Sun poll tomorrow: 83% believe the decision on child benefit right thing to do

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

About the same % that will still receive it.

We agree!!! We agree!!!!

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

so how come your visits to the site are so perfectly timed... Local Elections, General Election, when the tories are getting a bit of stick on the CB issue... nice one

You see, I think its great someone in politics is prepared to see what people are really thinking, saying and asking and how we react to things like this. Forums like this make it easy for them to.

Batchy

nickmason wrote: »

It's not a very important loop.:D

I am real.
I am conservative.
I am not "that" Nick Mason. I do not drive Ferraris, and I don't play the drums.
I probably don't matter much, except to my family. At the margin I matter to the residents of North Dorset, but probably not anything like as much as most politicians would want to matter.

Did you nick that from the film "8 mile" eminem... lol

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

You see, I think its great someone in politics is prepared to see what people are really thinking, saying and asking and how we react to things like this. Forums like this make it easy for them to.

i don't have an issue with that

timely contributions when you have an agenda is something else.

answer this then LIR, why does Rochdale Pioneers get lots of grief but it's ok for Nick Mason to do exactly the same thing.

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

i don't have an issue with that

timely contributions when you have an agenda is something else.

answer this then LIR, why does Rochdale Pioneers get lots of grief but it's ok for Nick Mason to do exactly the same thing.

He does get lots of stick....from you!

ninky_2

i support the cb cut and making it for households with a higher rate taxpayer, not joint income. however i think the threshold should be higher for single parents - unless the 'absentee' parent is also a high rate tax payer in which case i think they should be made to pay their share of the difference.

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

i
answer this then LIR, why does Rochdale Pioneers get lots of grief but it's ok for Nick Mason to do exactly the same thing.

I think there have been times when anyone stating any political allegiance of any sort gets grief. Nick gets it, rochdale gets it, any one of us who said how we were voting has got it.....

I have personally both thanked Rochdale for excellent points that I've either agreed with or felt ''challenged by'' and at other times thought, like others, he's been either politically doggedly loyal or blinded.

I also have repeatedly made clear when this arises that I think there is a difference in this case which I put to Nick's failure to protect his own identity, which I have told him I believe, though ''right'' ''honourable'' and brave is...well...stupid, this being what it is. For me that overrides political affiliation in this case.

lemonjelly

robin_banks wrote: »

Broadly I agree, though I'm still not comfortable with situation 2 earners on 43k get CB, but one on 44,001 won't.

That said it should be administered through HMRC.

Child benefit is administered by HMRC. (Though I assume you may mean that child benefit should be replaced by a tax allowance?)

Child benefit & Tax credits are both handled & processed by HMRC. To be honest, it is why both systems are such a shambles - the taxman is ok at collecting money, but terrible at paying it out.

Batchy

No offence to the sun, but most of their readers are self employed builders, and factory workers who put 15k income through the books and work the rest cash.

I wouldnt really think that their poll really reaches the effected audience.

try the Telegraph, Times , or the FT readers.

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

I think there have been times when anyone stating any political allegiance of any sort gets grief. Nick gets it, rochdale gets it, any one of us who said how we were voting has got it.....

I have personally both thanked Rochdale for excellent points that I've either agreed with or felt ''challenged by'' and at other times thought, like others, he's been either politically doggedly loyal or blinded.

I also have repeatedly made clear when this arises that I think there is a difference in this case which I put to Nick's failure to protect his own identity, which I have told him I believe, though ''right'' ''honourable'' and brave is...well...stupid, this being what it is. For me that overrides political affiliation in this case.

Thanks LIR but it's the timing of his appearances on the forum that make his agenda even more obvious...

and he's linking to The Sun to prove his illustrious defence... mmmm.
it's not convincing. sorry...