Child Benefits

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Did DPS beat you up in the school playground? Following him around on an internet mongboard is a sad state of affairs!

 

I obviously did something to him...not aware of it myself.

[Saint Charlie]

He's everywhere. Don't need to look too far for mongy "look at me" threads and posts.

 

You'll never far behind Saint Charlie.....are you following me around?

 

No - I just look at the popular threads and see in nearly every one of them you have a pop at DPS as if you forgot the meds this morning.

 

As he said he setup a sensible discussion about the government mugging him off and you reduce it to petty insults - if you hate the guy that much just call him a **** once and get it over with - all the mongy little insults and digs are tedious in the extreme.

[Dig Dig]

No - I just look at the popular threads and see in nearly every one of them you have a pop at DPS as if you forgot the meds this morning.

 

As he said he setup a sensible discussion about the government mugging him off and you reduce it to petty insults - if you hate the guy that much just call him a **** once and get it over with - all the mongy little insults and digs are tedious in the extreme.

 

I don't think he's **** at all and would never resort to petty name calling.

 

You're like a snidey worm tongue who seems intent on diverting attention to me when the reality is that you've been mugging off DPS since the summer, just in a more snake like manner.

 

I'm sure DPS sees it this way as well.

[Saint Charlie]

I don't think he's **** at all and would never resort to petty name calling.

 

You're like a snidey worm tongue who seems intent on diverting attention to me when the reality is that you've been mugging off DPS since the summer, just in a more snake like manner.

 

I'm sure DPS sees it this way as well.

 

 

We have had some debates, and I have diasgreed on some of his opinions on Saints, a few of which I have found pretty ridiculous, and I have told him that - he is big enough to take it, and I can accept his rebuttals as well - that what the Forum is for.

 

However, it has always been on topic, and never resorted to any personal digs - the kind you specialise in. That is not what the Forum is for.

 

I'm sure DPS sees it this way as well.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Do you know what, this was a sensible discussion. There had been a few 'get over yourself and deal with it' type posts, but none that were really read and taken seriously as they didn't offer any sort of argument.

 

Say what you want about my 'look at me' attitude to posting, but all you do Dig Dig is go to different threads and try to cause arguments, and you see me as an easy target. I've started to ignore you on the main board, and I think I will have to continue that on here if you are to continue following me around like a lost puppy. That seems to be your raison d'être with this board now.

[iansums]

Its worth pointing out that any benefits in kind such as company car, health insurance etc. can affect your position wrt child benefit. This was not made at all clear in the HMRC letter I received. I earn less than the £50k threshold but these benefits take me over.

 

As much as it disappoints me that I will now be taxed on child benefit I have to say I don't think we should receive it anyway. IMO child benefit should be scrapped and replaced by a system aimed solely at lower earners. I do sympathize with the OP but anyone earning over £50k should not be receiving child benefit. Unfortunately as someone else pointed out the whole tax system has evolved into a horrendously complex system with too much money being given to people who don't need it.

 

The child benefit we received for our daughter (now 13) has always gone directly into an account set up in her name, hopefully to help give her a start onto the property ladder.

[Saint Charlie]

Its worth pointing out that any benefits in kind such as company car, health insurance etc. can affect your position wrt child benefit. This was not made at all clear in the HMRC letter I received. I earn less than the £50k threshold but these benefits take me over.

 

As much as it disappoints me that I will now be taxed on child benefit I have to say I don't think we should receive it anyway. IMO child benefit should be scrapped and replaced by a system aimed solely at lower earners. I do sympathize with the OP but anyone earning over £50k should not be receiving child benefit. Unfortunately as someone else pointed out the whole tax system has evolved into a horrendously complex system with too much money being given to people who don't need it.

 

The child benefit we received for our daughter (now 13) has always gone directly into an account set up in her name, hopefully to help give her a start onto the property ladder.

 

Agree - I guess its just gutting if you happen to be affected just at the point you could have taken advantage of it.

[Dig Dig]

Do you know what, this was a sensible discussion. There had been a few 'get over yourself and deal with it' type posts, but none that were really read and taken seriously as they didn't offer any sort of argument.

 

Say what you want about my 'look at me' attitude to posting, but all you do Dig Dig is go to different threads and try to cause arguments, and you see me as an easy target. I've started to ignore you on the main board, and I think I will have to continue that on here if you are to continue following me around like a lost puppy. That seems to be your raison d'être with this board now.

 

Well my post on here is pretty much the same as all the others you reference. It's only your forum minder Saint Charlie who has made it a bigger issue than it needs to be. He's obsessed with our interactions on here, pretty bizarre.

 

Ignore all you want but when you actually look and think about it, I've used plenty of posts replying to you, asking you questions and providing my opinions etc.... it's not my problem that you start a disproportionatly high number of controversial threads which get peoples attention.

[Saint Charlie]

Well my post on here is pretty much the same as all the others you reference. It's only your forum minder Saint Charlie who has made it a bigger issue than it needs to be. He's obsessed with our interactions on here, pretty bizarre.

 

Ignore all you want but when you actually look and think about it, I've used plenty of posts replying to you, asking you questions and providing my opinions etc.... it's not my problem that you start a disproportionatly high number of controversial threads which get peoples attention.

 

Get a life, you are deranged.

 

[buctootim]

. Unfortunately as someone else pointed out the whole tax system has evolved into a horrendously complex system with too much money being given to people who don't need it.

 

There are two basic options for a benefits system. Means tested is fairer but hugely expensive and complicated to administer; last time I saw figures (admittedly years ago) it cost almost 80p in admin for every £1 paid out. Or you have universal benefits which yes means some people get them who dont need to but they are cheap to run and you can tax people on their overall income and recoup some of the cash.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Its worth pointing out that any benefits in kind such as company car, health insurance etc. can affect your position wrt child benefit. This was not made at all clear in the HMRC letter I received. I earn less than the £50k threshold but these benefits take me over.

 

As much as it disappoints me that I will now be taxed on child benefit I have to say I don't think we should receive it anyway. IMO child benefit should be scrapped and replaced by a system aimed solely at lower earners. I do sympathize with the OP but anyone earning over £50k should not be receiving child benefit. Unfortunately as someone else pointed out the whole tax system has evolved into a horrendously complex system with too much money being given to people who don't need it.

 

The child benefit we received for our daughter (now 13) has always gone directly into an account set up in her name, hopefully to help give her a start onto the property ladder.

 

I agree with what you say, but it is annoying. I feel like we are being penalised for having a better job.

 

What you have done for your daughter is exactly what we planned to do with it, put the money towards University fees, which are ridiculously high. Which is another (kind of) bugbear. I realise it was the reason that we have the jobs we do now, but we lose £650 a month through our bloody student loans. Hopefully they should be paid off in a couple of years, it's just another cost to take into account at a time when money is tight.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Well my post on here is pretty much the same as all the others you reference. It's only your forum minder Saint Charlie who has made it a bigger issue than it needs to be. He's obsessed with our interactions on here, pretty bizarre.

 

Ignore all you want but when you actually look and think about it, I've used plenty of posts replying to you, asking you questions and providing my opinions etc.... it's not my problem that you start a disproportionatly high number of controversial threads which get peoples attention.

 

This is not a controversial thread though.

[buctootim]

I agree with what you say, but it is annoying. I feel like we are being penalised for having a better job.

 

.....University fees, which are ridiculously high. .......the reason that we have the jobs we do now, but we lose £650 a month through our bloody student loans.

 

So which is it? Taxes too high or benefits too low? Surely you arent arguing for the magic budget - you know the one where everyone gets everything and no-one pays? (sometimes also known as Greece).

[stu0x]

all you do Dig Dig is go to different threads and try to cause arguments... That seems to be your raison d'être with this board now.

Unfortunately it seems to be a growing trend on here. The number of posters whose sole intention seems to be behaving like an attention-starved four year old grows apparently by the day.

 

Back on point, I've just had my first 12 weeks ago. Myself and my wife both sneak in just under 50k, so as far as I know we fall into that 'loophole' and it won't affect us. The money will just go into a savings pot for the little one anyway, it may go a tiny way to offset the massive imbalance in relation to the taxes we have paid/will pay (ie lots) and the benefits (with a small b) we receive (ie little).

 

That said, I would be happy with the entire Child Benefit system being scrapped, along with much of the welfare state.

 

There's an interesting article on the guardian website today about how the government spends its money, and a staggering amount is on Benefits. And in the last decade or so ive personally seen an overwhelming amount of abuse, either by people blatantly claiming what theyre not entitled to, or by generations of families existing solely on benefits.

 

The welfare state should be there to help people in need - it shouldn't be a lifestyle choice for a societal underclass. Problem is, a swathe of people have now been born and bred aspiring to nothing more.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

So which is it? Taxes too high or benefits too low? Surely you arent arguing for the magic budget - you know the one where everyone gets everything and no-one pays? (sometimes also known as Greece).

 

Neither, just venting my frustrations at a system that did well for the previous generation (those with University grants etc) but has pretty much left my generation and those ahead of us paying higher taxes and receiving less from the Government.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Unfortunately it seems to be a growing trend on here. The number of posters whose sole intention seems to be behaving like an attention-starved four year old grows apparently by the day.

 

Back on point, I've just had my first 12 weeks ago. Myself and my wife both sneak in just under 50k, so as far as I know we fall into that 'loophole' and it won't affect us. The money will just go into a savings pot for the little one anyway, it may go a tiny way to offset the massive imbalance in relation to the taxes we have paid/will pay (ie lots) and the benefits (with a small b) we receive (ie little).

 

That said, I would be happy with the entire Child Benefit system being scrapped, along with much of the welfare state.

 

There's an interesting article on the guardian website today about how the government spends its money, and a staggering amount is on Benefits. And in the last decade or so ive personally seen an overwhelming amount of abuse, either by people blatantly claiming what theyre not entitled to, or by generations of families existing solely on benefits.

 

The welfare state should be there to help people in need - it shouldn't be a lifestyle choice for a societal underclass. Problem is, a swathe of people have now been born and bred aspiring to nothing more.

 

Excellent post, and a very similar position to myself and Mrs DPS.

 

The amount spent on benefits it huge, and it has created our welfare state, so it was no real surprise that these were one of the first things to be tackled when the Tories came in. I just didn't think they would go this far.

[iansums]

Excellent post, and a very similar position to myself and Mrs DPS.

 

The amount spent on benefits it huge, and it has created our welfare state, so it was no real surprise that these were one of the first things to be tackled when the Tories came in. I just didn't think they would go this far.

 

IMO they haven't gone far enough, they are barely scratching the surface.

 

Read this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9722044/Autumn-statement-Why-George-Osbornes-Budget-wont-be-a-game-changer.html

 

I feel sorry for some of you guys just starting out with a family. I thank feck that we've been lucky enough to have CB for 13 years *****axed) and we'll have paid off our mortgage this time next year.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

IMO they haven't gone far enough, they are barely scratching the surface.

 

Read this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9722044/Autumn-statement-Why-George-Osbornes-Budget-wont-be-a-game-changer.html

 

I feel sorry for some of you guys just starting out with a family. I thank feck that we've been lucky enough to have CB for 13 years *****axed) and we'll have paid off our mortgage this time next year.

 

Bet that'll be a lovely noose to be removed from your neck, fairplay!

 

I think one of the biggest problems people my age (which is 28 by the way) face is through property. We bought our first place 2 and a half years ago, and looking at what it sold for 15 years ago we have paid 10 times that value, which is frankly mental. I know a lot of people that managed to get on the housing ladder in the late 90's/early 00's that have benefitted very nicely from the property boom. We will never know this unfortunately.

 

But hey ho, life is pretty good at the moment, just annoying that we don't get that £20 a week that everyone has got for however long. Good article as well btw.

[LGTL]

I'm of the generation where I don't know whether I'm lucky or not. At 24 I luckily missed the boat on drowning myself with a ridiculous mortgage, as well as being able to wait a few years before worrying about children. Also DPS, 600 of quid a month on student loans?? Either your loan was massive or you earn huge money. I know Noadswood is a good school but never thought it that good!

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

I'm of the generation where I don't know whether I'm lucky or not. At 24 I luckily missed the boat on drowning myself with a ridiculous mortgage, as well as being able to wait a few years before worrying about children. Also DPS, 600 of quid a month on student loans?? Either your loan was massive or you earn huge money. I know Noadswood is a good school but never thought it that good!

 

650 between us, 300 me, 350 her...Noadswood WAS a class school, went rubbish when I left (class of 2k, wooooooo)

[pap]

We've lost ours. Not going to moan about it as there are clearly people who are worse off. Have to say though, I think that anyone getting on their high horse about the so-called scroungers is suffering from a case of misplaced envy. I have no idea whether you've ever had to live on benefits, but it really isn't fun. I saw my old dear worry over sums that even adjusted for real terms, I'd spend without thinking about.

 

So as someone who was brought up on benefits, let me assure you that it isn't the land of milk and honey you think it is. Always worried about money; know for a fact that the old dear went without food so she could feed us. If you think it's all beers, ciggies and Jeremy Kyle, you're very much mistaken.

 

It's crap, and 9/10 people I know on long-term benefits would rather not be.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Pap, I don't think people are trivialising people who honestly need benefits, I think the issue is those sections of people who don't deserve welfare end up tarnishing the masses.

[dingbattigger]

We've lost ours. Not going to moan about it as there are clearly people who are worse off. Have to say though, I think that anyone getting on their high horse about the so-called scroungers is suffering from a case of misplaced envy. I have no idea whether you've ever had to live on benefits, but it really isn't fun. I saw my old dear worry over sums that even adjusted for real terms, I'd spend without thinking about.

 

So as someone who was brought up on benefits, let me assure you that it isn't the land of milk and honey you think it is. Always worried about money; know for a fact that the old dear went without food so she could feed us. If you think it's all beers, ciggies and Jeremy Kyle, you're very much mistaken.

 

It's crap, and 9/10 people I know on long-term benefits would rather not be.

 

Mrs D here, very much this ^^. I was also bought up on benefits as my father died when I was young and my mother was not well. We had food but mum often went without. No holidays, not even school trips, no ciggies/alcohol or branded goods. I now have a daughter living on benefits because she has M.S. and it's bl**dy hard.

[the stain]

Pap, I don't think people are trivialising people who honestly need benefits, I think the issue is those sections of people who don't deserve welfare end up tarnishing the masses.

 

Hang on - are you in the deserving or not deserving category?

it seems to me that you're moaning about not getting financial help bringing up your children and moaning about not getting a free university education. You have a job, your wife has a job, albeit she's on maternity leave, yet you want hand outs? And you, a self confessed Tory. How does that add up? Or is it that you want hand outs, even if you don't need them, but can't see how helping those who genuinely need help is any of your business? I'm very confused as to your stance on the whole thing.

Edited 5 December, 2012 by the stain

[Jonnyboy]

The world is a bit mad innit. Tories demanding benefits and labour demanding tax cuts.

[bridge too far]

The world is a bit mad innit. Tories demanding benefits and labour demanding tax cuts.

 

Well, their millionaire buddies should be happy at least - benefit scroungers

[pap]

Pap, I don't think people are trivialising people who honestly need benefits, I think the issue is those sections of people who don't deserve welfare end up tarnishing the masses.

 

There's the thing though; how on earth do you decide?

 

The Conservatives have gone for some very crude measures that exacerbate the problems instead of solve them. And guess what? People on the right loved them when they were announced. The problem for the vast majority of people espousing these views is that they have no understanding of how the underclass works, or how self-defeating it ultimately all is. Take some recent examples; HB capped at £400pw. The right loved it. The consequence? Families moved into overcrowded B+Bs. Kids growing up with sh!t lives ready to begin all over again.

 

Now, a politician of real conviction would have attacked the root cause; gone after the banks and landlords that are fleecing so much money from the state. They won't do that, though. They'd rather have the lot of us knifing each other in the back for the scraps that trickle down from the banqueting table.

 

We shouldn't be angry with the poor. We should be angry with successive governments who have failed to produce a society where the poor can generally improve their lot and where it doesn't pay to work. We should be angry with the banks for irresponsible lending, or the captains of industry for sending jobs overseas for a better shareholder return. We should be angry with the whole damn financial system, and the inexplicable primacy it seems to have over all else.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Pap, I don't think people are trivialising people who honestly need benefits, I think the issue is those sections of people who don't deserve welfare end up tarnishing the masses.

 

The scroungers may exist in some cases but the extent has been blown out of all proportion by a sensationalist and elitist media:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/28/benefit-scroungers-child-poverty-parents

[Barry Sanchez]

Its worth pointing out that any benefits in kind such as company car, health insurance etc. can affect your position wrt child benefit. This was not made at all clear in the HMRC letter I received. I earn less than the £50k threshold but these benefits take me over.

 

As much as it disappoints me that I will now be taxed on child benefit I have to say I don't think we should receive it anyway. IMO child benefit should be scrapped and replaced by a system aimed solely at lower earners. I do sympathize with the OP but anyone earning over £50k should not be receiving child benefit. Unfortunately as someone else pointed out the whole tax system has evolved into a horrendously complex system with too much money being given to people who don't need it.

 

The child benefit we received for our daughter (now 13) has always gone directly into an account set up in her name, hopefully to help give her a start onto the property ladder.

Do you think thats right though as well?

[aintforever]

Exactly.

Child benefit was originally designed to ensure that kids had resonable clothing & were fed, not to fund pony club outings or a holiday abroad, Anyone earning over 50 grand should be ashamed if they are claiming this.

 

Agree, typical of the ingrained greed in today's society.

[SO16_Saint]

Is it still the case that a couple both earning 49,999 each will be entitled to benefits but a couple where one earns zero and the other 50,001 they will NOT be entitled to anything.

[egg]

Is it still the case that a couple both earning 49,999 each will be entitled to benefits but a couple where one earns zero and the other 50,001 they will NOT be entitled to anything.

 

Yes. Makes the point above look a bit silly.

[aintforever]

Is it still the case that a couple both earning 49,999 each will be entitled to benefits but a couple where one earns zero and the other 50,001 they will NOT be entitled to anything.

 

That is daft but is due to the expense of means testing each couple. The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the couple earning 49,999 each feel the need for state support.

 

Still no reason for someone on 50K to cry like a baby for not being given handouts. Like I said, ingrained greed.

Edited 5 December, 2012 by aintforever

[SO16_Saint]

That is daft but is due to the expense of means testing each couple. The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the couple earning 49,999 each feel the need for state support.

 

Still no reason for someone on 50K to cry like a baby for not being given state handouts. Like I said, ingrained greed.

 

Agree - 1/50th of annual salary.

 

Still - the £99,999.98 couple shouldn't get benefits either.

 

Much like Starbucks shouldn't be lambasted for 'not breaking the law'

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

That is daft but is due to the expense of means testing each couple. The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the couple earning 49,999 each feel the need for state support.

 

Still no reason for someone on 50K to cry like a baby for not being given handouts. Like I said, ingrained greed.

 

Who's "crying like a baby"? Why post something so full of hyperbole?

[egg]

That is daft but is due to the expense of means testing each couple. The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the couple earning 49,999 each feel the need for state support.

 

Still no reason for someone on 50K to cry like a baby for not being given handouts. Like I said, ingrained greed.

 

Why is it greed to feel agrieved to lose something that you've always had? Particularly at a time when income is not keeping pace with cost of living.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Why is it greed to feel agrieved to lose something that you've always had? Particularly at a time when income is not keeping pace with cost of living.

 

It's not but some people love to sensationalise.

[egg]

It's not but some people love to sensationalise.

 

I was referring to the "ingrained greed" commebt. Which side of the argument are you referring to?

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

I was agreeing with you.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Hang on - are you in the deserving or not deserving category?

it seems to me that you're moaning about not getting financial help bringing up your children and moaning about not getting a free university education. You have a job, your wife has a job, albeit she's on maternity leave, yet you want hand outs? And you, a self confessed Tory. How does that add up? Or is it that you want hand outs, even if you don't need them, but can't see how helping those who genuinely need help is any of your business? I'm very confused as to your stance on the whole thing.

 

What are you on about? You seem to have got yourself all confused. I have not said I am deserving financially, however it's frustrating that something that has ALWAYS been available for everyone gets removed just after I have had my first child. The same with paying for University. You can be frustrated about something yet agree with the reasons why they came to fruition.

[pap]

What are you on about? You seem to have got yourself all confused. I have not said I am deserving financially, however it's frustrating that something that has ALWAYS been available for everyone gets removed just after I have had my first child. The same with paying for University. You can be frustrated about something yet agree with the reasons why they came to fruition.

 

Welcome to my world, mate. Got one kid who'll be off to Uni in 18 months, another will go in five years. I thought I was hard done by when I ran up a trifling 11k of student loan debt.

 

I suppose it depends on what you think the priorities of the system are. If the priority is to promote social mobility, we're doing badly. If the priority is to get people into debt, jobs a good un.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Welcome to my world, mate. Got one kid who'll be off to Uni in 18 months, another will go in five years. I thought I was hard done by when I ran up a trifling 11k of student loan debt.

 

I suppose it depends on what you think the priorities of the system are. If the priority is to promote social mobility, we're doing badly. If the priority is to get people into debt, jobs a good un.

 

11k for me too! What is your daughter going to do there? Excuae me for saying, but you seem quite young to have a 17 year old...

[pap]

11k for me too! What is your daughter going to do there? Excuae me for saying, but you seem quite young to have a 17 year old...

 

She hasn't completely decided yet, although the A levels she's taking would be pretty good for a law degree.

 

I'm 37, she's 17. I'm one of those idiots who had kids before he could afford them. Worked out alright, as I recall.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

She hasn't completely decided yet, although the A levels she's taking would be pretty good for a law degree.

 

I'm 37, she's 17. I'm one of those idiots who had kids before he could afford them. Worked out alright, as I recall.

 

Good stuff. Whatever you do, steer her away from mixing disciplines! I did Business Economic (major) and Law (minor) as I wanted to cover all bases. Turns out to be pretty hard work when the 2 disciplines are very different!

[pap]

Good stuff. Whatever you do, steer her away from mixing disciplines! I did Business Economic (major) and Law (minor) as I wanted to cover all bases. Turns out to be pretty hard work when the 2 disciplines are very different!

 

My only real hope is that she does something she enjoys and suits her personality. She likes a good debate, is almost incapable of backing down. Much like her Dad in that respect.

 

I've been lucky enough to do a career I enjoy, but I know I'm working within myself and that there are attributes I'm kind of fond of that I have to suppress in a professional environment, whereas they'd be quite handy in others.

[aintforever]

Why is it greed to feel agrieved to lose something that you've always had? Particularly at a time when income is not keeping pace with cost of living.

 

Because the country is skint, vital services are being cut, police, armed services etc are being thrown on the dole and there is a lot of people genuinely hard up. Someone on 50K moaning about not getting state hand outs is pathetic. Shows how sick with greed society is.

[CB Saint]

My only real hope is that she does something she enjoys and suits her personality. She likes a good debate, is almost incapable of backing down. Much like her Dad in that respect.

 

I've been lucky enough to do a career I enjoy, but I know I'm working within myself and that there are attributes I'm kind of fond of that I have to suppress in a professional environment, whereas they'd be quite handy in others.

 

Politics, philosophy and economics then.

[egg]

Because the country is skint, vital services are being cut, police, armed services etc are being thrown on the dole and there is a lot of people genuinely hard up. Someone on 50K moaning about not getting state hand outs is pathetic. Shows how sick with greed society is.

 

Lovely (albeit ridiculous) rant but it avoids the question.

 

It is greedy to ask for something that you don't need. It is not "greedy" or "pathetic" or "sick" to feel unhappy that something that always has been given is taken away.

 

I would imagine that many families with one earner just over £50k will be hit very hard by this. Some will have large mortgages, various children, only one earner, debts and so on.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Because the country is skint, vital services are being cut, police, armed services etc are being thrown on the dole and there is a lot of people genuinely hard up. Someone on 50K moaning about not getting state hand outs is pathetic. Shows how sick with greed society is.

 

You're failing to understand the argument, and are starting to look a bit silly.

[aintforever]

Lovely (albeit ridiculous) rant but it avoids the question.

 

It is greedy to ask for something that you don't need. It is not "greedy" or "pathetic" or "sick" to feel unhappy that something that always has been given is taken away.

 

I would imagine that many families with one earner just over £50k will be hit very hard by this. Some will have large mortgages, various children, only one earner, debts and so on.

 

Virtually everyone is facing some sort of cut backs. Giving state handouts to people on 50K in the current situation is just complete bonkers.