Originally posted by Saddo
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Why are the all the Daily-Mail-middle-class-closet-communists so outraged by....
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Alf W View Post**** me! We are being governed by a bunch of people who think adding up two salaries is "too complex and expensive"
I'm more inclined to do away with the child/tax benefit completely, because that payment is made to the parents. And there's nothing to stop the parents using the payments to buy ciggies or booze. Would be better giving that money to the schools and allow them to control food and clothing for needy youngsters (would there be a problem with a school having a member of staff to manage this process?).Comment
-
Originally posted by Saddo View PostThink overhead with this one. If relationships were good and stable then it would work. However relationships come and go, and the admin overhead trying to keep up with the situation could be very significant.
I'm more inclined to do away with the child/tax benefit completely, because that payment is made to the parents. And there's nothing to stop the parents using the payments to buy ciggies or booze. Would be better giving that money to the schools and allow them to control food and clothing for needy youngsters (would there be a problem with a school having a member of staff to manage this process?).
Having said that, you're idea would probably be a good idea up in the North (no offense, but lets be realistic)Comment
-
Originally posted by Saddo View PostThink overhead with this one. If relationships were good and stable then it would work. However relationships come and go, and the admin overhead trying to keep up with the situation could be very significant.
I'm more inclined to do away with the child/tax benefit completely, because that payment is made to the parents. And there's nothing to stop the parents using the payments to buy ciggies or booze. Would be better giving that money to the schools and allow them to control food and clothing for needy youngsters (would there be a problem with a school having a member of staff to manage this process?).And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View PostMy parents gave me their child benefit payments for a few years and I saved it all up to buy a motorbike (Yamaha RD350LC), which I wrapped around a tree after two weeks. Two fun weeks though.Comment
-
Originally posted by DimPrawn View PostI used mine to buy a ZX80.
Im surprised you didn't use it to expand your Star Wars figurine collection.Comment
-
This is why the whole thing is so stupid and ill-thought out. A flat rate payment by child is easy, efficient and fair. Those who pay tax get some of it back as a reward for bringing up kids. Those who don't, get an additional benefit to help them raise their kids.
At a stroke the Tories have managed to piss off every middle manager with kids in the country and a fairly high percentage of those will now be rapidly going off the Tories.
Wait a minute, this is all becoming a bit clearer now. I bet Cleggy has set up Fag Osborne here and goaded him into announcing this policy ("it'll be a toppper announcement Georgie, honestly, they'll all think you are such a whizz") knowing full well it will start driving these people back towards the Liberals.Guy Fawkes - "The last man to enter Parliament with honourable intentions."Comment
-
Originally posted by DimPrawn View PostI used mine to buy a ZX80.And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post...and remained a virgin into your thirties.Comment
-
Originally posted by Saddo View PostSurely the wobby RAM pack would have provided entertainment without it resulting in an accident?And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment