General Chat

RR certainly has a point about expectations. Even 8 years ago when our youngest was at school, she felt hard done by when friends from lower income families (supplemented by Benefits) had annual holidays on the Costas.

A TV (the bigger the better) is now seen as a necessity rather than a luxury. Ditto mobile phones. You could probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of teenagers in a school who don’t own their own Mobile, regardless of income or Benefits.

Brenda, I agree I think a lot of it is down to difference in 'expectations' , and that has developed over the decades since the war, with what you might call the rise of the middle class, I think looking back will show that 'we' have had almost as big a social change in the 20th/start of 21st C as the industrial Revolution.

The gap between rich and poor was always very apparent of course but no matter how hard you worked the gap was likely to remain, but with so much choice since the 60s/70s , of everything, and with higher rates of employment and industry going well there were more people in the 'middle' in those years able to have a car, washing machines fridges...There was then a shift away from the 'blue collar' industries and manufacturing is almost extinct...and i think there developed approaching almost a distaste for what became to be considered 'menial' jobs... how many times did I hear people say 'oh I wouldn't do shop work...or he'll end up as a bin man " or similar, devalueing the jobs that 40 years ago people were proud to have.

At the same time all those things that previously you maybe managed to work for and got 10/20 years into a marriage started appearing on wedding present lists in the '80s. People thought (imo) that we could 'all' have it all lol, children stopped 'expecting' to have hand me downs and expected and GOT 'designer' trainers; free books from a weekly trip to the library became games consoles, a weeks holiday in Blackpool became 10 days in Spain....Adults expected to own a car, their own home,, all mod cons , now the bigger tv, the 100 channels, the newest of everything.

i think what anyone "Earns" or is gven of the goverment, has got nothing to do with anyone else to be honest,

but i do think its a good idea to stop it if people earn a certain amount, same as i think it should be stopped after so many children, x

Rose,I know why the government gave out family allowance,but this didn't allter the fact that everyone was responsible for bringing up their families without help.
Like Dizzi,we unpicked old sweaters and washed the wool and knitted up again,this was in the 60's.At the time we had a guest house and beach cafe and worked so very hard,but I often wondered why I was so pale,and locals came in the cafe looking tanned and saying we must be made of money when it couldn't have been further from the truth.I often wonder how I did it with 2 young children,and this makes me think that today too much is expected.
Rant over!!

BRENDA
I BOUGHT HAND KNITTS FROM JUMBLE SALES
AND UNPICKED TO REKNIT AGAIN

The original point of giving family allowance for the second and third etc was that people would be actively encouraged to restore the birth rate after WW2.

In the 1950's and 60's family allowance was not given for your first child,and only 5 shillings(25pence)for 2nd,3rd etc.This was eventually raised to 8 shillings.We did not expect help.If you wanted children you had to plan and do without luxuries to afford them.
We made clothes,sometimes from some old material and even our old dresses.We recycled old toys or made them,but took great enjoyment out of the finished product.Sometimes I despair about what we take for granted.
It doesn't do anyone harm to cut back .The war time spirit instilled in us to treasure what we have.
As others have said,it won't be the poorest who willl have their benefits cut,and it may yet change again before 2013.

we have to make cuts that will affect us all

and for a change its the higher wage bracket thats being hit

not the poor or needy for a change
the changes will only affect 15% of people
and 83% agree with the cuts in a sun poll

I couldn't agree with you more on that.
fathers who have children should provide for them full stop.

What I would like to see from this Govt is a commitment ( jeez even a comment would be good!) that they will sort out the CSA ( Child maintenance ) and not let all those who manage not to pay it get away with it...and not crucify those absent parents who DO support their children by excessive payments taken. But that's a different subject....lol

So they should.

Foggy that is apparently being talked about? tax incentives for working married couples to compensate.

There was another thread on this topic started yesterday by Mildred. A lot of points raised there may answer questions raised here.

Hi Rose, If the government want to stop CB for parents who singly earn over 44K, then they should reduce the amount of tax and NI they have to pay.
Their tax and NI will come to a tidy amount.

i never new about CB not being paid for child 1 where was the sense in that could that of encouraged child no2 ?

Foggy, I don't think it is 'penalising' anyone if they earn over £44k a year to stop paying them something they don't need? ...Put it this way , if I was ( or had been ) earning that amount I would be happy to do without CB.

If someone would like to give me a job paying that, I shall prove it forthwith ;)

wish id had enough money and time to go out for coffee, i could not of managed without cb it helped towards the creche i had my daughter in 5 days a week whilst i worked on the next floor.

i hate single woman who have babies as often as they can to ensure they get more money one lives not far from me and her friend they just keep churning them out , i got sterilised after no 3 would not have affored a 4th sadley.

there cb should be stopped after no 2 with father unknown.

Ive also fostered the childs mother got to keep her cb, where is the sense in that

No Steven I didn't say it was "normal" to go out for coffee....you misread or misunderstood perhaps ...I meant as a single mum struggling on very little sometimes it was nice to FEEL 'normal' and go in a cafe and maybe even pay for some elses cup , because believe it or not...when you are in that position it is sometimes worth going without a meal yourself at home ( not your child, you) just so you can buy someone else a coffee. It's just a little way of keeping some self respect and a way of making a food shopping trip a bit more interesting for your child...even if it is only once in a blue moon.

Why penalise someone who works hard to earn a good wage.
High earners pay higher taxes, higher NI, they are contributing to the country by their hard work, unlike ones who have large families who wont work at all.

we didnt mind then part time dizzi
they became part of our family
all the childern were equal
child 8 was under social servises
who when they visited
offered us two more kids which we declined

we are now grandparents to their children
and most are still a massive part of our lives