Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hugo, Hugo, Hugo... I'm sorry if what I write makes you think I'm making things up or have some weird goings on in my head. I do get passionate about subjects such as these because my view is one of an insider, unlike yourself. It's so easy to generalise in debates like these. And to be fair, you come across as a very miserable resentful old man so I just respond accordingly. Of course I don't wish anything happens to you, I'm not interested in teaching people lessons at all.


I was refering to this point you made in regards to IV's post:


'You've clearly got great kids, but other people will have kids who are a net drain on society. Besides most of their tax investment will go on providing services for themselvelves.'


I'm also in favour of reforming child benefits, to see that those who need it get it.

That's simply a statement of fact zeban. There are 3 million UK adults on long term unemployment benefits. They were children once.


It's not safe to assume that a child automatically develops into a tax-paying asset.


Now, please don't do anything terminally stupid like claim I was having a go at scroungers or anything. I'm spectacularly unimpressed by this encounter with an 'insider', but I should be humbled if you don't need to make anything else up to demonstrate your lofty surveil.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's simply a statement of fact zeban. There are

> 3 million UK adults on long term unemployment

> benefits. They were children once.

>

> It's not safe to assume that a child automatically

> develops into a tax-paying asset.

>

> Now, please don't do anything terminally stupid

> like claim I was having a go at scroungers or

> anything. I'm spectacularly unimpressed by this

> encounter with an 'insider', but I should be

> humbled if you don't need to make anything else up

> to demonstrate your lofty surveil.



Nor is it "safe" to assume they wont.


Not a good point to make eh? ;-)

Oh God.


*despair*


The point was that you cannot be sure that a child is an investment with a post dated return on taxable income.


Hence you can't use it as a robust justification for child benefit.


It's not a 'loaded' context. The only people who 'loaded' it were the ones who made completely fabricated claims about what I'd said in order to vilify my position, the ones who tried to turn it into a war of compassion for the starving and downtrodden.

As in the background I've come from, my own personal experience. It's only been IV and myself who have layed these out on the line as a kind of counter argument to some simplistic responses to this debate. It is a complicated issue after all.


Look Huguenot, I'm sorry if I misread you, I honestly didn't think I did. It's true that 'you cannot be sure that a child is an investment with a post dated return on taxable income' but they also might well do that. There's also other ways you can contribute towards society than just paying your taxes.

Zeban, we probably agree with each other. I'm not against the welfare system per se.


DJKQs summary of the impetus for delivering child benefit in the 40s may well be spot on, that it was created in a world that needed to come to terms with the empowerment of women and families.


However, if this was the case once, what is it now? Clearly rogue husbands down the pub spending the housekeeping would not wash for the creation of a new benefit allowance in the modern era.


If there are millions in poverty who need support then give it to them. Just don't call it child benefit, and don't give it to people for whom the biggest family challenge this year will be Tuscany or the Dordogne.

If there are millions in poverty who need support then give it to them. Just don't call it child benefit, and don't give it to people for whom the biggest family challenge this year will be Tuscany or the Dordogne.


Finally we agree and all ends well. :)-D

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Not sure what the age range is but Woodcraft Folk meet at the East Dulwich Community Centre in Darrell Road on a Tuesday evening.
    • James  may have initiated the boards but there would have been a group of people who would have taken in turn to keep boards up to date. When locks and boards were vandalised  it took some while (around 2 years) for the council to repair/replace and many of the group who maintained them, moved/died. I know James was not seen so much in ED due to  family  illness/bereavement  and I believe he also changed his job.    
    • Have been to Love Dulwich twice for lunch - best food have had for a long time.  Seabass in gorgeous Cannot find anything to suggest they do a children's'  menu. We have 2 grand children (9 and 11)  who are fussy eaters but will generally eat chicken - also small appetite.
    • Bowley Close at Crystal Palace has a NHS  specialist Orthotic clinic - I have to wear specialist shoes and they take all the measurements to send off. for shoes to be made, You will need a GP referral My grand daughter is in her 2nd year degree in Podiatry and she usually does my feet, As she does not live locally, there are times when I need to go to the Woodwarde  Road, Very expensive and prices change in accordance to whom you see,  Last time I went they told me I had a verruca and needed treatment which I noticed on their price list, was over £100. Consulted my grand daughter, who examined my foot and advised that verruca was very small and looked as though it would go away itself. She checked my feet a couple of months later - no sign of a verruca.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...