Child benefit U turn being lined up

chewmylegoff

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17255753

Well, it will come as no surprise that the coalition are setting up another watering down exercise. Perhaps too harsh to call it a complete u-turn, but frankly its a bit of a strange situation when, against the backdrop of a deficit of 10% of GDP, even the nasty party haven't got the guts to cut benefits to the middle classes.

Graham_Devon

These cuts were poorly thought through and completely unfair.

Cut child benefit by all means, but make it fair!

Radiantsoul

Well there is an issue with very high rates of marginal taxation that some will face and the middle class do vote.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

chewmylegoff wrote: »

against the backdrop of a deficit of 10% of GDP, even the nasty party haven't got the guts to cut benefits to the middle classes.

At this point in the political cycle nearly half-way through a term in office, there are only three thoughts going through the heads of most politicians.

Re-election, re-election, re-election.

Decisions taken today are aimed at positioning the economy, and voters financial circumstances, in a place where a political campaign can be fought and won 2-3 years down the road.

SecondLegDownIsTheBigOne

The coalition is leaving skidmarks all over the gaff.

Generali

It's a bad benefit IMO as the world has changed since it was introduced: in these days of women being perfectly able to work after having children and also being able to divorce easily there is no need to have a benefit paid to all women.

If you're paying 40% tax you are in the top 15% of British earners and, I would guess, the top 1% of earners worldwide. These are people that really shouldn't need state aid to raise their kids.

The thing is for the left it is a touchstone, especially for leftist feminists because essentially the movement for Family Allowances was the start of the feminist movement in the UK.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

It's a bad benefit IMO as the world has changed since it was introduced: in these days of women being perfectly able to work after having children and also being able to divorce easily there is no need to have a benefit paid to all women.
...

I'd suggest it's a bad benefit which has become woven into the core income of some families.

Going forward child benefit should taper off more markedly for larger families. The days of the large family living off the state have to end. They are unaffordable.

Fella

Child Benefit is people without children being forced to give money to people with children. And in lots of cases it's poor people without children being forced to give money to rich people with children.

It should be abolished. People should have children if they can afford them just the same as pets & holidays.

nearlynew

Generali wrote: »

.....
The thing is for the left it is a touchstone, especially for leftist feminists because essentially the movement for Family Allowances was the start of the feminist movement in the UK.

And the feminist movement's ultimate accomplishment?..........


Creating a situation where it now takes two people's income to pay for a house, whereas it used to take one.

The damage this has caused, both economically and socially, is now plain for all to see.


Take a bow feminists.

Generali

nearlynew wrote: »

And the feminist movement's ultimate accomplishment?..........


Creating a situation where it now takes two people's income to pay for a house, whereas it used to take one.

The damage this has caused, both economically and socially, is now plain for all to see.


Take a bow feminists.

That's the law of unintended consequences. I would imagine that the Pankmeister et al would be very pleased with the progress of feminism in the C21st.

Pennywise

Generali wrote: »

If you're paying 40% tax you are in the top 15% of British earners and, I would guess, the top 1% of earners worldwide. These are people that really shouldn't need state aid to raise their kids.

You're missing the point re unfairness. Under the proposals, a household with one worker earning £45k would lose all child benefit but their next door neighbours where both worked, earning, say, £40k each, would keep their child benefit despite a far higher household income. That's why the proposals were unfair. Not to mention the practicalities of the proposal which was to continue paying the child benefit to the mother, but to deduct it from the father's payslips - an administrative nightmare!

The Govt really shot themselves in the foot with this one and it does beg the question as to their competence when no politician, nor Treasury official, flagged this up before it was officially announced. Also, announcing it so far in advance and leaving a rectification so late in the day has allowed this open wound to fester and done the govt untold harm.

They should have simply scrapped it in the Budget and replaced it by increasing tax credits by the same amount, so that all families receiving tax credits would continue to receive the same overall amount, and families who's incomes were in excess of the tax credit threshold would receive nothing. Simple.