Reply to: Cameron hint over child benefit cuts for better-off

[IR35 Avoider]

The governments proposals were bad.

I don't think child benefit is a bad benefit: in my ideal world only low universal benefits would exist, so that there was no disincentive to work (because you lose no benefit if you do) and child benefit would become the "per-person" benefit that stopped each child from starving. (Would probably have to increase, haven't considered the numbers.)

If you are going to cut it, then do it in a way that reduces administrative complexity rather than increases it. The tax system is, or can be made, simple, and looks at individuals, not families. The benefits system does look at family circumstances, so is already necessarily complex. (The "unfairness" of the proposed changes is precisely because they are tax-system linked and therefore can't easily look at family circumstances.) So abolish universal child benefit and introduce a means tested benefit that is part of the income of the benefits classes. With regard to the working poor, note that tax credits are (by my definition) part of the benefits system, so working people do not necessarily lose out.

[The Spartan]

I don't think petrol should necessarily be classed as a luxury, there are places in the UK where public transport is truly dire and something like shopping, taking kids to the doctors, or even attending a job interview would be next to impossible without a car.

Yep I wasn't thinking about those who live in rural areas either, you are indeed right

[Mich the Tester]

I don't think petrol should necessarily be classed as a luxury, it's an expensive high, but still a lot cheaper than crystal meth.

ftfy

[Notascooby]

Yep, but there are people on this earth who would die without their Special Brew.

There's a "special" allowance for that and you can get the benefits paid more frequently so you don't go on a bender and spend it all at once.

[doodab]

I don't think petrol should necessarily be classed as a luxury, there are places in the UK where public transport is truly dire and something like shopping, taking kids to the doctors, or even attending a job interview would be next to impossible without a car.

[Mich the Tester]

I've probably said this hundreds if not thousands of times but here goes again. All the government should do is issue them with a card (much like a normal chip and pin one) and instead of receiving cash their money gets added to the card. This card can then be used to purchase essential items only, so when you try to use it to pay for alcohol, cigarettes, petrol and anything classified as a luxury item perfume etc it will be declined.

Yep, but there are people on this earth who would die without their Special Brew.

[The Spartan]

I've probably said this hundreds if not thousands of times but here goes again. All the government should do is issue them with a card (much like a normal chip and pin one) and instead of receiving cash their money gets added to the card. This card can then be used to purchase essential items only, so when you try to use it to pay for alcohol, cigarettes, petrol and anything classified as a luxury item perfume etc it will be declined.

[d000hg]

The question is how much would it cost to means test these benefits, any savings would be lost be the bureaucracy that comes with it.

That's only a short term worry, if long-term it encourages people to grow up with a work ethic.

It is crazy to give taxpayer's money to people just because they have children; child benefit is a hangover from WW2 but no government has had the cahoonies to get rid of it because it would be politically unpopular

No, it would be cruel and monstrous. If you get no extra benefits for having kids, how should you feed them? All very well to say "they shouldn't have had the kids" but once the kids are born, is it humane to allow them to suffer as a punishment on the parents?

Otherwise we're back in the Dickens days... street kids begging and stealing, or like the introduction to Slumdog Millionaire.

[fullyautomatix]

Not sure until what age, but "benefits mums" also get milk tokens to provide baby with at least one healthy pint of milk per day.

I know this because I used to canvas for dairies in the high street, and these should have been a knock-down sale because they can just hand over the token to the milkman

The most common response was that "tescos take them for fags"

Why blame the messenger ? Why was the govt giving out tokens that Tescos can take for fags ? Its these politicians that need to be shot for introducing half measures and cant be arsed to do anything properly.

[fullyautomatix]

Though that maybe true it is often those on benefits that can afford those luxuries

IPhone 4S and IPAD

FTFY

[Mich the Tester]

Not sure until what age, but "benefits mums" also get milk tokens to provide baby with at least one healthy pint of milk per day.

I know this because I used to canvas for dairies in the high street, and these should have been a knock-down sale because they can just hand over the token to the milkman

The most common response was that "tescos take them for fags"

[Bacchus]

Surely if you can afford to buy a car and run it and you are on benefits then you must be getting too much

Not sure until what age, but "benefits mums" also get milk tokens to provide baby with at least one healthy pint of milk per day.

I know this because I used to canvas for dairies in the high street, and these should have been a knock-down sale because they can just hand over the token to the milkman

The most common response was that "tescos take them for fags"

[Notascooby]

Surely if you can afford to buy a car and run it and you are on benefits then you must be getting too much

or uninsured

[The Spartan]

Surely if you can afford to buy a car and run it and you are on benefits then you must be getting too much

[doodab]

They're wbankers as well so don't encourage them to breed.

I'm just pointing out that someone else pointed out that they don't really need child benefit.