Child Benefit Farce

Loughton_Monkey

The_White_Horse wrote: »

but yet when you are old and have no kids to help look after you, you will expect other people's kids to look after you (in respect of their taxes and their professional expertise). people like you are extremely short sighted.

I'm also childless and don't see it that way!

Firstly, the concept of children physically devoting their time to look after elderly parents of course happens, but is rarer than you might think.

Secondly, if/when either of us needs "care" by others, we will have to pay for it. In full. Are you suggesting that if I pay £1,000 a week to a BUPA home that recruits 'young' people with a degree of professional experience [that I hope they would have], that this transaction is in any way shady? Or Scrounging? Or indeed wrong in any way?

Or would you prefer us to rot away in our own homes, keep our money, and let the local care home sack all its staff because of lack of business?

For me to go into such a care home is "robbing" the inheritance to nieces/nephews, but providing employment to carers and BUPA, both of whom, I assume, pay tax. So what are you griping about?

John_Pierpoint

Hi Loughton,

When my mum needed, what turned out to be 4 years care, following a stroke.
We were given a glossy brochure (it was the year 2000). The more top of the range care home (more Travel Inn than Travel Lodge) was charging £600 per week in Surrey/S.W.London, they had a similar branch on Canvey Island charging £350+ and the branch, near my sister in S!!!!horpe, was "only" £250 per week, but it was round the back of a scrap yard.

When it was mum's brother's turn to go, he lived about 2 miles from his sister, the NHS funded him under CHC in a BUPA nursing home in the cheapest of about 70 rooms. The posh rooms on the other side of the corridor, with patio doors giving out onto a little balcony, overlooking the garden and lake, were being charged out at £1,100 a week.

John

PS That would be S-see-you-next-Tuesday-Thorpe

JonnyBravo

I love that the white horse has finally revealed himself to be hooked on benefits (well, one particular benefit).
It was a daft alter ego anyway but at least it always had consistency.
Consistency now gone he is left whining about his "entitlement".
Love it.

dori2o

Can I nominate this topic for 'Funniest Topic of the Year'?
and this

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the real issue, apart from the clear stupidity and unfairness, is the fact that one person is being taxed for another person's benefits. It is MADNESS. if you want to treat families as a unit for tax, then fine - do it - but do it properly. not this way, so you extort more tax out but don't reciprocate in terms of tax allowance. It is one of the biggest civil liberties I have EVER seen. The whole system just ridden rough shod over, to claw back a pathetic bit of tax. Disgraceful. They should be imprisoned for this.

for funniest post of the year?

Zero_Sum

shop-to-drop wrote: »

Do you not actually read and think about what is written. 1 person in the household has a large income the other members have no income at all and so this one income has to support all of them. This household is no where near the top 10% probably closer to the bottom 10%.

don't talk stupid. The median household income is around £35k. If you're a sole earner paying 40% tax, you're holsehold income will still easily be in the top 30-40%

Zero_Sum

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Let's have a lefty example

Gay man does not get a job because he is gay. Lefty: "that is so, like totally unfair man, that is like, so not on. You have done nothing wrong, you were born this way. this is a disgrace"

Family with one earner on 60K and three kids loses benefits and may struggle. Family on 98k with one kid collects full amount. Person on 60k questions the fairness of this policy. Lefty: whhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa iwant I want, just because you pay loads of tax doesn't mean you are entitled to ever see 1penny of it back, you shameless fool. don't you realise some people earn less than you?? whaaaaaaa whaaaaaaa"

What is the difference? the imbecile lefty has decreed that the second form of discrimination is fine. Because it is.

Thanks lefty.

Its not in the slightest similar, you're having a total breakdown here.

Yes its an unfair system, but its being done this way as its cost effective (this is the actions of the right, not the left). But the amount of people who'll gain from this will be minimal, which why it was upped from the 40% tax payers to £50k, to reduce the number of people who'll unfairly gain.

Zero_Sum

Article on the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20146596

We currently receive £2,260 a year, we are not on the breadline but it is the equivalent of paying for a family holiday.

Its unbelievable the sense of entitlment some people have.
I don't see why as an average earning childless tax payer, I should pay for a much better off family to go on holiday.

CLAPTON

Zero_Sum wrote: »

Article on the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20146596


Its unbelievable the sense of entitlment some people have.
I don't see why as an average earning childless tax payer, I should pay for a much better off family to go on holiday.

you don't pay for their holiday

as they pay much more tax than you, they are paying for your holiday

GeorgeHowell

Zero_Sum wrote: »

Article on the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20146596


Its unbelievable the sense of entitlment some people have.
I don't see why as an average earning childless tax payer, I should pay for a much better off family to go on holiday.

That's true. But let's not forget that the sense of entitlement goes right across the board in this country. As well as the example quoted, there are the very wealthy who think they are entitled not too pay too high a rate of tax by various ways and means, and there is the underclass who think they are entitled not to work at all but to still enjoy a decent standard of living.

This is essentially a lazy, something-for-nothing, dog-in-a manger country. There are of course many many exceptions to that accusation, but nevertheless that is the prevailing culture. It's plagued us ever since WWII, and probably before that,

Zero_Sum

CLAPTON wrote: »

you don't pay for their holiday

as they pay much more tax than you, they are paying for your holiday

How exactly?