Stay at home parents?

butterflymum

Whoops - sorry for the triplicate post - glitch in system (or in me!).

ANNIEHAHA

thanks for this I have signed it I think this is THE most important job anyone will do
We also live on a tight budget but I would rather do this then not see them before and after school
It just seems a joke that we get penalised for wanting to look after our own kids!

robindunne1

CIS wrote:

It doesn't matter if your poor or a millionaire, if you live by yourself you can get it.

My point is that people who do not live by themselves can get it if they are on a low income. Below is taken from the Leeds City Council website, people who qualify for the discount are:

Students and young people:

18 or 19-year-olds that you are claiming child benefit for;
students under 20 in further education on recognised courses (for example, A-levels, BTEC);
18 or 19-year-olds who left school or college after 30 April, for the period between the end of their course and the following 1 November;
(To claim any of the discounts listed above, please complete the Young Person Discount claim form.)

full-time students or student nurses;
Youth Training trainees and apprentices;
non-British spouses of full-time students.

Elderly and disabled people:

people who live with and care for a disabled person who is not their spouse, partner or child under 18.
people living in residential care homes, nursing homes or mental nursing homes.
people who are severely mentally impaired and receive certain benefits.
long-term patients in hospital.
Others:

people in prison (except those in prison for not paying council tax or a fine)
people staying in certain hostels and night shelters
members of religious communities (such as monks or nuns)
members of visiting forces or international headquarters and defence organisations
Reduction for disabilities
You may be able to get a reduction in your Council Tax if a disabled person lives at your address and he or she uses a wheelchair indoors, or if the property has;

an additional bathroom or kitchen especially for the disabled person; or
another room used mainly to meet the disabled person’s special needs.
Even if your property is in Band A (the lowest band) you may still get a reduction.

Who doesn’t have to pay?
Some properties are exempt from council tax. The exemptions below are for occupied properties, and they last for as long as the property meets the description.

Hall of residence for students.
Property where all the residents are full-time students and/or student nurses.
UK armed forces accommodation.
Visiting forces accommodation.
UK armed forces accommodation.
Visiting forces accommodation.
Property where all the residents are under 18 years old.
Property where all the residents are severely mentally impaired and would have to pay the council tax if this exemption did not exist.
Property where all the residents are diplomats.
Domestic property which is part of another domestic property, and the person living in it is a dependent relative of a person living in the main property.

---

Therefore it is more tax efficient for my wife to commit a crime and go to prison than look after her own children.

Why do this government see a stay at home parent as a non person? Every other person in society is given at least some recognition by the state:

- Student - student loans and education
- Carer - carers allowance
- Disabled - disability allowance
- Employed - salary and a tax allowance that can be used
- Jobless - job seekers allowance
- Pensioner - state pension

But a full time carer for their own children is not recognised, ignored by the state and expected to pay tax without any income. This constant attack on the basic family unit by this Labout government ensures that for me at least I will not be voting for them again.

Wonder why there is a such a social meltdown in this country???

culpepper

great idea.
Ive sent it to OH at work so a few more names will probably be added.
I stayed home with mine because of the exact same reasons.I was not going to pay for someone elses values and discipline of my kids while I went out and worked for the privelidge.
OH has to pay my council tax alongside his.

I really do agree that some of the social problems today are caused because kids dont have a homelife.

isitenough

Excellent post robindunne1. I've signed it and think it's an excellent point. I gave up work after 9 years to have our first child, mainly as paying for childcare took more than half my wages so wasn't worth it. This idea of the working partner being able to claim it would make a huge difference to us.
I take my hat off to working parents as I had a temporary job last year at a Children's Nursery and it was hell to juggle everything!

full-time-mum

culpepper wrote:

I really do agree that some of the social problems today are caused because kids dont have a homelife.

Hear, Hear.

For this very reason, I am supporting the petition. Our society is becoming disjointed what with

• ease of divorce
• lack of discipline/respect
• the "its my right/me me me" culture
• ethinicity (not that this is all bad)/lack of racial integration

so I think that it is about time to encourage marriage and stable home life even if only in a small way. Re-instating some of the tax breaks for married couples would send out a strong message from government.

However, I don't think that this measure is really supporting us non-entity full-time-mums(parents). On one hand, society moans that our youth is becoming delinquent and that parents should take more responsibility but on the other, the government is pushing parents into work by supporting childcare for those who want to work but not supporting the financial difficulties encountered by wanting to stay at home and having to live on a single wage.

Don't get me wrong, I know that if I was to fall below a certain threshold then the state would come to my rescue, its just that there are a lot of families who want to raise their families themselves and are just above that threshold and struggling. Even a small amount per month would make a huge difference to us and some state support would send the message that raising the next generation is important to society as a whole.

exil

Well that was the point I was making - the petition ISN'T for an allowance for stay-at-home parents, but for a married persons allowance - which would also be paid to parents who were BOTH working.

A couple of points

- everyone here seems to have had something to gain from the proposal. If only those who will benefit support it, it is doomed. Most people are (a) single (b) divorced (c) married but both working (d) have no children, or children already grown up. To say - I support this proposal and by a strange coincidence it will benefit me personally - is not going to convince many.

In particular, I know singles, divorcees and childless couples already resent the tax advantages given to couples with kids, not to mention paternity leave, being able to persuade the boss to let them work flexible hours, and so on.

- the reality of the situation is that in general, wealthy people are more likely to make the decision for a parent to stay at home. So - we need to have some "cap" on the allowance otherwise the majority of the money will go to those who don't need it

robindunne1

exil wrote:

Well that was the point I was making - the petition ISN'T for an allowance for stay-at-home parents, but for a married persons allowance - which would also be paid to parents who were BOTH working.

A couple of points

- everyone here seems to have had something to gain from the proposal. If only those who will benefit support it, it is doomed. Most people are (a) single (b) divorced (c) married but both working (d) have no children, or children already grown up. To say - I support this proposal and by a strange coincidence it will benefit me personally - is not going to convince many.

In particular, I know singles, divorcees and childless couples already resent the tax advantages given to couples with kids, not to mention paternity leave, being able to persuade the boss to let them work flexible hours, and so on.

- the reality of the situation is that in general, wealthy people are more likely to make the decision for a parent to stay at home. So - we need to have some "cap" on the allowance otherwise the majority of the money will go to those who don't need it

The person who set up the petition titled it wrongly. If you read the detail behind it he sets out that the tax allowance should go to parents with caring responsibility for children.

As far as the economics goes - it is a no brainer. Child care tax credits pay up to 80% of child care costs (not to mention the associated administration costs of running the CTC scheme). The loss to the tax payer of transfering an allowance to a working spouse is crica £40 a week - a lot less than the burden suffered by the state for child care costs.

The issue here goes a lot further than a purely financial one. All the current "family" friendly policies this Labour government have initiated focus on the number of children in the family - not on the way the child is looked after. The answer they have is to throw billions of pounds at the consequencies of social breakdown to the point that it becomes an incentive for parents to lead lives so they can benefit from this money.

Parents live apart as it is more financially beneficial to be in different households - living together means less tax credits and other means tested benefits. A mother calls herself a single parent as it entitles her to more money and less of a compulsion from the state to find a job. People work less as they know less salary will be off set by increases in tax credits.... etc.... etc....

A strong family is the bedrock of society. Labour policy does not recognise this and penalises those who work hard and look after there own children by taxing them in a higher proportion.

The assumption that those who make the sacrifice are generally better of is wrong. The extra £40 a week that it will bring in would make a world of difference to the majority of families I know. The maths is simple - one income means less money coming so give the family a tax break.

Anyway, enough of all this political posturing. We only have to look at the report by UNICEF to know Labour social policy has failed children. Any child in care would love to have stable family where both the mother and father were there to care for them. BUT LABOUR POLICY SIMPLY DISCOURAGES PARENTS FROM DOING SO.

exil

Was it really necessary to turn this into a party political issue? Tory by any chance?

The social trends we are talking about have been in existence for many decades, and have occurred in all western countries. They didn't suddenly appear since Blair came to power.

I'm not prepared to say that women should be disbarred from following a career if they have children. Career breaks - perhaps - but the way to encourage this is to make it easier to get back into the workforce after taking time off for child care, making part time work easier and so on not fiddling with tax allowances.

The days when a woman would resign from work on her wedding day, expecting to keep house for the rest of her days are dead and gone, and despite the problems we're talking about, it's good riddance to those days in my opinion.

LJM

excellent post