If I might make an observation... by Raistlin


User avatar
Raistlin
... without stepping out of bounds (Delete if you think fit Mick :))

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10220898/Families-with-two-working-parents-will-be-offered-Government-help-with-childcare.html

Single parent mums (or dads) are having their benefits cut right left and centre. Meanwhile, two parent families on a total income of £300000, meagre and insignificant though that is, will be entitled to grab a further amount, PER CHILD, of up to £1200, which, of course, they desperately need to keep them above the poverty line.

Now, that's equitable, don't you think?

"We're all in this together"
Paul

Cogito ergo sum... maybe?

Click the image to go to Nano-Meet Website
Image

Posted 03 Aug 2013, 22:18 #1 


carlpenn
Those on incomes of as much as £150,000 a year will be eligible — so even households with two working parents with a joint income of up to £300,000 could get the online vouchers.


And that is where it falls down............

Why oh why would someone earning that much need help? Really? Who is looking after their Kids ....... The Queen?

Just for once, I would like to see a Gov't bring a Benefit in, that actually benefits people who need it.

Or am I asking too much?

Also looking at this:

The scheme will be introduced for children under five by 2015 and extended to cover all those under 12 by 2020, under current plans.


Election Promises?
Upgrades:

Fitted Electric Memory Seat, Leather Cubby Lid, Wood Dash, Message Centre.

Posted 03 Aug 2013, 23:45 #2 

User avatar
Bermudan 75
Stop the world.....I want to get off. :roll:
Image

Posted 04 Aug 2013, 09:37 #3 


Jumper
Apart from 6 weeks in 1960, every one of which evaporated in some sort of self-induced haze (had no dependants then), I have never received any welfare benefits at all. So I count myself rather lucky.

There have been times though when getting-by money has been hard to come by. We were always a single-earner family by choice, believing our children were our own responsibility and we would prefer to keep it that way. My solution was to take a second job until the situation was resolved, no family money for me. Didn’t matter what the second job was, it was after all ‘secondary’.

But I had friends who were desperate to find even the money to keep their family together and seen the futile attempts of honest people trying to maintain some sort of respectability in the face of crushing indifference. That’s happening now.

It’s odd how whenever expenditure has to be trimmed, it’s never the outrageous wastage of Gov. departments that take the brunt. Oh, their budgets are cut, but that just means the services they are meant to provide as emergency relief are cut to suit - not their institutional extravagance. That’s not political comment, all govs. are the same.

I believe there should be no ‘benefits’ as a right at all for families (including what used to be called Family Allowance) or individuals with an income in excess of the national average. Not until the prevailing insider belief that ’the horny-handed’ are not real people changes will the welfare system be true to its founding principles. We seem to be regressing 100 years.

Posted 04 Aug 2013, 11:57 #4 

User avatar
geesmith
I confess to having occasionally wept at the intentional callousness of it all.
There is no longer democratic government. David Cameron is simply the eager Manager of some larger concern. Who are the Directors? Who owns the franchise?
The taxes we pay are being diverted to that businesses interests. Our state owned institutions are being maliciously broken then pointed out as failing and in need of privatisation.
Come the election it matters not who we vote in because it will just be a change of managers for the UK branch of the same global business. I think there may still be some worthy members of Parliament but they aren't allowed near the front of the house.

Agenda 21 was initially intended to address world issues of food and energy resources but the big business that pays our Manager didn't like the way that was heading so they set about monopolising world food production and energy resources. They believe it's necessary to reduce world population to as low as a tenth of the current level.

I'm delighted to see that you question what is going on rather than bleating out the mantras of the media.

Another angry source of interesting topics from someone without political bias for the current parties:-
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk ... urope.html

Posted 08 Aug 2013, 02:20 #5 


Top