our income... entitled to anything?

MissMoneypenny

FBaby wrote: »

It was the position for most parents whose children were at nursery before the age of 2. Two similar average income coming in, too high to get much subsidising for their childcare costs, but too low individually for one to give up work.

Before Tax Credits were invented (just a decade ago) there was no asking the welfare state for money towards our childcare costs. No free nursery places either for pre school age children (unless the local council paid for them).

Can you imagine the fuss some parents would kick up now if they were told to pay for all their own childcare? They might have to go without Sky, the latest phone; their second car; a holiday.

I'm sure those type of parents would rather we paid for all their childcare. They would probably want us to give birth to their children if we could, to save them doing that too!

FBaby

Can you imagine the fuss some parents would kick up now if they were told to pay for all their own childcare?

Could it be that because of the introduction of tax credits, childcare fees doubled if not more. In my region it is anything between £30 to £50 a day for a baby. Who can afford this without help from tax credits? Not many.

DorsetGirl_2

Dunroamin wrote: »

When your daughter was at school there was no such thing as A* at A level, neither is it possible to apply to both Oxford and Cambridge on the same application.

Nearly all Oxbridge candidates have A grades at A level so obviously some won't get places, even if the rest of your information is accurate....

Quite right.

If it is a true story, you need to bear in mind Nanny that there is also a lot of weight given to the interview, and a candidates extra curricular activities. Its not just about grades.

M0ney

sh1305 wrote: »

I don't get your problem at all. Many would love to have that level of income without state assistance.

You should be grateful that you have that amount of money comming in. Someone on that level of income doesn't "need" child benefits.

I don't think I said that I needed benefits, I don't think I even said that I wanted benefits, the point I was making is that there is far more deducted from my household simply because I am the sole earner of around £43,000 when compared to a couple whose combined income was £43,000 which I feel is unfair.


People whose incomes are in the £40ks are not rich people but yet a small portion of our income attracts a 42% deduction as does anything in addition when there is extra overtime. It's the money that they're taking away that I object to it's not that I want any handouts.


That said, I do recognise that I have an income that a lot of people would aspire to but that doesn't change the basis of what I was saying.

northerntwo1

M0ney wrote: »

I don't think I said that I needed benefits, I don't think I even said that I wanted benefits, the point I was making is that there is far more deducted from my household simply because I am the sole earner of around £43,000 when compared to a couple who's combined income was £43,000 which I feel is unfair.


People who's incomes are in the £40ks are not rich people but yet a small portion of our income attracts a 42% deduction as does anything in addition when there is extra overtime. It's the money that they're taking away that I object to it's not that I want any handouts.


That said, I do recognise that I have an income that a lot of people would aspire to but that doesn't change the basis of what I was saying.

If their children are young they'll also pay childcare and work expenses. It can virtually balance each other whilst weans are small.

zagfles

M0ney wrote: »

I don't think I said that I needed benefits, I don't think I even said that I wanted benefits, the point I was making is that there is far more deducted from my household simply because I am the sole earner of around £43,000 when compared to a couple who's combined income was £43,000 which I feel is unfair.


People who's incomes are in the £40ks are not rich people but yet a small portion of our income attracts a 42% deduction as does anything in addition when there is extra overtime. It's the money that they're taking away that I object to it's not that I want any handouts.


That said, I do recognise that I have an income that a lot of people would aspire to but that doesn't change the basis of what I was saying.

Yes £43k to support a family is not a high income. In most countries you'd get much higher tax allowances than here and so pay far less tax. Some people seem to have an objection to people getting "handouts" in the form of payable benefits but not to getting handouts in the form of tax allowances worth about the same! Go figure...