Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:31 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

That was my first thought too as I can relate to the figure of £30k, you'll come out nett with around £2000 per month, now if two of you are on that sort of figure then £800 saved (for the whole of your working life) is probably do-able, but if only one of you is on what might be termed an average salary and the other is on a minimum wage no fixed hours contract, then the main wage earners salary is going to be all used up just by living before anyone has even thought of the word "pension".

The other thing I'd add is that the pension investors love to give the outward expectation that your "investment" gets an immediate 20% boost by tax relief and so how can you fail but increase your pot year on year ?

They like to give that impression, but of course thats not what their small print says, and when they actually lose more than what you paid in year on year (4 years out of 5), then they suddenly go very quiet, indeed, my pension investor didn't even have a standard letter put together to explain why my fund was decreasing year on year, all they could do was send me the one that they'd prepared for the good times, the one that starts "We're pleased to enclose your annual statement"...like pouring freshly squeezed lemon juice in a paper cut.

Only if your tax code was about mega high, I would guess around £1800.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:43 pm  

IDS proposing to limit child benefits to your first 2 children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20077758 Such a good idea. Having children is a lifestyle choice, a bit like having a Jaguar XKR on your drive or a 37ft motor cruiser on the Broads. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. The idea that the state should fork out to help someone maintain their 3+ kids is ridiculous. Government also trying to get rid of this ridiculous nonsense where parents can claim child benefit for children living outside the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/ ... outside-uk

IDS proposing to limit child benefits to your first 2 children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20077758 Such a good idea. Having children is a lifestyle choice, a bit like having a Jaguar XKR on your drive or a 37ft motor cruiser on the Broads. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. The idea that the state should fork out to help someone maintain their 3+ kids is ridiculous. Government also trying to get rid of this ridiculous nonsense where parents can claim child benefit for children living outside the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/ ... outside-uk

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:52 pm  

Fecking pensioners . I hate them . I have a few that come in and help out at work . Mainly doing bodywork and prepping/restoration on classic/historic cars . They complain constantly about the state of this country , and the best way to get their backs up is a mere mention of Maggie . All they do all day is complain about immigration , the price of biscuits , and bang on about the time they served in Aden armed only with flumps .

' Feckin pensioners should be drowned at birth' is a phrase that is commonly used in my place of work .

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:00 pm  

The Video Ref wrote: IDS proposing to limit child benefits to your first 2 children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20077758 Such a good idea. Having children is a lifestyle choice, a bit like having a Jaguar XKR on your drive or a 37ft motor cruiser on the Broads. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. The idea that the state should fork out to help someone maintain their 3+ kids is ridiculous. Government also trying to get rid of this ridiculous nonsense where parents can claim child benefit for children living outside the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/ ... outside-uk He's not simply talking about Child Benefit, he's talking about child-related benefits. So, what happens if someone who had a good job, paying enough to allow him and his wife to have four kids and live comfortably, suddenly finds himself with a debilitating condition that means he can no longer support his wife and four kids? Should he ask his missus to stuff that youngest two back up her fanny? More bullshit from IDS, pandering to brain-dead feckwits. Look back at China's "one-child policy' for all you need to know

The Video Ref wrote: IDS proposing to limit child benefits to your first 2 children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20077758 Such a good idea. Having children is a lifestyle choice, a bit like having a Jaguar XKR on your drive or a 37ft motor cruiser on the Broads. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. The idea that the state should fork out to help someone maintain their 3+ kids is ridiculous. Government also trying to get rid of this ridiculous nonsense where parents can claim child benefit for children living outside the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/ ... outside-uk He's not simply talking about Child Benefit, he's talking about child-related benefits. So, what happens if someone who had a good job, paying enough to allow him and his wife to have four kids and live comfortably, suddenly finds himself with a debilitating condition that means he can no longer support his wife and four kids? Should he ask his missus to stuff that youngest two back up her fanny? More bullshit from IDS, pandering to brain-dead feckwits. Look back at China's "one-child policy' for all you need to know

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:07 pm  

rover49 wrote:

Only if your tax code was about mega high, I would guess around £1800.

<cough> I'll be ok as long as I don't stop running...

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:11 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Claiming yourself as representative of everyone, are you?

On what grounds?

And did you notice that this thread is about pensions – not 'those who don't work like wot I do'.

Unlike yourself - I don't claim to have the only opinion that matters. Every thread on here moves away from the original OP often caused by you trying to ram your righteous preachings down everyone's throat.

The fact remains how with an ageing population does the country afford the OAP - a debate you seem to have avoided on this thread!! Perhaps the government should just keep borrowing, after all you think the deficit is pretty low - compared to the years after the second world war!!

Perhaps if women had to wait until they were the same age as men before they could claim might help?

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:14 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

The fact remains how with an ageing population does the country afford the OAP - a debate you seem to have avoided on this thread!!

Really? I seem to remember the topic of collecting all the corporation tax that was due mentioned as a starting point.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:15 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

He's not simply talking about Child Benefit, he's talking about child-related benefits.

So, what happens if someone who had a good job, paying enough to allow him and his wife to have four kids and live comfortably, suddenly finds himself with a debilitating condition that means he can no longer support his wife and four kids? Should he ask his missus to stuff that youngest two back up her fanny?

More bullshit from IDS, pandering to brain-dead feckwits. Look back at China's "one-child policy' for all you need to know

You cannot base a benefits system on the worst case scenario - the man with 4 kids understands the risks to his family if he loses his job - if he hasn't considered it then it should not be the role of the state to consider it for him.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:16 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

He's not simply talking about Child Benefit, he's talking about child-related benefits.

So, what happens if someone who had a good job, paying enough to allow him and his wife to have four kids and live comfortably, suddenly finds himself with a debilitating condition that means he can no longer support his wife and four kids? Should he ask his missus to stuff that youngest two back up her fanny?

Unfortunately that is the nature of life. We all have financial commitments that we would, probably, struggle to meet if we developed a debilitating condition.

Life insurance policies cater for such eventualities.

Re: More undeserving poor told they should work for benefits : Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:11 pm  

The Video Ref wrote: IDS proposing to limit child benefits to your first 2 children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20077758 Such a good idea. Having children is a lifestyle choice, a bit like having a Jaguar XKR on your drive or a 37ft motor cruiser on the Broads. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. The idea that the state should fork out to help someone maintain their 3+ kids is ridiculous. Government also trying to get rid of this ridiculous nonsense where parents can claim child benefit for children living outside the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/ ... outside-uk Sound policies. Save money and promote fairness.

The Video Ref wrote: IDS proposing to limit child benefits to your first 2 children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20077758 Such a good idea. Having children is a lifestyle choice, a bit like having a Jaguar XKR on your drive or a 37ft motor cruiser on the Broads. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. The idea that the state should fork out to help someone maintain their 3+ kids is ridiculous. Government also trying to get rid of this ridiculous nonsense where parents can claim child benefit for children living outside the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/ ... outside-uk Sound policies. Save money and promote fairness.