Benefits for new parents

midnight_express

An unemployed 24 year old childless person gets £55 a week benefit to live on. A couple over 25 without children get £111 in JSA. An employed couple with 3 kids with an earned income £1500 a month get £200 a week in benefits. It would make more sense to pay people not to have children or to pay all benefits per adult.

zagfles

midnight_express wrote: »

To get a state pension you have to pay NI for 30 years.

Or if you've paid no NI you can get pension credit which is worth more than the state pension. Either way, other peoples' children will be paying for it.

That's why all workers subsidise children, because in a generation's time the roles will be reversed and the children will become the workers (ie main taxpayers) while the workers become pensioners. Something the "child free" seem to forget. As well as the subsidy they themselves got as children.

zagfles

Russe11 wrote: »

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/incometax/married-allow.htm

Try actually reading the link you posted. The OPs wife is pregnant, do you really think either of them is over 77 years old :rotfl:

Russe11

zagfles wrote: »

Try actually reading the link you posted. The OPs wife is pregnant, do you really think either of them is over 77 years old :rotfl:

i'm not ageist.

Russe11

midnight_express wrote: »

An unemployed 24 year old childless person gets £55 a week benefit to live on. A couple over 25 without children get £111 in JSA. An employed couple with 3 kids with an earned income £1500 a month get £200 a week in benefits. It would make more sense to pay people not to have children or to pay all benefits per adult.

All part of the ponzi scheme

Mumto3cheekymonkeys

And with regards to water! I have an underground water tank that collects rain water and filters it for use in my house!

MissMoneypenny

zagfles wrote: »

Or if you've paid no NI you can get pension credit which is worth more than the state pension. Either way, other peoples' children will be paying for it.

Why do some welfare claimants always use that as a reason to give them money for the children they decided to have, but want the welfare state to pay for?

Some of those "other peoples' children" will also become muggers, murderers, burglars; welfare claimants; need state welfare payments for the children they bring into the world, just as their parents did to raise them.

We need to limit the number of children per family that the welfare state will give parents money for (or better still, feed the children and don't give the parents any of the childs welfare money) and raise the pension age (have already raised that to 68 and can raise it higher).

Mumto3cheekymonkeys

Is that not why they have introduced a benefit cap?

MissMoneypenny

Mumto3cheekymonkeys wrote: »

Is that not why they have introduced a benefit cap?

There is no limit to the number of children the parents can claim money from the welfare state for, with the welfare cap.

I'm still not convinced that the money given these parents to help their children out of poverty, gets spent on their children. I would rather the childs welfare payments (tax credits and child benefit) was spend directly on these children through council run schemes and that none of this money is given to their parents.

Mumto3cheekymonkeys

Ellejmorgan wrote: »

You have property, earn a good wage, slate people who can't work then want benefits...have I got that right...??

No I dont slate people who cant work just those who choose not to! My cousin had a very good job, she lost it had no luck finding another in that sector so guess what she does now! she has 2 small cleaning job and works as a part time receptionist! I get handouts because we are on a low income and the handouts top that up to what the government think is a reasonable amount to live off.