think tank thinks child benefit change is a farce

The_White_Horse

never has their been a bigger own goal scored by a govt than this crazy mess.

wouldn't it have been simpler and cheaper to just scrap the benefit altogether and give those with children a larger tax code so people can simply keep more of THEIR OWN money?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20912269

what a cretin that osbourne is.

BertieUK

The_White_Horse wrote: »

never has their been a bigger own goal scored by a govt than this crazy mess.

wouldn't it have been simpler and cheaper to just scrap the benefit altogether and give those with children a larger tax code so people can simply keep more of THEIR OWN money?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20912269

what a cretin that osbourne is.

wouldn't it have been simpler and cheaper to just scrap the benefit altogether and give those with children a larger tax code so people can simply keep more of THEIR OWN money?

TWH to you and I yes it would have made more sense but come on that would have been far to simple, they just want to make a mountain out of a molehill, nothing is simple in their political resolves.

grizzly1911

Yes it is a farce.

On t'radio they were saying the marginal tax rate for those losing benefit, between 50 - 60K was 70%+:eek:

Was this the first poorly thought through change?

The fact they didn't have the guts to say "whoops" our error tells you even more.

JimmyTheWig

grizzly1911 wrote: »

On t'radio they were saying the marginal tax rate for those losing benefit, between 50 - 60K was 70%+:eek:

I believe I worked out that for those with 5 children the marginal tax rate would be more than 100%...


But I think the point of all these anamolies is to get the policy talked about. The more that is wrong with it, the more people talk about it. The more people talk about it the more people end up moaning about others being on benefits when they don't need them.

It's all part of an attack on benefits and those on benefits.

The_White_Horse

it's a disgrace. it would have been so easy for them to have limited it to two children per claimant. that would have been easier to adminuster, cheaper to administer AND encourage people not to have massive families they can't afford.

they could have lowered the age it is given to, ie up to 12 only. when the child reached secondary school, then the parent is free to go back to work.

this was the WORST possible solution. It is unfair, it goes against the notion of tax on individuals. It is disgusting that a man who moves in with a woman can be taxed for a benefit she received. It is soviet. It is a disgrace.

I think Osbourne is finished because of this. The only people he had peed off are the ones who might have voted for him. His advisors should be sacked, as should he. Moron of a man.

CLAPTON

david and george will probably use it as an example of their commitment to the simplification of the tax system

michaels

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I believe I worked out that for those with 5 children the marginal tax rate would be more than 100%...


But I think the point of all these anamolies is to get the policy talked about. The more that is wrong with it, the more people talk about it. The more people talk about it the more people end up moaning about others being on benefits when they don't need them.

It's all part of an attack on benefits and those on benefits.

Good - I am not the only person who gets it.

Remember 'we are all in it together'?

This is the only tangible example so it is deliberately unfair and cack-handed in order to generate as much outraged coverage as possible, the more the better according to Tory party strategists. Those impacted will not change who they vote for, those who see 50k as a huge salary will be receiving exactly the message the govt want them to hear. Keep on complaining folks, it is what the govt wants you to do.

ILW

I find it rather amusing all these middle class people without too much to worry about getting all worked up about how unfair it is.

The_White_Horse

Well I for one will never vote tory again whilst Cameron and Osbourne are at the helm. I guess 100,000's of others will do likewise. Meanwhile, all the "working class" will still vote labour, so all they have done is LOSE votes with this imbecilic farce. they will not have gained anything.

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

david and george will probably use it as an example of their commitment to the simplification of the tax system

On NW BBC news he said it showed, that the well off were being targeted with the removal of this benefit, showing that we are all in together.

PaulF81

i want the cb cuts to go ahead. it means once the axe falls further down the class system, the coalition can get the club out and go at it really hard. we a all in it together means the middle classes wont give two hoots once the whingeing starts.