come the revolution gogglebox ....

rosiet2008:

Aye the government (like one of my colleagues) seem to think you only need help if you have kids whereas couples with children are usually the most affluent of all groups. 

Rosie - you have surpassed yourself there! Couples with kids more affluent than those who have not? You are having a laugh. All us lucky parents are just delighted when term time comes around and we have to shell out for new uniforms, shoes, trainers, sports kit, ballet shoes, football boots etc......because our kids have taken a spurt over the summer.

i am also delirious that I can pay £1.50 per day per child for them to have school dinners, never mind the after school clubs, swimming at the weekends and all the other expenses that are just part of life.

couples with no kids only have to worry about feeding themselves and swaning off on hoiliday when they feel like it. Not so the parents.

All said and done I would not change it for the world but don't try and tell me I have more disposable income than those without kids. not in this universe anyway.

You're definitely mistaken if you think people without kids are better off than those with.  The people I work with are always complaining about how hard up they are and how they should be given more money by the government because child rearing is an expensive business (a business they CHOSE to go into!!) and the next minute these same whingers are flying off on holiday.  I and many others who don't have kids and/or whose kids have grown up and flown the nest can't afford the luxury of swanning off on holiday.   Difference isn't that people without kids have only themselves to feed but that we're not entitled to claim our taxes back like those who have kids do (and then grumble they're not getting enough whilst swanning off on holiday!!).

I think you are missing the point.

The government want to encourage us to have kids. It safeguards the future of the country and of society. Who do you think is going to pay our pensions when we retire?

The point is that you are not responsible for anyone but yourself whereas parents are responsible for thier kids.

No parent is asking for handouts but you have to ask yourself why the government are willing to make concesions for parents - because they are contributing to something worthwhile for the country.

The government want to encourage people to have more offspring because it's good for economy - consumerism is the watchword and from the minute they're born we're consumers (even though we contribute nothing until at least the age of 16). 

 If only it were the case that parents WERE responsible for their offspring.  More & more frequently nowadays we see parents negating that role in favour of being their pals and leaving it to the government and/or "experts" to tell them how they should be raising their kids. 

As to whether parents are contributing something worthwhile that's a matter of opinion judging by the increasing number of  (to be polite) unruly kids we see nowadays. The reason parents get tax refunds is because the majority of people ARE parents.  Come the revolution when parents are in the minority tax refunds will be given to those who are not adding to the overpopulation problem.  Incidentally isn't it a tad hypocritical of the government to encourage breeding given their supposed commitment to green issues? 

Unless, after the revolution, you are planning to line all the parents up against a wall and shoot them, I doubt they will ever be in the minority.

Also there are more well behaved and law abiding kids than there are unruly and disruptive ones. I think you are falling into the trap of media hysteria whipping up a frenzy on the subject of neds, chavs whatever you want to label them.

since when have we had an overpopulation problem? Birth rates have fallen year on year.

raging:

Unless, after the revolution, you are planning to line all the parents up against a wall and shoot them, I doubt they will ever be in the minority.

Also there are more well behaved and law abiding kids than there are unruly and disruptive ones. I think you are falling into the trap of media hysteria whipping up a frenzy on the subject of neds, chavs whatever you want to label them.

since when have we had an overpopulation problem? Birth rates have fallen year on year.

True I don't think parents will ever be in the minority given that most people seem to have this "selfish gene" syndrome.    And sadly I don't need to rely on "mass hysteria" to remind me there are young savages roaming the streets as I have had personal contact with said yobs.  Still I suppose there are those who will always chant the mantra but the majority are well behaved - doesn't really solve the problem of what to do about the scumbags though does it?!

As regards birth rates, world wide the birth rate is 6 billion last I heard and continuing to rise.  Why else would scientists be working on gm food if not to feed an ever increasing population.  We're led to believe globalisation will solve the problem - that when the "developing" nations reach a set standard of living their birth rates will fall too and so world wide the population will decrease whereas all globalisation seems to be doing is increasing the divide between rich & poor

Don't know about birth rate on the decline in the UK , look at the amount of unmarried underage females having children in this country against other european countries.  I stayed at home with my children because I wanted them and I wanted to be their sole carer and not ship them off to a creche.  I enjoyed every minute of it.  We didnt have holidays abroad every year.  We had camping,caravanning holidays in this country which were fun for us all.  This country is lovely (maybe not the weather) but it has a lot to offer.  Yes I have had a short time when I claimed Child Tax Credit but we've mostly provided for them ourselves.  There are people that need to claim because they have low wages and not because they expect free child care along with 2 or 3 cars per family, 2 or 3 holidays a year. Blah blah blah.  Our children are now grown up and my hubby had a short time last year unemployed and I work part time, we couldn't claim tax credits and yes we couldn't have a holiday abroad,  unlike my whinging colleagues who get all the benefits going and can afford to take their children on an all inclusive holiday for 2 weeks.

My point exactly.  You were able to claim tax credits when your children were young but now they're fully grown you're not entitled to claim.  Someone told me tax credits weren't just available to those with kids but to those on low pay generally.  Seems they were wrong!!  Meanwhile people who earn 10 times what I do can still child allowance.  Go figure!!  

 

My Mother-in-law worked for a woman who is an Optician and her husband an accountant and they had 2 children.  They gave their 2 children the Child Benefit for pocket money??  They obviously did'nt need the money.  Why people who earn so much get it I will never understand.

<quote>Why people who earn so much get it I will never understand. </quote>

Most likely to maintain the status quo.  They don't want the plebian working class to have the same income as smart, middle class professionals do they?  Else it would make a mockery of the mockery that is our education system.

Once again we are off on a pointless tangent.

Child benefit is one of the few that is not means tested, because it is for the benefit of the kids. Rich or poor you get it and that is a good thing. There is no greater agenda here, no conspiracy to keep certain people down either.

By the way, the longer you bang on about Middle class, upper class and working class then the longer these stereotypes will persist. It is about time in this country that we stop pigeon-holing people into class types because it is insulting. With the exception of the very poor, everyone has the opportunity to thrive and be educated and therefore be gainfully employed or start their own business.

 

These stereotypes persist because the class system persists and with globalisation the divide between rich & poor will continue to increase (not just in this country but in the developing nations).  And yes child benefit is universal (given to rich & poor alike) which is disgraceful as allowances should only be given to those who really need them.  A spoilt brat whose parents earn enough to allow the little darling to travel the world does not (and should not) be granted such an allowance.  But not to worry because even those who have lost their 10p in the pound advantage will claw it back in increased child allowance.  Those without kids won't of course have such preferential treatment.

Should the sins of the father be visited upon the son? quite simply no. i know it is tempting to tar everyone wit hthe same brush but in doing that we make the same mistake in sticking one person into a class division.

These stereotypes only persist because we allow them to. I really could not care where someone's money came from, what their dad did for a living or where thye wer educated.

As my mother was fond of saying "we all pop out of the same hole"

I'm not sure what stereotypes you mean but if you mean classification of people in terms of class they exist because the class system exists (or, if you prefer, because inequalities exist and giving child allowance to those who don't really need it maintains that inequality as surely as the wage structure does).