New baby for 40% tax payer: Any support?

nannytone_2

Pippin12 wrote: »

People castigate you Nannytone for receiving so much state help - but you claim what you're entitled to, no more no less. You can't blame the OP simply because he had the audacity to question whether he would be entitled to anything.

i didnt attack him. i gace hin the answer ti his question.
when he seemed suprised i merely stated that he and his wife are choosing to have the baby and on a healthy income should be able to manage it without stste help.

then the usual suspects chimed up and compared what i receive in a very megative manner ( thats finem ut's their opinion) and the OP jumped on it too.
again thats fair enough.
but i never 'attacked' as you put it until other posters became personal with their remarks.
( including the OP saying that 'people like me' should be stripped of all benefits. did he mean disabled people that have paid tax for 30 years before being able to continue working or just thoise who receive benefit pg amy kind?)

clemmatis

And having asked for links, I forgot mine and can't find it! Here though is another account, from work by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation

Under 1% of workless households might have two generations who have never worked – about 15,000 households in the UK

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths

I should add that I'm not opposed to qualitative research. I just see no need here for more than links to data.

bloolagoon

clemmatis wrote: »

And having asked for links, I forgot mine and can't find it! Here though is another account, from work by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation



http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths

I should add that I'm not opposed to qualitative research. I just see no need here for more than links to data.

Can you define never worked? To me if someone worked a very short period of time I'd still say they never worked. What is the definition of worked? 1 week, 1 month, more than 50%. That figure seems very low to me, especially when you consider disabilities, I'd have assumed much higher.

clemmatis

Credit-Crunched wrote: »

Conversely, if the or has been a HR payer, should he not be entitled to MORE.

No.

(That was easy.)

clemmatis

bloolagoon wrote: »

Can you define never worked? To me if someone worked a very short period of time I'd still say they never worked. What is the definition of worked? 1 week, 1 month, more than 50%. That figure seems very low to me, especially when you consider disabilities, I'd have assumed much higher.

I'd have to read the reports -- which should be available online -- to answer that. I'll do a bit of work over the weekend. I'm not all that inclined to do it unless Credit-Crunched does, admittedly; but I realise your query's genuine, so I'll do what I can.

(And yes, of course "never worked" may mean never worked at all. And -- in reply to your point about disability -- it's possible only "workless" people who could claim JSA have been counted. Again, I may be able to find out.)

mazza111

bloolagoon wrote: »

Can you define never worked? To me if someone worked a very short period of time I'd still say they never worked. What is the definition of worked? 1 week, 1 month, more than 50%. That figure seems very low to me, especially when you consider disabilities, I'd have assumed much higher.

There are going to be people who have never worked, especially some people with learning difficulties for example.

My dd worked since leaving school, up until she was 19/20 when disability struck, we're hoping that one day she may be able to work part time, for her own sanity, but seriously doubt she will be able to unless there's some medical miracle. Now what she's paid in taxes in those 4 years, won't have been enough to keep her these days. But what's the other option for her?

Georgiegirl256

nannytone wrote: »

and if you read my other posts more thoroughly, you will also see that i worked and paid into the system for 30 years as well.
i was a single parent who worked full time and received BO benefits apart from child benefit.
one of the #handouts' i receive is one that people in work can also receive, regardless of income. even millionaires can claim it.

it is irrelevant what someone pays into the system through taxation as benefits, in the main, are based on income.
insurance is available for people that wish to have children and suffer no financial implications due to maternity leave.
on such a good joint income maybe the OP should have looked into this opryib?

What benefit is that? One that even millionaires can claim? Surely there's something wrong with the system, if people who are well off can claim a handout? Just curious that's all!

JencParker

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

What benefit is that? One that even millionaires can claim? Surely there's something wrong with the system, if people who are well off can claim a handout? Just curious that's all!

Until the beginning of this year, child benefit

mazza111

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

What benefit is that? One that even millionaires can claim? Surely there's something wrong with the system, if people who are well off can claim a handout? Just curious that's all!

DLA. Winter fuel payments. And they used to get CB as stated above

Georgiegirl256

JencParker wrote: »

Until the beginning of this year, child benefit

Ah of course! Just the way it was worded, made it sound like something else, I guess I thought that because I thought nannytones kids were adult now?