope for inheritance. Hehe, so then we can be up with you lot with grand houses.

delluver

Plasticman wrote:

I also don't agree with your comment about people on low incomes not having children. Everybody has the right to have a child but they also have the responsibility to support them. I don't believe that tax payers should be funding other peoples lifestyle choices.

I think you've misunderstood the point there. People on benefits can support having a child, but come on they could do with the piffling child benefits more than those who don't need to budget as much and that can save, and don't have an overdraft every month just from paying out for the essentials. We pay tax, and don't have much of a lifestyle compared to others, but like I was saying in other posts everyone's in a different situation.

humfer

Plasticman wrote:

That's what some people here seem to be advocating. Take more from the better off, remove their benefits (child benefit etc), give more to those without. I'm all for supporting the vulnerable in our society and ensuring that everybody has a reasonable standard of living. Bashing those on higher incomes - who are paying for those who aren't - doesn’t seem the right way forward to me. I also don't agree with your comment about people on low incomes not having children. Everybody has the right to have a child but they also have the responsibility to support them. I don't believe that tax payers should be funding other peoples lifestyle choices.

Very well said - I couldn't have said it better myself

Andy_Davies

melaniec wrote:

I am so sick of funding peoples life style choices and kids are one of those, too right it should be means tested how many people give child benefit to their kids as pocket money? It was designed to help parents feed and clothe their kids not to give to them as pocket money.

Your parent's lifestyle choice was funded...

Besides we need kids, who's going to fund the state i.e. our heathcare, security etc., when we get old - if we don't have kids there won't be many taxpayers about.

As for means testing, what would you rather - all the people who appear in programs like neighbours from hell having kids because they'll get great benefits or intelligent people having kids?

Other point about means testing is it would probably cost more to administer than you'd save in benefits...

Murphy_The_Cat

Andy_Davies wrote:

Other point about means testing is it would probably cost more to administer than you'd save in benefits...

& require a further army of non-jobs being created in the civil service to administer it.

MTC

Andy_Davies

TonyW wrote:

The way to make the system fairer is to make all benefits taxable in the same way as any other income, in that way the well off would keep less of the benefit than those are less well off.

But what's the point in giving it out with one hand and taking it back with another - all you're doing is creating employment for more civil servants.

The 'well off' (rather than the stinkingly rich!) already pay their fair share in taxes already - higher rate tax payers contribute over 50% of the total income tax take, while only forming 11% of taxpayers.

seven-day-weekend

Haven't voted for either a) or b): I don't think there should be child benefit at all. (Although as it exists I received it from 1980-1997).

I haven't read this thread so can't at this moment discuss anything.

seven-day-weekend

However, having now read to page 3, I think that stay-at-home mums should have their NI contributions credited, even if no Child Benefit were paid.

russjacks

I and my wife work, allways have done, none of us have ever been on the dole since we left school 28 years ago. we have made a lot of cut backs with help from this site in order to make ends meet. we have used our daughters family allowence to help with her school expencers.
She is now 17 and going to 6th form. she at her age if she wished can leave school, get pregnent, get a flat off the council, and get dole money and any other handouts given to her. at great expence to taxpayers.but, no she stays on at school to try and make her life a bit better than ours. good for her. If i was unemployed she would be able to collectc £30.00 a week for staying on at school. but because we both work she gets nothing.
The point i'm trying to say is that we are already means tested. but it is always the middle of the road workers of this country that suffers. not the rich who can afford it or the less well of who get handouts left right and centre. If family allowence was means tested only us would suffer, again