Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Reck B

Child Benefit

Recommended Posts

I don't need it, but i'm certainly not giving it back, i pay enough in taxes to not feel guilty about accepting it

Maybe if the government stopped spraying money at people who don't need it, we might just get lower taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't need it, but i'm certainly not giving it back, i pay enough in taxes to not feel guilty about accepting it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe if the government stopped spraying money at people who don't need it, we might just get lower taxes.

Increased cash flow, more money going round in circles allows more money to be created, simple tax cuts don't make people spend more money than they earn/doesn't promote debt, big fluctuations in wages and extra money flying in and out will make people spend more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the state's reward for doing your bit to maintain the birth rate to ensure enough new system slaves come on stream to keep their fiat, debt-based, fractional reserving banking scheme is kept chugging along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont need it either, but will certainly be claiming it (baby due Nov). Just had a quick look at the HMRC website and for the first child its £20 a week. Still doesn't quite make up for the circa £50k tax I paid last year, but every little helps.

Edited by worzel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This benefit seems to discriminate against the childless. That must be illegal. I think I might persue a claim for child benefit for the 16 children I don't have. Even if I don't win, my legal aid laywer might give me some cash back. Dontcha just love the UK - free money for everyone! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't need this state money.

I suspect there are millions that don't need this money.

Why am I and millions of others given it?

It's not for you, it's for your kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This benefit seems to discriminate against the childless. That must be illegal. I think I might persue a claim for child benefit for the 16 children I don't have. Even if I don't win, my legal aid laywer might give me some cash back. Dontcha just love the UK - free money for everyone! :)

it certainly discriminates against people who believe the world is over-populated and choose not to pop them out. Surely the human right laws cover this, they cover everything else???!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This benefit seems to discriminate against the childless. That must be illegal. I think I might persue a claim for child benefit for the 16 children I don't have. Even if I don't win, my legal aid laywer might give me some cash back. Dontcha just love the UK - free money for everyone! :)

Worked for these guys (until they got caught).

"Benefit scam built £4m property empire

AN illegal immigrant and his girlfriend were both jailed after amassing a £4 million property empire, following a benefit scam which lasted ten years.

Nigerian Saheed Ladega, 38, who had already been deported once, teamed up with Oluwatosin Gbadebo, the mother of his five young children, to subject local authorities to nearly a decade of deceit.

The couple used 26 false names to claim nearly £170,000 in housing and council tax benefits from Waltham Forest and Newham Councils.

A large slice of the cash was used as deposits for 11 properties in Leytonstone and West Ham bought with mortgages in false names, Southwark Crown Court heard." Link

LIAR LOANS, illegal immigrants, benefits fraud - stories' got the lot!

Seriously though, I'd support a cut off for child bens at 2 kids - we need that for population replacement (more or less) - if you want more, then pay for 'em yourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original idea behind child benefit was that it was paid (usually) direct to the mother.

When it was first set up, this was important, because at that time, not many women (and few mothers) worked, and so they were dependent on their husbands being "generous" with giving his wife enough money from his pay-packet to feed the kids etc.

Child benefit was set up like this to help women with the cost of child-rearing, by putting the money directly into their hands, not their husbands.

It was universal because it was thought that even a bloke who was working might be stingy in terms of giving his wife enough "housekeeping".

It has since become one of those benefits that is politically very dangerous to be seen to tamper with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The original idea behind child benefit was that it was paid (usually) direct to the mother.

When it was first set up, this was important, because at that time, not many women (and few mothers) worked, and so they were dependent on their husbands being "generous" with giving his wife enough money from his pay-packet to feed the kids etc.

Child benefit was set up like this to help women with the cost of child-rearing, by putting the money directly into their hands, not their husbands.

It was universal because it was thought that even a bloke who was working might be stingy in terms of giving his wife enough "housekeeping".

It has since become one of those benefits that is politically very dangerous to be seen to tamper with.

Now a supposedly socialist government believes it's in the best interests of everyone to force mothers out to work. As if childcare was not work. As if the only thing any sane woman would want to be is a frigging MP.

I believe child benefit was originally given to the father. Women campaigned to have this changed. My mother-in-law was one of them. So this was not the original impetus behind child benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont take it then ;)

With the Child Trust Fund voucher you have no choice. If after 12 months (iirc) you have not used the voucher to open an account in the childs name, then the government open one for them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   289 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.