Issue 90 is out now

Welcome to The Green Parent Forum

A place where you can chat to like-minded parents, form new friendships, share ideas, events and recipes. Use the search tool to find a wealth of information from the past 10 years of forum discussions. Register today and become part of our supportive community.

I do welcome the increased fuel tax (despite being a motorist) and the increased personal tax allowance for lowest earners.

I am really, really angry about the way that the child benefit scrapping has been done. I think, first and foremost, its right that a civilised society makes sure that women have money to raise their kids. I remember, from working for a charity, that CB was so often the only income that an abused woman had and it was a REAL safety net. I also think its right that we get some kind of financial tokenist gesture (assuming you are on £60k I guess CB is pretty tokenistic) to acknowledge that we are raising future citizens. But primarily I am angry that its now being assessed on the higher wage earner’s income not family income. I just do not understand the logic of this. Its certainly not necessary-almost every other benefit is assessed as a “household claim” so the DWP and Revenue are more than used to assessing joint income. TBH, the Revenue, which administers child benefit, has this information already for most of us because it also assesses tax credits, which are jointly applied for. So that’s a load of rubbish. The Tories and Liberals want to penalise families where a partner, usually the woman, stays at home and they are going to amazingly convoluted lengths to do so.

I also think freezing the income tax allowance for pensioners at the level they are at is ludicrously unfair. I think it fair enough that there should be a cap for super wealthy pensioners, but at the rates they are talking it just seems gratuitously mean. FGS if someone is still working at 65, give them a break!

But I am just FURIOUS at cutting of the 50p tax rate. So we can’t afford to subsidise families, pensioners, or generally poorer people, we are cutting jobs and rights left right and centre-but millionaires? Yes yes we must make sure that those starving millionaires are alright. In the midst of the deepest recession in…however long its been, millionaires are without a doubt the most deserving group to receive a massive, massive tax break. After all we wouldn’t want them to leave the country, because then we wouldn’t get the pleasure of them screwing us over.

big surprise  mad  rolleyes  I think that sums up what I think of the budget

yep reckon thats pretty much where i am with the buget too confused rolleyes  angry

happy mamma to dd1 dd2 and twins ds1 and dd3 grin

wow as i was was reading this it was my exact trail of thought from last night when i watch the budget!!!

http://thegannersblog.blogspot.com/  our ‘larger’ family blog!!

I think the child benefit thing is a reaction to the outrage last year where a certain benefit (can’t remember which one) was given to couples even if both of them earned £39k, but wasn’t given to families where only one parent worked but the other earned £41k. I agree, it is a ridiculous way of solving the problem, but I can see why they have done it.

I can’t quite believe that Mr Osbourne has given a nod to Boris Island Airport - really? Do we really need another airport? Also that he is actively encouraging oil drilling - no concept of climate change?

Personally, i would prefer a budget that penalised big business over oil and incentivised green business, rather than penalising motorists at the petrol pump. We live in a rural area where the bus service has been cut *again*. we do actually need to use our car. I can’t afford to replace it for a more environmentally friendly one - and I never will be able to while so much of my income goes on petrol. If, however, big incentives were given to companies making eco-cars, and big incentives were given to purchasers, then in a couple of years time there will be plenty of second-hand Eco-cars on the market for ordinary folk!

Angie

http://www.etsy.com/shop/WashedUpFamily Sea Glass Jewellery from the beautiful South Coast[/color]

http://washedupfamily.blogspot.co.uk/

http://www.etsy.com/shop/NannieCool , http://nanniecool.yolasite.com Nannie Cool - for beautiful slings, playsilks, toys, nappy wraps and accessories made by Grace’s Nannie. All designs are “Approved by Grace”

http://bournemouthattachmentparents.blogspot.com/

The oil drilling thing is to get back as us Scots for daring to vote SNP and move towards Independence -lets get as much of the stuff out as we can!  I am angry about a whole lot of this budget -  50p rate cut - the child benefit cut and the granny tax.  And fuel is just so much more expensive here than on the mainland, in such a rural and remote area with such a poor bus service that basically stops at around 5 pm, it is not helpful to us at all.

Angiegw - 22 March 2012 09:32 AM

I think the child benefit thing is a reaction to the outrage last year where a certain benefit (can’t remember which one) was given to couples even if both of them earned £39k, but wasn’t given to families where only one parent worked but the other earned £41k. I agree, it is a ridiculous way of solving the problem, but I can see why they have done it.

I can’t quite believe that Mr Osbourne has given a nod to Boris Island Airport - really? Do we really need another airport? Also that he is actively encouraging oil drilling - no concept of climate change?

Personally, i would prefer a budget that penalised big business over oil and incentivised green business, rather than penalising motorists at the petrol pump. We live in a rural area where the bus service has been cut *again*. we do actually need to use our car. I can’t afford to replace it for a more environmentally friendly one - and I never will be able to while so much of my income goes on petrol. If, however, big incentives were given to companies making eco-cars, and big incentives were given to purchasers, then in a couple of years time there will be plenty of second-hand Eco-cars on the market for ordinary folk!

Angie

me and DH recently got back together after a 2 year split where we lived a separate end s of the country. We are approximately £4,000 a year worse off now that we are back together!!!???
Its mental- how can that possibly be right!??
If we stayed appart we got £4,000 a year more money between us??? both working, its now better for us to both be part time earners to avoid childcare costs as this basicly absorbed all of our income that we were working so hard for.
i think untill DC are at school there is no wayt we could go full time again!
I have a career (nurse) where i need to work or ill loose my registration, DH is the same as he is a driver, as neither of us can give up work all together the only choice is for us both to work part time and giggle the childcare between us to avoid the massively expensive wrap around care and nursery bill!!
No tax credits for us to cover it where as when i was on my own i got some help with childcare.
I just dont understand why we are financially screwed for being a couple??

http://thegannersblog.blogspot.com/  our ‘larger’ family blog!!

Is there anywhere you can read it all in simple English (for a simple minded pregnant lady???) or a calculator to say how it will affect you? There is a calculator on the Telegraph website but it doesn’t really help at all.

Was I right in reading that they are not going to take childcare costs into consideration when working out tax credits??? What will that mean for people like my friend? She is a single mum to two children and pays childcare for both of them. At the moment she gets about half (I think) of her childcare paid by tax credits - but if they don’t take it into consideration will that mean she won’t get help towards childcare costs at all??? That will more than definitely mean her having to quit her job as her childcare payments are about what she earns right now.

Personally the budget is ok for me, the rise in income tax allowance is great news.  I don’t think I’m adversely affected at all.
I am however gobsmacked at the 50p tax cut…I read that the treasury said it didn’t make them any money which is why they are scrapping it… I really don’t see how that can be possible!
And I am incensed at the way the elderly are treated, most of whom have put blood sweat and tears into this country and this is how they are treated.  It is morally offensive.

I can appreciate there may be need for change..but seriously this is just too fast, people are getting seriously screwed…and I’m furious that the bank gets to plunge us all into a financial crisis but then they can still give huge bonuses etc to their CEO’s and make huge profits.  It’s sickening.

I’m kinda surprised it has kicked off more riots.. and honestly, while I don’t agree with violence and destruction of property… I would have some sympathy for people so frustrated by this govt.

https://www.facebook.com/ByHook0rCrook/  - Freeform Crochet Art.

My blog:  http://freelyeducated.blogspot.co.uk/

LETS membership # 52

http://rosehowey.org.uk - HOME!

“I think the child benefit thing is a reaction to the outrage last year where a certain benefit (can’t remember which one) was given to couples even if both of them earned £39k, but wasn’t given to families where only one parent worked but the other earned £41k.”. Sounds like it is child benefit you are talking about and exactly what I am talking about, the only difference is that the threshold is higher and there’s a bit of a taper. The unfairness of allowing families where both partners work to earn twice as much as those who choose to live on a single income remains. Not to mention those who don’t actually choose it-lone parents, say, are also just as affected by this.

The Tory argument is that single income families earning up to £60k don’t need child benefit, but dual income families earning up to £120 k do need child benefit. In other words, many, many dual income, higher rate taxpayers earning OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND BETWEEN THEM are going to be receiving child benefit, while those on half that don’t, simply because they’ve chosen for someone to stay home with the kids. You might be, say, two lawyers, or two juniorish doctors, or two highish grade civil servants. You’d qualify for a mortgage of around £350k at least. And yet, you’d continue to get child benefit.

My anger at this is mainly ideological. I have a huge problem with the message I feel I am getting about my worth as a SAHP. (not sure if we will be personally affected, but suspect might not-depends on income this year)

I cannot for the life of me work out why they are doing this though. Although middle income women with kids are statistically more likely to vote Tory, iirc they are also very much swing voters. Doesn’t make sense from any direction.

And how the hell they can say with a straight face that they HAVE to take money from families - and then cut income tax for the highest earners…

My anger at this is mainly ideological. I have a huge problem with the message I feel I am getting about my worth as a SAHP.

Absolutely - we are just so not valued by any political party - including here in Scotland.  i read an article by the SNP communications director (female) who was shouting about all the wonderful things they were doing for mothers - well yes, if you were working and requiring full time child care etc.  She has not yet replied to my message about excluding SAHMs from their policies - I must follow that up now.

I haven’t seen the budget at all, I’ve just been reading though your comments.  I heard somebody say on the radio earlier that you are at your wealthiest on the day you retire, and I think that is true.  And with regards to the ‘millionaires’, we really want to keep them paying tax in this country, rather than going away and paying somewhere else.  So, although a cut may seem like we are taking less money from the very rich - the total income from the very rich may be more if you reduce tax, as you have more very rich people to take tax from (not just income tax either).

Plus, I never liked the idea of the government supporting childcare.  It just seems to me like they are telling you to go to work and let somebody else look after your children, which I believe is not best for society.

Increased personal tax allowance for lowest earners is great - rather than taxing them and then giving back though a convoluted and very expensive to run benefits system.

Just thought I would share my uninformed opinion…

Husband to an amazing wife and learning all the time from twins boys (Dec 2007) and their younger brother (March 2011)

DaddyTom

1. The government IS right now telling us to go to work. This is what the huge anger over child benefit is about. Families where both partners work (and presumably use some form of childcare, incl free stuff), , who are earning well over a hundred thousand a year are keeping child benefit when families with a SAHP on half their income are not.

2. I think its entirely circumstance dependent whether you are at your wealthiest on the day you retire. I really don’t think you can use that as a basis for a generalisation about whether over 65s should not have income tax breaks. Some over 65s are wealthy. Very many are not. I think pensioners should have to pay income tax, just not at this level. My big problem is that many many people, especially women who have had career breaks, are still working at 65, trying to build up some retirement money. Others have family responsibilities-dependent grandchildren. Others are carers. Other have chronic health problems. Giving over 65s tax breaks recognises that, for many, this is actually quite a financially challenging time of life and really their last chance to get it sorted.

3. I’d actually like to see some concrete evidence that the super-rich are this mobile. 50p was levied at £150k or above. That isn’t actually super-super-rich. Its what I suspect a doctor with many years increments who did additional private work might be on, or a city banker, or a well placed barrister, or a business owner. These are not necessarily people who can just up and leave or want to even if they can. They may actually have UK specific qualifications or have less earning potential if they retrain. Like the rest of us, they generally have family and friends in the UK, are rooted here, have kids in school here. Also, they’d have to find a country that, all in all, including the benefits of things like free healthcare, they liked better. I’d really like to see statistics on whether the 50p tax rate affects immigration in this bracket. I am really not sure, if you are on £150k, whether a 10p change in tax would be enough to make you move country. However, I bet the cumulative effect of it on the UK coffers was actually significant.

4.Plus where are they going to go? Most Northern European countries have very comparable rates of tax for their highest earners. The UK really does not have the highest tax rates in Europe.

I read somewhere the higher rate of tax raises 1 billion per year over the new lower rate. Not to be sniffed at. I hate the way the government can give tax breaks to high earners, pay for wars and send aid abroad but cannot look after British eldery, disabled and children first. This is not just this government but any government although this one seems worse. I didn’t actually see the budget so don’t know all the details this is just a general impression I get. I am not sure how the new rules on child benefit are working either. How are stay at home mums being penalised exactly?  Oldl tory ideology is that mothers should stay at home, but with the coalition I think to many compromises are having to be made and we are ending up with some crazy policies that don’t make any sense. Clegg has ensured that Cameron has reneged on many of the tory election promises.

” hate the way the government can give tax breaks to high earners, pay for wars and send aid abroad but cannot look after British eldery, disabled and children first. “

I dunno, to my mind, as long as its actually aid and not political strategising, I’m really glad I live in a country with enough global conscience to look after everyone in their world, not just their own citizens. Starving kids, to my mind, are starving kids, whether in Kent or Somalia.

I also think we take disproportionately of the earth’s resources in this country and its right -or would be right- that we give back disproportionately.

Edith I agree with you completely, but if they can afford to send aid abroad they can afford to support the poor in this country also surely? I understand that poverty is subjective and we are still much richer than billions of others, probably to their detriment due to the global financial system. But to me when they send aid abroad they are papering over the cracks, there needs to be a much larger international effort to actually end world poverty. With careful world wide planning/farming surely there are enough resources for all on the planet. I have been watching the poor/starving in Africa since I was a teenager watching live aid, and while a lot has been done it never ends does it. I don’t think any government is really commmited to ending poverty abroad, they pay lip service to it. I know that what I am suggesting is probably just a pipe dream though.

Share this with friends

Recent Posts