It should be, but it isn't. This is how political parties choose to differentiate themselves from one another.
Yeah right course it was Dont be fooled when someone tries to row back from an extreme position, if their opinion has changed they should at least just say so. But then this is the internet...not like its real life :wink:
That should have been mail readers tbf, but my attention to detail is a little like my tolerance of twats: minuscule
I'm not likely to be using the maternity ward any time soon, so maybe they can adjust my tax so i don't pay for that bit?
Indeed. Pete made the point quite nicely that it's not about getting value for money by only paying taxes on the bits that you use, but by paying into a common pot which goes to fund everyone everywhere regardless of whether or not you agree with it. That includes funding for anti-smoking campaigns, drug rehabilitation, social care and also child benefits. The idea is that you can break the cycle of poverty by helping to fund children through their formative years and allow them to obtain enough education to get a job and contribute instead of becoming another drain on resources. The cost of child benefit can be used for multiple purposes; heating, clothing, food, books, extra tuition, even cigarettes and booze (for the parents, not the children) but ultimately it is extra money which will contribute, even in some small way, to making life easier for that child. Obviously there will be some abusers to the system - as there are with all systems - but these are the minority, even though the likes of the Daily Fail wish to paint them in the picture as the norm. Again, as was pointed out before, the idea of a universal system makes it easier, simpler and cheaper to run and maintain. The loss aspect pales into insignificance compared to the cost savings of means testing. No system is perfect, and I agree that there should be a cap on this benefit even though as a father of 3 children I would be worse off. In the same way that I believe there should be a cap on other benefits, such as housing and unemployment, to help break the cycle of becoming dependent upon the system and thus reinforcing the "benefits culture" that we often read about in the tabloids. Without bringing up the debate of the utilitarian ideal, it is very difficult to argue against the common good of social benefits that we have in this country. Just as I would not be morally able to deny a frail old lady the healthcare she needs to improve her quality of life, I would not want to deny anyone the social benefits for which I pay my taxes. I have come to accept that while I may not agree with all of these, they do in fact benefit society as a whole. So yes, you're right, some people really are thick.
in case the penny hasnt dropped, i put this thread up to provoke some reaction and to see if what i suspected would get said, would actually get said, and by whom...in some cases i was proved correct, in others, there is still hope. if that makes me a twat, so be it..id rather be a twat than a snipey, penny pinching self centred bumhole...i despise scroungers, whether they be the abusing poor or the abusing rich. sadly its the abusing rich that tend to build the system to their continuing advantage. Some of the points i made in my initial inflammatory post i do hold sympathy for..ie kids not turning up for free drama club, music lesson and the like, but by the same token, i also think that the kids whose parents pay for those things, should get a kick up the backside..the non attendance thing, is 90% child centred..the parents simply dont know. The worst payers ive had in my experience are the middle class/upper middle class. i make these students (i dont teach below the age of 18 privately) sign a contract 'learning agreement' and pay up front, because they are the worst payers and alwyas wanting to change lesson times and piss me about. Ive paid into the system all of my working life,,,when i was unable to work the DSS shafted me as you already probably know....i didnt blame the other 'scroungers' i blamed the system...that said, i received a £60k+ operation and it didnt cost me a penny...so, ive been a burden on the state by that measure, and i still treatment for a further 2 years at least. I dont mind family allowance in the slightest, but i take issue with the small number of people who make benefits a lifestyle choice, set a terrible example to their children, and take no/have no responsibility for their breeding...this cycle is passed on from generaration to the next...the 'under class' if you will. Its truly ironic, that the least liberal people who whinge and bemoan those with less, and tar them all the same, but yet aspire to be better off (just like the old black and white Cleese, Corbett, Barker sketch) suddenly do a U turn of their usual nosensical rhetoric when it actually affects them....yadayada..'but ive got kids so none of this is relevant', then descend into the usual name calling....so disappointingly predictable.
It is called child benefit and it is being changed for political reasons. Around 165,000 middle class parents miss child benefit deadline - Telegraph
I think I may have just been called middle class! Awesome I've finally made it..,next step aristocracy
