What's the fuss about this new benefit caps?

remorseless

lisyloo wrote: »

MIL was 39 when she had my husband. Yes women of 40+ do have kids these days.
It was an example.
There are plenty of reasons people can't rely on family.
Deceased, live in Australia, abusive, not interested,alhohic, in prison, in hospital etc. etc.

It's all very well making ultra harsh rules, but it is the children who will suffer.
In your world we'd have kids being neglected and "ferral" people hanging round the streets nicking stuff.
It's not an option to just throw people on the streets.
You'll have to live in a gated comunity and own a gun.
It's not morally ok, but it wouldn't be pleasant for the wealthy either.

I was afraid of this response... to me this is only opening a flooding gate of excuse that is very difficult to close... well, hopefully, now it is starting to get closed but it'll take a long time.



Why aren't their parents thinking about the children?

Generali

ggb1979 wrote: »

Please tell me you cannot pension yourself into low income brackets to claim benefits? That would just be ridiculous.

I confess to knowing the answer to this but I'll let michaels tell you.

michaels

wotsthat wrote: »

What's your approach to do this?

Do you salary sacrifice down to minimum wage and then manage on this plus the benefits or are you using savings to supplement income?

Going OT but yes, SS to minimum wage and then personal contributions down to benefits cut off level. This puts me 20k net worse off which is 10k less saved and 10k added to mortgage. Net result is about 50k in pension at a cost of 20k net. Other people might do the same at 5k per year extra into pension for 10 years which would cost a higher rate taxpayer 2.9k net PA so my way 'saves' about 9k.

michaels

ggb1979 wrote: »

Please tell me you cannot pension yourself into low income brackets to claim benefits? That would just be ridiculous.

I don't write the rules, perhaps you should do the best for your child by following them to the letter?

ukcarper

michaels wrote: »

Going OT but yes, SS to minimum wage and then personal contributions down to benefits cut off level. This puts me 20k net worse off which is 10k less saved and 10k added to mortgage. Net result is about 50k in pension at a cost of 20k net. Other people might do the same at 5k per year extra into pension for 10 years which would cost a higher rate taxpayer 2.9k net PA so my way 'saves' about 9k.

It really is something Osborne needs to look at saving tax is one think but claiming benefits is something else and this should not be allowed.

remorseless

ukcarper wrote: »

It really is something Osborne needs to look at saving tax is one think but claiming benefits is something else and this should not be allowed.

does he have a twitter account? :A

lisyloo

Why aren't their parents thinking about the children?

What is your suggestion?
Steralising everyone below a certain IQ?
I think benefits for 2 children only is a move in the right direction.

Physics

remorseless wrote: »

Children are a privilege not a right!

A privilege of those wealthy enough to provide for them. But you're now faced with two, very difficult problems. First of all, at what level of wealth or earnings should we allow this privilege? I don't think this is at all sensibly answerable.

Second of all, and most problematic, do you think there is political and public will to legislate around this?

remorseless wrote:

very little, so that the behaviour is not encouraged. Being on benefit should not be looked as a viable option...

Fair enough. What effect do you think this will have on the country, if any? I suspect - though perhaps I am wrong - that people are still going to have kids, whether or not they can afford the lifestyle you or I deem sufficient. People seem to want them.

ukcarper

remorseless wrote: »

does he have a twitter account? :A

Probably but I don't expect he reads it.

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

What is your suggestion?
Steralising everyone below a certain IQ?
I think benefits for 2 children only is a move in the right direction.

I can see this causing problems what if you have 3 children the something bad happens. I think that you should be able to claim for the children you have when you first need to claim and no more.