Woodsinho Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Oxford United: Adam Chapman plays with burnt nipple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Oxford United: Adam Chapman plays with burnt nippleWhat a hero, pin a medal to his chest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/2994273 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teabags Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2225987/Angela-Epsteins-furious-attack-Government-My-family-losing-child-benefit-just-earning-100k.htmlIn our house, that means our benefit payments will soon be no more than a childhood memory since my salary hovers around £50,000 and my husband’s is significantly more.No longer eligible for the monthly payments, we will be left with the invidious choice of either giving it up completely or continuing to take the benefit and then having it clawed back from us when we fill in our tax forms for the financial year.I understand that we are going through a time of great financial difficulty in this country and that sacrifices must be made to get us back on track.But why should my children lose out, simply because their parents have had the temerity to work hard and earn a good living? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 I'm sorry but if both parents are earning over £50,000 a year, as in this example, I don't see why they should be entitled to child benefit of £20 a week (an extra £13 for every other child after the first). In the course of a year it amounts to just over a grand for one child, which is what they probably get in 6 months for an allowance at the public school they attend. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 I'm sorry but if both parents are earning over £50,000 a year, as in this example, I don't see why they should be entitled to child benefit of £20 a week (an extra £13 for every other child after the first). In the course of a year it amounts to just over a grand for one child, which is what they probably get in 6 months for an allowance at the public school they attend.It's principle, innit?Aside from all emotional arguments, on a practical level, junking child benefit is a ludicrous move. Under the new rules, two breadwinning parents who each earn £49,000 will keep all of their child benefit. But a couple, in which one person earns £60,000, lose all of theirs.Two parents earning £49k each is a combined £98k. One parent earning £60k and the other not working is a combined £60k. Yet couple '1' still retain child benefits, despite earning more.The argument is that it has never been a means tested benefit before (rightly or wrongly), and now that it is, the test is flawed.Who's to say that a grand a year for one child doesn't help a family earning £60k a year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stroopy121 Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 Who's to say that a grand a year for one child doesn't help a family earning £60k a year?If I were pulling in £60k a year, and be offered a £1,000 per year pay rise, I sure as fuck wouldn't think to myself "Oooh, now I can afford to raise a child!"Giving out benefits to a family who earn more than three times the minimum wage is fucking stupid, if you ask me.xx 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kybosh Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 child benefit should be scrapped completely , it was only introduced after WW2 to encourage people to have kids in order to bring the tax paying population back up to pre-war numbers.if you want kids , pay for them yourself 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 For the record, I totally agree that child benefit is a stupid thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teabags Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 It's principle, innit?Two parents earning £49k each is a combined £98k. One parent earning £60k and the other not working is a combined £60k. Yet couple '1' still retain child benefits, despite earning more.The argument is that it has never been a means tested benefit before (rightly or wrongly), and now that it is, the test is flawed.Who's to say that a grand a year for one child doesn't help a family earning £60k a year?While that example is stupid, and shows a very flawed system, neither should fucking need the child benefit. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stroopy121 Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 TBH any benefit system that has a yes/no cutoff point in salary is a fucking dumb idea. Even IF the system HAS to remain in place, it should be a gradual roll off where as your salary goes up, your benefits decrease.And not one fucking penny should be given to families who have two parents earning minimum wage, or one parent earning 2x minimum wage. And minimum fucking wage should be enough to realistically live on.Overly simplistic view, maybe, but it makes fucking sense doesn't it??xx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teabags Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 I'd say it should be a bit higher than minimum wage. But it shouldn't be as high as £50,000 or anywhere fucking near it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaaakkkeee Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 £1000 a year is a lot of main presents though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 £1000 a year is a lot of main presents though.Child benefit is not for main presents, just like it's not for fags, drugs, booze and scratch cards 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaaakkkeee Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 Child benefit is not for main presents, just like it's not for fags, drugs, booze and scratch cardsA neighbour of mine had to get a jacket gifted to her by a mutual friend due to the fact her mum had spent all the benefits that was supposed to go on school clothes and stuff. Such a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Gold Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 Mass sterilisation is the only way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Jerk Posted November 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 And minimum fucking wage should be enough to realistically live onI, one thousand percent, disagree. Minimum wage is grim. I got a huge bollock of a paycut last year when I was a temp, from £9 per hour to £6.50. I don't even know if that is mimimum wage, but I don't think it is very far off. It crippled me. I had to sell beloved possessions like guitars and amps so I at least had something to fall back on if needed, as I didn't like living so close to the edge. I could just about afford to feed myself, and that's it. Bring more mouths to feed into the equation and it becomes even more of a struggle. I'd probably need a bigger place, so that's a much higher rent, more food and clothes to buy. I'd probably be less grippy with the heating too, so the young 'uns didn't get ill. Hypothetically, me and my missus work full time minimum wage jobs. Who's gonna take and pick up the kids from school and nursery, and look after them during half term if we're both working 8-5? Childcare costs a bomb. Minimum wage doesn't come close to covering that sort of stuff. Even if it did, that would be a miserable and difficult life, and definitely not a life I would want to give to a child.Then again, to me there is a difference between 'living' and 'surviving'. Living wage to wage, scraping costs so you don't lose your home or get hospitalised from malnourishment certainly isn't living.I am not against child benefit, but I'm sure alot of parents just see it as pocket money and not an allowance to buy clothes for their kids, or pay for school trips and all that stuff. It's shitty irresponsible parents I'm against. Can't we just BURN THEM ALL and send their orphan children into the navy, to protect our seas from pirates? I don't know where I'm going with this anymore. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 I, one thousand percent, disagree. Minimum wage is grim. I read it as though that was his point...that minimum wage should be increased and brought into line with the true cost of living rather than Stroop saying that he thought the current min wage sufficiently covered it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kybosh Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 I think he meant minimum wage should be higher so it is enough to live on.......as above beat me to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 As an aside, that would probably help encourage people to work rather than popping out six kids to maintain a life from child benefit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Jerk Posted November 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 if that's what he did mean, and I mis-read his point, then that's all good. If he means that £6.19 per hour (I looked it up) is enough to raise a family on, then I'm going to wait for him outside where he works and give him a roughing up, for having different opinions to me, the KNOB! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 My new job pays £5.48 an hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scootray Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 That's more than the national minimum wage for your age group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 That's more than the national minimum wage for your age group....Oh man, so it is. Holy shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scootray Posted November 1, 2012 Report Share Posted November 1, 2012 What job did you get anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.