Children Limit:

missbiggles1

missapril75 wrote: »

They were. You qualified because you were a student. The amount might vary. Exceptionally it might be zero but the greater majority were full or close to.
Are you familiar with the word context?

They most certainly weren't.

My dad was a postman and my mum did basic level clerical work and they had quite a substantial amount to pay - I remember them taking out a bank loan to pay for it!

FBaby

I wonder if my grandparents thought "young people, eh..." or did they just recognise that people generally have better things than those that came before and consider it progress.

Are you saying that your parents enjoyed a level of comfort that their parents couldn't afford for themselves, but still expected them to help them paying every day bills. If so, then I guess your parents were precocious in that mindframe!

zagfles

missapril75 wrote: »

They were. You qualified because you were a student. The amount might vary. Exceptionally it might be zero but the greater majority were full or close to.
Are you familiar with the word context?

Are you familar with the ending of the saying "When in a hole..."

missapril75

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I apologise, I missed your reply.:o

No problem

However, I don't think that it was that small a minority as means testing kicked in so much lower than it does now.

In real terms I don't think so. There weren't as many higher earners as now.

Every vacation we had claims from tenant students and every summer we had claims from all students (except those going straight into work). And this in a major student area. We had award notices for every one. Where there was a parental contribution, the Supp Ben assessment was more complicated than when there was none, especially if the contribution was paid by deed of covenant which had tax advantages.

The number of complicated assessments, fortunately, were few and far between. They also made little overall difference because most contributions were just a small part of the calculation.

missapril75

missbiggles1 wrote: »

They most certainly weren't.

My dad was a postman and my mum did basic level clerical work and they had quite a substantial amount to pay - I remember them taking out a bank loan to pay for it!

See my reply about the award notices. I dealt with hundreds of claims every vacation and many more for summer vacations.

missapril75

FBaby wrote: »

Are you saying that your parents enjoyed a level of comfort that their parents couldn't afford for themselves, but still expected them to help them paying every day bills. If so, then I guess your parents were precocious in that mindframe!

Nope.

I'm saying that the "young people wanting everything now" is quite a common view and very likely advanced by people who had things "now" that their own parents didn't have.

I'm quite sure my grandparents with their outside loo, no fridge, and no heating looked on with amusement when my parents with their central heating and nice indoor toilet made comments about "young people, today, wanting fitted carpets and a colour TV " and all with neither expecting support from the other.

I'm fairly sure that those of my generation who grew up with colour TV and stereo music systems complained of those that followed all having computers, mobile phones and iPods, while those that followed with their laptops and tablets are now thinking that the next lot all want smart watches and google glasses.

The mind boggles at what those with smart watches will envy about the next lot.
:rotfl:

tomxlisa

Without this getting too political i just hope that some kind of limit is brought in as I think it is reasonable to have a cap and not for someone to think oh it's okay we can have another child we can afford it we will get extra money, can't see why someone with loads of kids should be better off than someone who works there dogs dangly bits off, there should be a limit on two kids I'd say was fair and then any extra kids you want if you can't afford it do something about it.

[Deleted User]

I'd support a limit of one child per adult. So a couple having two kids for the first time get full state support, but one person who goes around having kids by multiple different partners as a career doesn't get anything beyond child #1.

wiltsguy_2

IMO it's all getting out of hand. People are able to choose having kids as a career move to get free cash. Im sick of hearing the phrase 'the goverment can't tell me how many kids i can or can't have'... No one is telling anybody they cant have kids, just that if you do-pay for them yourself-as they are your kids after all.

CB should be capped to two children.

missapril75

missapril75 wrote: »

The mind boggles at what those with smart watches will envy about the next lot.

Virtual work where you plug yourself into a device that simulates the work commute and day at the office; Mind transfer to some sort of machine that performs various tasks under your control; Virtual attendance at the job centre for an appointment with a virtual advisor....