Child tax credit limit reduced to £26,000

Firefox1975

gillybean129 wrote: »

In what for myself? What kind of comment is this?

Do you understand why the benefit system has to change? why you will be receiving less?

do you think it is just about you and your £10 a week?

The economy is in a total disaster.

Expect it to get worse, because it will, before peoples attitudes (Both spending and demanding) change so it can be allowed to recover.

shedboy94

custardy wrote: »

as i said before,£10 a week isnt a lot to earn

Do you just post for the sake of posting?

melly1980

shedboy94 wrote: »

I disagree with a lot of the benefits paid out in this country, but you are being extremely unfair to the OP. They haven't been stealing from the state, they have been receiving what the government wants to pay them - just like CB - you say you shouldn't be paid it......why don't you hand it back then? I hate the fact that some people receive ridiculous amounts of benefits - I see it 1st hand every day, but come on.....£10 a week isn't crippling the country but it does give a bit of breathing room to a lot of families. Who actually cares what the OP did with the money....I don't......oh my god.....buying your children clothes or giving them a hobby to entertain them/keep them off the strret/keep them fit and healthy/give them future job prospects.........would you rather the child sat in their bedroom watching TV all night.....or is that a luxury too????
If the OP was coming on the forum gloating about stealing benefits or saying they spent their benefits on luxuries, fair enough -have a go......but this is just ridiculous.
There are too many people on this forum with far too much time on their hands.
.............and before you ask, I am at work but posting this while on a break.

you are right, the term stealing was uncalled for and I accept that it was wrong.
The basic idea behind the post though, I stand for. We (and i include myself again here) have just plodded along taking child benefit and tax credits and spent it on stuff that we dont need. Many dont accept this but open your eyes and see the normality of owning multiple luxury items. If you were to walk into the house of someone low paid or not working and living off benefits you know full well that you would see mobile phones, playstations etc etc. These are essentially being paid for by the state.

melly1980

gillybean129 wrote: »

It's not about the dance classes, it's about buying basics such as clothing, yes occasionally goes towards dance fees but this I consider to be part of her education, (after all it counts as UCAS points) childrens's clothes are expensive, especially as they are mostly in adult clothes from being teenagers. So every little helps especially as we don't earn that much.
In fact increasing hours isn't an option, we will both be lucky to hold onto our jobs if anything

I refuse to believe that you can not trim back on non essentials to pay for these basics such as clothing.

custardy

shedboy94 wrote: »

Do you just post for the sake of posting?

what does your post add?
As i said before
the wife doesnt work. so a bit of ebaying can easily generate that

seems you cant make your mind up what you think.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3786871

Mrs_Arcanum

melly1980 wrote: »

I refuse to believe that you can not trim back on non essentials to pay for these basics such as clothing.

With a teenager you are now paying 20% VAT on everything so the £10 per week may go towards that. For some families there could be the person in receipt of this money being reliant on this because the other person is so mean they do not give sufficient housekeeping, Sweeping generalisations about what an individual can or cannot afford are missing the point. - Those of us in the middle are trying to bring useful and productive children in to the world. The next generation of taxpayers. Not scroungers or tax dodgers. Yet because we actually PAY and can be traced we are penalised by this government.

shedboy94

melly1980 wrote: »

you are right, the term stealing was uncalled for and I accept that it was wrong.
The basic idea behind the post though, I stand for. We (and i include myself again here) have just plodded along taking child benefit and tax credits and spent it on stuff that we dont need. Many dont accept this but open your eyes and see the normality of owning multiple luxury items. If you were to walk into the house of someone low paid or not working and living off benefits you know full well that you would see mobile phones, playstations etc etc. These are essentially being paid for by the state.

That's fine, and yes there are people like this - I totally agree, and it is unacceptable. The whole welfare system needs to be reformed......it is too easy not to work, but penny pinching from the working classes is a panic measure, not a solution. The reason I'm defending the OP is that she has done nothing wrong - she gave a personal opinion of how she felt when the government decided to turn around and effectively say she is earning too much money, when for years they have been saying she hasn't. She never said the £10 was for dance lessons, she said it contributed to a number of things including clothing. I take it sport and leisure activities should only be accessable for the rich?? The Olympics are gonna get a lot posher from now on!!

Caroline_a

shedboy94 wrote: »

That's fine, and yes there are people like this - I totally agree, and it is unacceptable. The whole welfare system needs to be reformed......it is too easy not to work, but penny pinching from the working classes is a panic measure, not a solution. The reason I'm defending the OP is that she has done nothing wrong - she gave a personal opinion of how she felt when the government decided to turn around and effectively say she is earning too much money, when for years they have been saying she hasn't. She never said the £10 was for dance lessons, she said it contributed to a number of things including clothing. I take it sport and leisure activities should only be accessable for the rich?? The Olympics are gonna get a lot posher from now on!!

Actually it depends on the sport. My youngest daughter used to go to gymnastics. It cost £80 a quarter plus leotards (at around £30 a throw!). When she swapped from gymnastics to athletics the costs dropped like a stone - around £20 a year. That was a few years ago, but even now, a youngster can join an athletics club and get free coaching for around £25 - £45 a year. So not for the rich at all!

shedboy94

custardy wrote: »

what does your post add?
As i said before
the wife doesnt work. so a bit of ebaying can easily generate that

seems you cant make your mind up what you think.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3786871

What can't I make my mind up about? On this thread I am defending someone who is being verbally attacked over the fact that she uses her £10 a week CTC to buy clothes and give her child some exercise and skills. The one you have helpfully linked to was showing the complete opposite end of the scale.

It's good to see that not only do you have time to post on here over 19000 times, you have time to look up other peoples previous posts as well. I wish I had that much time on my hands.

clemmatis

gillybean129 wrote: »

yes occasionally goes towards dance fees but this I consider to be part of her education, (after all it counts as UCAS points)

? UCAS points are given for grades in approved qualifications. IOW there are lots of ways to get them. And surely the school isn't charging for classes for courses that lead to UCAS points?