silly wrote: » Stupid idea - where would I get the time to collect it when both myself and my husband work full time.....
The Princess Bride wrote: » It would be better to get rid of it altogether- don't have children if you can't afford them.Stop expecting the tax payer to fund your family. Phase it in gradually.No benefit for newborns from January 2016. That'd give folk enough time to sort out their contraception.
Uepped wrote: » I have an idea about child benifit that could save millions, Remove the option of paying it into a bank account and make all recipints collect it at their local post office with their welfare card. That way people who arn't even living in the country couldn't reseive it and rich yummy mummys who don't need it would probably be too embarresed to que in the po to collect it.
SEPT 23 1989 wrote: » Amazing with the technology we have to tax everything,the 100,000+ euro a year civil servants throw their hands up in defeat year after year when it comes to taxing child benefit of very high earners like themselves
Gannicus wrote: » It might not be a bad idea to have those who are on the welfare do that. Even better would be to have a letter fro the school each year stating their child is enrolled in it and that they have attended the school a sufficient number of days to prove they are in fact in the country.
AnonoBoy wrote: » Personally I think we should euthanise everyone once they hit 30. It's not the childers that are ruining the country, it's us old people. No more pensions to pay out, we could quadruple child benefit and we'd get loads of cash by selling off the organs.
whupdedo wrote: » So if someone who pays taxes and contributes to the system earns more than allowed, they would have the child support cut off for their children. But, if someone who has never worked, is claiming the dole and is in receipt of social housing. rent allowance, free furniture bedding etc etc they should still get child support, it doesn't seem very fair to me to pay the more unproductive members of society to have children, and all the while penalising the productive members for daring to have a good job and kids
Uepped wrote: » Lunchtime ? before or after work ? Saturday ?
ted1 wrote: » these kids that you don't want people to have will be paying your pension. fewer kids = reduced pensions. There is always a bigger picture.
jimgoose wrote: » It would be a vastly better idea to stop paying it to people who don't need it. It should be means-tested.
Gannicus wrote: » I was thinking there and it should be completely stopped and diverted to the school systems to ensure every child gets a decent lunch, uniforms and books and equipment every year. Soo many kids go without books lunches and equipment around this country it would be nice to see them all get an even shot at an education to try and break the fold. I still despise the way childrens allowance day is seen as a chance to go on the pissed (at least in my local area)
Bepolite wrote: »
sbsquarepants wrote: » 1. Not everyone who collects child benefit is on welfare
popolive wrote: » I think that is a good idea if it ensures the kids themselves get good or even better value for the cash and would definitely ensure that the money was not spent abroad or claimed by those abroad thereby killing two birds with one stone (people who blame the EU for the flow of funds abroad). It would also reduce admin costs of checking up on parents.