Government considering cap on child benefits

A

amy_b

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 October 2010
Messages
807
Visit site
from radio 2 news this morning -
'‎the government is considering a cap on child benefits. the cap will be four children'
....FOUR KIDS?!!!!!!! :eek:
im handing my notice in, my reason will be 'to pursue a career in child bearing!!'
RIDICULOUS!!! :mad:
 
why is 4 rediculous? i have 3 (not all through choice!)

i do however agree that the child benefit requires an overhall, cap on number of kids paying out OK, household salary limit too IMO (have freinds who both earn over £64k a year & get CB for their 2 kids on top)
 
absolutely NO problem with people having four kids! have as many as you like! but people that cant afford to pay for the kid/s they have having up to four subsidised by the government, Im not such a fan of! I think a cap at 2 is fair?!
thats mental about the people you know being paid CB!!
 
i know wrong isnt it, CB is paid out on every child at present regardless of familys income. i wonder some months how we manage 3 but we do & without the NEED to rely on CB ect... that goes into the account for school trips/hobbys/MORE shoes, all the nicer things that the kid might want to do.

sorry if i came across harsh in my reply above but ive had someone have a go a me for having 3 kids under 5 (i tend to get defensive now) :)
 
mental! I agree with you, there should be a cap on parents income aswel! :confused:
thats a better way of using it IMO rather than nice new clothes or nights out that the rest of us cant afford!
and sod the people that have a go at you. ;)
 
In my humble opinion it isn't that benefits are too high, they are not, it is that wages are too low until we can fix that we're going to get issues like this all the time.

It seem to me that for some (usually poor and with no support from a man) women it really is a wise career move to decide to breed, and in order to make that pay enough to do more than subsist you need to have at least 3 kids, anything below that is not lucrative enough, even allowing for the housing benefit and council tax benefit. I always wonder if the women having the big families consider it in those terms or if they just keep having kids because they like having big families.

eta- I am only referring to single women not in work, although family tax credit is also nothing to be sneezed at
 
Last edited:
skint1 said:
In my humble opinion it isn't that benefits are too high, they are not, it is that wages are too low until we can fix that we're going to get issues like this all the time.

It seem to me that for some (usually poor and with no support from a man) women it really is a wise career move to decide to breed, and in order to make that pay enough to do more than subsist you need to have at least 3 kids, anything below that is not lucrative enough, even allowing for the housing benefit and council tax benefit. I always wonder if the women having the big families consider it in those terms or if they just keep having kids because they like having big families.

eta- I am only referring to single women not in work, although family tax credit is also nothing to be sneezed at
Click to expand...


If you are well off, or dog poor you are in a better position in this world. If we earned pennies we would get our rent paid and CT paid and be left with more than we are after we are paid. If we were paid more we woul dbe able to not live in a **** hole. but we are in the middle bracket. We do not earn enough to buy a house - max mortgage we could get is £120k, up here that gets us a 1 bed flat, just - but too much for any help (not that we really need it) but we are surviving, not living. My best chance at owning a house is if my parents pass, and so I can see myself in the next 20-30 years leaving employment to nurse them.

So there is a chance that financially we will not be able to have a second child, and whilst not a necessity, it has started to upset me as there are only 4 older kids at LO nursery with no siblings, and she keeps asking me where her sister is, and can x be her sister and going on that she wants a sister. I really want ot have another,but that will mean we will be down £700 a month.........but still earning too much for any help and will possibly put ourselves into poverty.................

We are right in the middle .
 
If you cannot afford kids, why have them!? nothing wrong with child benefits but when people have waaaay to many kids and complain they cant afford them you just think "maybe you should have thought it through before you jumped into bed with your new lad".

and we have a population problem, too many people. put a limit on how many kids you have for ONE generation and you will quarter if not half the population.
 
wewillshowyou said:
If you cannot afford kids, why have them!? nothing wrong with child benefits but when people have waaaay to many kids and complain they cant afford them you just think "maybe you should have thought it through before you jumped into bed with your new lad".

and we have a population problem, too many people. put a limit on how many kids you have for ONE generation and you will quarter if not half the population.
Click to expand...

And how will that happen?

Forced abortion? Murdering excess babies? Enforced sterilisation?

What about rape victims? IVF mothers who have multiple births? Twins?

Child benefit is for everyone not just for the chav babyfarms. I've always thought it should be means tested and limited. If they decide to go ahead with capping it at 4, I'm in full agreeance to that.
 
Last edited:
I will admit to not knowing much about this, but I understood that things such as child benefit were taken into account when people are paid other benefits.

Surely that will mean if you are living on benefits a reduction in child benefit will not make any difference as other benefits will be increased.

If thats true then the only people to suffer will be those who are working. The higher income people who can actually afford that many kids will hardly notice. The only ones to really suffer will be the ones on lower wages who actually bother to work rather than live on benefits.

If all of the above is right, please tell me if its not, would that be yet another incentive not to bother getting a job.
 
Cap to two apart from special circumstances eg twins as plenty of ways of stopping having kids, this country has a large enough population anyway.
 
four is too many, cap it at 2 why should we subsidise breeding!!! the worlds and this countrys population is rapidly becoming unsustanable, and maybe we should only allow child benifits for people who dont claim other benifits and or have a job???? that would help working people
and not the feckless underclass.......
 
OK. And now from the other side of the coin.

I am a single parent bringing my child up on my own - I am in the higher tax bracket. This means in 2013 I will lose the child benefit of around £80 a month.

This is the same child benefit that EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THIS BOARD WHO LIVED IN ENGLAND AS A CHILD got. Irrespective of whether your parents needed it financially or not - it was just given to them. You don't even have to apply for it - once your birth was registered your parents just got the money. So for those of you who say that it should be removed from those who didn't need it, and whose parents were in the higher tax bracket - would you consider paying it back to the government now?

I took out a mortgage taking that £80 into consideration. I also assumed (wrongly) that my salary would increase in line with other costs - it hasn't (the same as many others) - so the removal of that £80 is actually going to make quite a difference to me and many other single parents who earn just into the higher rate tax bracket.

Finally. If two people living together earn slightly under the cap (currently around £42,000) they can earn £84,000 and still receive child benefit.

I can (as a single parent) earn, £43,000 and LOSE the child benefit.

Oh - one more thing. When you have two parents, you need far fewer external child care facilities. If one parent can't do pick up, then the other usually can. You don't have to pay for the child to stay at school or go to another carer whilst you are at work busy earning your higher rate tax money. So the single parent who is a higher rate tax payer is knocked yet again.

I can live with the benefit being removed, PROVIDING families who go way over the £42k limit don't get it either.



How is that fair?

This whole discussion makes me mad to boiling point

And as far as having four children or more - good luck to you!!!!! It is not even a matter of cost, it is more a matter of time!!!
 
I can understand why they want to cap ctc and cb after 4 kids,as a lot of people do take advantage.
I know someone who has 8 kids and neither of the parents work,they have a better life than most people I know who are working.They dont pay rent/council tax.
I dont work but my hubby does and we cannot afford to buy our own property.
I do get mad at these people who wont work and keep having loads of kids and the goverment gives them loads of money. Grrrrrrrrrrrr
 
The whole pointn of child benefit was that it was paid, in cash, directly to the mother. Even in well families, where the husband might be earning a lot, it didn't mean that he was giving his wife a lot of housekeeping money (this was back in the days when a mother didn't necessarily have to keep working after having a baby). It was not means tested as it was considered not cost-effective, simpler and cheaper just to give it to every mother.
 
If You Cannot Feed Them Dont Breed Them.Iit seems a Career move a rake of Brats by Numerous fathers = House furniture and Benefits for Life this is the whole problem with this Country through taxation Penalise those that will Work and give the money to those that wont work:mad::mad::mad:
 
I think we are very lucky in this country, friend of mine now lives in South Africa (I know her choice she married a South African) and they have just had a baby, she gets NO benefits, had to pay for the bed in the hospital, injections etc. Sometimes we do rather take for granted the benefits, NHS etc in this country
 
FMM said:
OK. And now from the other side of the coin.

I am a single parent bringing my child up on my own - I am in the higher tax bracket. This means in 2013 I will lose the child benefit of around £80 a month.

This is the same child benefit that EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THIS BOARD WHO LIVED IN ENGLAND AS A CHILD got. Irrespective of whether your parents needed it financially or not - it was just given to them. You don't even have to apply for it - once your birth was registered your parents just got the money. So for those of you who say that it should be removed from those who didn't need it, and whose parents were in the higher tax bracket - would you consider paying it back to the government now?

I took out a mortgage taking that £80 into consideration. I also assumed (wrongly) that my salary would increase in line with other costs - it hasn't (the same as many others) - so the removal of that £80 is actually going to make quite a difference to me and many other single parents who earn just into the higher rate tax bracket.

Finally. If two people living together earn slightly under the cap (currently around £42,000) they can earn £84,000 and still receive child benefit.

I can (as a single parent) earn, £43,000 and LOSE the child benefit.

Oh - one more thing. When you have two parents, you need far fewer external child care facilities. If one parent can't do pick up, then the other usually can. You don't have to pay for the child to stay at school or go to another carer whilst you are at work busy earning your higher rate tax money. So the single parent who is a higher rate tax payer is knocked yet again.

I can live with the benefit being removed, PROVIDING families who go way over the £42k limit don't get it either.



How is that fair?

This whole discussion makes me mad to boiling point

And as far as having four children or more - good luck to you!!!!! It is not even a matter of cost, it is more a matter of time!!!
Click to expand...

Hey if it were up to me I would set the cap a lot higher than that, and I'd do it on household rather than individual income. I was a single parent with one child myself (but earning around £19k) always earned too much to get much in the way of Family Tax Credit as when my daughter was young they didn't take childcare into account at all, so the child benefit was a real life saver to me. My daughter is 20 now and I still miss it, but I would cap it at a much lower point than 4 children.
 
If the world is over-crowded, why are we paying people to have children? As for being in the "higher tax bracket" and moaning about the loss of BENEFITS!!! I earn less than 20k, get nothing by way of benefits and pay the taxes that give you those benefits!
Oh - and I had one child as I could'nt afford any more and to suggest paying back benefits received 15 years ago is simply insulting.
 
The increase in the population in this country and the developing world is due to an ageing population.

If we, as a nation, stop having children who is going to be paying taxes in 20 - 30 years time? Where will our state pension payments come from? Remember that the taxes we are paying now go toward the pension payments of people who are retired now. Our taxes dont get 'saved' for us to use later. Less children, more old people, no money. Maybe we should be encouraging proper retirement plans for EVERYONE, not relying soley on the government.

Just a thought....
 
Endrete said:
The increase in the population in this country and the developing world is due to an ageing population.

If we, as a nation, stop having children who is going to be paying taxes in 20 - 30 years time? Where will our state pension payments come from? Remember that the taxes we are paying now go toward the pension payments of people who are retired now. Our taxes dont get 'saved' for us to use later. Less children, more old people, no money. Maybe we should be encouraging proper retirement plans for EVERYONE, not relying soley on the government.

Just a thought....
Click to expand...
Great post !!!! yes and if you are in debt borrow more money that's the answer :D
 
Eeyore.1 said:
I think we are very lucky in this country, friend of mine now lives in South Africa (I know her choice she married a South African) and they have just had a baby, she gets NO benefits, had to pay for the bed in the hospital, injections etc. Sometimes we do rather take for granted the benefits, NHS etc in this country
Click to expand...

Ahh, but.....

My neighbours have moved here from SA (she & kids had dual citizenship, he had to apply to remain). Over there they were rich, had a large house, their own pool and employed servants. Over here all they can afford is a 3 bed ex-council semi with a 100k mortgage.

.....swings and roundabouts??
 
Not aimed at anyone personally but if you can't afford them, don't have them. I'd stop all child benefit at a stroke and those already on it would be phased out earlier or if that's too harsh for some of you it would only be paid until they went to secondary school.
 
Northhorse said:
If the world is over-crowded, why are we paying people to have children? As for being in the "higher tax bracket" and moaning about the loss of BENEFITS!!! I earn less than 20k, get nothing by way of benefits and pay the taxes that give you those benefits!
Oh - and I had one child as I could'nt afford any more and to suggest paying back benefits received 15 years ago is simply insulting.
Click to expand...

I believe you miss my point entirely.

YOU WERE GIVEN CHILD BENEFIT WHEN YOU WERE A CHILD SO YOU DID RECEIVE BENEFITS!!! Then, when the children "you" are paying for get older, THEY will be paying benefits for the next generation. Everyone had it, everyone gets it, then everyone pays for it. Until now.

And I was not suggesting that YOU pay back benefits - where did I say that?

I see you live in Scotland. I have no idea on house prices where you live, but where i am currently living, you would be looking at £180-£250k for a fairly average house. So if you are a single parent with no income from a partner or ex, you would NEED to be earning a fair whack in order to get a mortgage and have somewhere to live. I am moving to be nearer my family, and down there, I have seen two bedroom flats for £300k ... salaries are worth more in some areas of the country than others in terms of buying power, yet everyone is taxed the same.

As a higher rate tax payer I will be paying waaay more tax than those on a marginally lower salary.

I, like many others, BUDGETTED to ensure that I live within my means. To then remove chunks of money that have been given to EVERY child in this country for decades will have a fairly major impact.

As far as subsidising me over the past 10 years - I had been under the impression that my own large tax bill had been doing some of my own subsidising!!!

I am not asking for your sympathy - I am merely stating that the way the government is removing child benefit is unfair for single parents who a higher rate tax payers.
 
Some of the posts here are incredibly insulting and confusing child benefit with mothers who are deemed as "spongers" living off benefits. That isn't the case, every mother in the UK receives child benefit even if they work and earn over 100k per year (or are Royalty on much more!). Some of those who are stating people shouldn't have them if they can't afford children, certainly took their child benefit when their own children were growing up. Are some of you so morally wonderous that if you were given child benefit when you become parents that you would give it back out of principal? I think not, you would take it and spend it as you see fit. For those who don't need it, put it in an account for your child each week so they have some college money or a deposit for a house when they grow up.
 
I've been trying to find out what the rate was for CB until 1989 when son left school but no joy from Google. However, if it would make you feel better, then yes, I'll pay back all the CB I had for one son which was only £1 a week for some years - which we did put away for him and the paltry amount went towards his first car. However at those rates I don't think it was quite enough for a deposit on a house even then. Besides, I've paid more than what I ever got from CB in tax so I don't think I actually owe anyone anything from my handout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top