Child Benefit- is is now means tested?

Person_one

fannyanna wrote: »

I too think the governments plan to put a cap on child benefit is crazy for the precise reasons that have already been outlined.

I stumbled across a really interesting post a while ago that compared two families. One was a very low income family and therefore eligible to a variety of benefits and the other was what is deemed as a moderately high income family. It absolutely amazed me that once you added up the benefits people were eligible to receive these families had pretty much the same income to live on.

P.S. Where I live (South East) £1,000 per month are average (and possibly on the low side) nursery costs for one child.

The poorer family were 'topped up' to an amount the state deemed necessary for them to live to an acceptable standard. The more well off family can afford that acceptable standard without that help, do you want the higher earning family to be topped up so they have more? On what grounds?

fannyanna

Person_one wrote: »

Has your husband considered being a SAHD, or going part time seeing as you're the higher earner?

(Of course, you shouldn't short change his existing children in the process.)

THe child maintenance is a fixed percentage of his income so by him reducing his hours or not working at all that would have a direct impact on the amount of maintenance that he paid.

Kimberley82

Person_one wrote: »

Why don't more dads go part time so they can share the care?

Because unfortunately men are normally paid more then women still, plus if the family needs the money to survive how will anyone taking a cut in wages help.

fannyanna

Person_one wrote: »

The poorer family were 'topped up' to an amount the state deemed necessary for them to live to an acceptable standard. The more well off family can afford that acceptable standard without that help, do you want the higher earning family to be topped up so they have more? On what grounds?

I'm confused. I'm not sure where I said that it’s wrong to top up those on a low income. I’m actually proud to live in a society where the state is concerned about the welfare of its citizens and is prepared to help those in need.

I was just trying to highlight that in some cases there isn’t that much of a difference in the amount of funds people have available to him.

Person_one

fannyanna wrote: »

THe child maintenance is a fixed percentage of his income so by him reducing his hours or not working at all that would have a direct impact on the amount of maintenance that he paid.

You could always pay it from your salary, surely you don't only pay it because you're forced to?

Kimberley82

Person_one wrote: »

You could always pay it from your salary, surely you don't only pay it because you're forced to?

But they would still be short it the dad stopped or cut down working.

Person_one

fannyanna wrote: »

I'm confused. I'm not sure where I said that it’s wrong to top up those on a low income. I’m actually proud to live in a society where the state is concerned about the welfare of its citizens and is prepared to help those in need.

I was just trying to highlight that in some cases there isn’t that much of a difference in the amount of funds people have available to him.

I don't think you said topping up was wrong at all!

My point was that some people feel they should get the top ups when they don't really need them, they just want them because it would make life a bit easier.

If the amount needed to care for 2 children is £100 a week (I'm simplifying, bear with me) and poor couple A only have £20 a week, then they need to be topped up by £80. If well off couple B have £105 a week they don't need to be topped up. They might feel peeved that they now have the same income as a poorer family, but the truth is that they don't need it.

fannyanna

Person_one wrote: »

You could always pay it from your salary, surely you don't only pay it because you're forced to?

My salary would not stretch to providing for myself, my husband, my baby and my husbands children (I may be the higher earner in our relationship but I don't earn THAT much money ). That is why my husband works, why both myself and my husband will need to continue to work when I have a baby and why we have had to wait so long before we're even in a position to try to conceive.

Person_one

Kimberley82 wrote: »

But they would still be short it the dad stopped or cut down working.

Why? They'd be saving hundreds on childcare?

Kimberley82

Person_one wrote: »

Why? They'd be saving hundreds on childcare?

and loosing hundreds by him not working