Nice to know our Tax money is being spent prudently

[goldstone]

Ok. So what you want to happen to her and her children?

We're probably stuck now with providing the minimum for them, but the problem is the present system which gives her the guarantee that she can carry on having children and the state will take care of her and them. If she had known that there was no benefit security blanket maybe, just maybe she would have thought of the consequencies before bringing forth sprog after sprog.

 

[maltaseagull]

I honestly feel the Daily Mail's mission is to have the people of Britain tearing each other's throats out just in case we're not getting the same deal as everyone else. Money or otherwise.

It's truly depressing to open it's pages.

Then don't?

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

Iv'e had a very small pension I have paid into as a self-employed plumber since 1974. Got a letter today to inform me if I want to retire (57 yesterday)I can take a lump sum of 25 per cent of feck all, but it will be taxed before I get a penny--------------thanks for nothing.

 

[goldstone]

Indeed, a good summary of the situation. Also worth mentioning that if you total up the cost of all those 'scrounger' families with > 10 kids, it would cost each tax payer an average of....

9p a year. Well worth getting worked up about in anyone's book

There are many many totally unnecessary areas of state expenditure in this country that "only cost each taxpayer 9p a year". The problem is that if you add all these 9p costs together you end up with an enormous tax burden. Save a penny (or in this case nine) and save a pound.

 

[Creaky]

Iv'e had a very small pension I have paid into as a self-employed plumber since 1974. Got a letter today to inform me if I want to retire (57 yesterday)I can take a lump sum of 25 per cent of feck all, but it will be taxed before I get a penny--------------thanks for nothing.

You need to check that - the 25% of a pension fund that you are allowed to take as cash should be tax free.

Just done that with one of my funds, (dear daughter needed a deposit for a house!), and deferred payment of the balance for an annuity later.

 

[BLOCK F]

We're probably stuck now with providing the minimum for them, but the problem is the present system which gives her the guarantee that she can carry on having children and the state will take care of her and them. If she had known that there was no benefit security blanket maybe, just maybe she would have thought of the consequencies before bringing forth sprog after sprog.

Agreed.This is not what the benefits system was meant to be for.

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

You need to check that - the 25% of a pension fund that you are allowed to take as cash should be tax free.

Just done that with one of my funds, (dear daughter needed a deposit for a house!), and deferred payment of the balance for an annuity later.

Just read it again If I take an income it will be taxed--------still pissed off tho
My 25% might buy a big shed

 

[BLOCK F]

She's had 11 kids. She could probably house them in her fanny. And the horse.

Nibble,that is one of your best ones.
Made me laugh out loud!

 

[drew]

We're probably stuck now with providing the minimum for them, but the problem is the present system which gives her the guarantee that she can carry on having children and the state will take care of her and them. If she had known that there was no benefit security blanket maybe, just maybe she would have thought of the consequencies before bringing forth sprog after sprog.

Exactly what do you propose? Are you saying that someone on benefits, after having two kids, should be sterilised because other than that, how do you stop irresponsible people from having kids! You could move them into foster care but that costs money and would mean splitting up siblings through no fault of their own. Adoption would have the same problems as far as the children are concerned.

 

[carlzeiss]

150 years ago how many of those 11 kids would have lived past the age of 14 ?

The human race as have all other animals evolved due to evolution over many thousands of years .
This process is now being reversed by many factors of which the benefits culture is only one .

 

[oldalbiongirl]

Congratulations. You have reacted exactly as the Daily Mail would have wished you to. It's like pushing a sheep into a pen.

Don't you realise that if the rest of us are hoodwinked into hating each other, the real beneficiaries of the current system (ie those owning the Mail and the rest of the super-rich) will continue to sit back laughing their heads off?

Absolutely this. The ability of the media to brainwash people on the basis of a few sensationalist stories is simply stunning.

 

[cloud]

Just read it again If I take an income it will be taxed--------still pissed off tho
My 25% might buy a big shed

The first £9,440 pa will be tax-free, so if it's that small a lump sum then you should be OK, especially since the basic pension is only £5727

 

[beorhthelm]

Iv'e had a very small pension I have paid into as a self-employed plumber since 1974. Got a letter today to inform me if I want to retire (57 yesterday)I can take a lump sum of 25 per cent of feck all, but it will be taxed before I get a penny--------------thanks for nothing.

you do know you got tax relief added to the pension on the money you put in all that time? thats how it works, you get paid on income regardless of it source (it about the only straight forward part of the system). and if the pension is small, that only reflects the amount put in.

 

[melias shoes]

Exactly. That's what is wrong with the benefit system in this country. A benefit system which costs you and I a fecking great amount of money so that people can go off and have ELEVEN children comfortable in the knowledge that the State (i.e the taxpayers; i.e people who WORK and PAY TAXES) will take care of them. There's a lot to be said for the American system.

Hear hear.

 

[HastingsSeagull]

Does the American system involve 3 years of benefits over your lifetime (so 6 times you can be unable to find even a min. wage job for 6 months during your life) and then after that you're stuffed? Always thought that was a good way to stitch up the 'life-ers' but look after those who actually work and fall on hard times! Perhaps with similar to Working Tax Credits to top up minimum wage urners that would be a good system?

 

[goldstone]

Exactly what do you propose? Are you saying that someone on benefits, after having two kids, should be sterilised because other than that, how do you stop irresponsible people from having kids! You could move them into foster care but that costs money and would mean splitting up siblings through no fault of their own. Adoption would have the same problems as far as the children are concerned.

Good question. Personally I would go with sterilisation, but I realise that this is probably not possible in our "democracy".

My point is that if these irresponsible people knew that their benefits would be cut off after a certain number of kids (my number would be two) then they may change their behaviour.

It would be interesting to know if any other western countries have a policy to address this problem effectively.

 

[drew]

Good question. Personally I would go with sterilisation, but I realise that this is probably not possible in our "democracy".

My point is that if these irresponsible people knew that their benefits would be cut off after a certain number of kids (my number would be two) then they may change their behaviour.

It would be interesting to know if any other western countries have a policy to address this problem effectively.

As I thought, you don't have an answer. Seems this type of family are the exception as most people do only have what they can afford. Chances are she gets pissed and ends up pregnant. Cannot make rational decisions when pissed.