Child Tax Credit changes come into force today - How it affects you - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Child Tax Credit changes come into force today - How it affects you

£0.00 @
New Child Tax credit changes come into effect today - possibly affecting millions of low-income parents who are planning a third child. (via The Express) Under the new rules, babies born into … Read More
msmyth Avatar
[mod] 2m, 2w agoPosted 2 months, 2 weeks ago
New Child Tax credit changes come into effect today - possibly affecting millions of low-income parents who are planning a third child.

http://oi67.tinypic.com/5vdn4p.jpg
(via The Express)

Under the new rules, babies born into families that already have two children will not get any extra help through tax credits or universal credit. The Child Tax Credit changes also mean that there will not be an extra £545 a year for newborn first children. It is thought the changes will eventually affect four million low-income families in a bid to reduce Government spending by £5billion a year.

Child Tax Credit - which is worth up to £2,780 per child per year - will only be paid for the first two children in any family.

Historically there has not been a limit on how many children a parent can claim for. If your children were born before today, credits for three or more children will still be applicable.

Four other cuts introduced this month may also affect families across the UK. However, exclusions apply and it's worth checking to see how you may be personally affected...

1: £30-a-week disability benefit cuts

From today, people claiming the disability benefit called Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) will be getting £29.05 less each week if they are deemed fit for Work Related Activity (WRAG). This means instead of £102.15 per week, this particular group of people will now recieve £73.10 per week - which is the same as jobseekers’ allowance.

2: The Family element

An extra payment in Child Tax Credit called the “family element”, worth £545 a year, is being shut down.

3: Changes for people who have been widowed

Three different benefits are being replaced with one new Bereavement Support Payment. It’s worth £3,500, plus £350 a month for 18 months, for claimants with dependent children (£2,500 plus £100 a month for other claimants).

4: Young people and housing benefit

Already in force on 1st April, Jobseekers aged 18 to 21 will no longer be able to get Housing Benefit, worth varying amounts and always paid directly to the landlord.

Tax Credits - gov.uk
Tax Credit Calculator - gov.uk
msmyth Avatar
[mod] 2m, 2w agoPosted 2 months, 2 weeks ago
Options

Top Comments

(5)
38 Likes
I will probably be in a minority here but I'd say not paying extra for a 3rd child seems sensible.
20 Likes
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
12 Likes
History repeats itself.The poorest are always portrayed as the low lives.Its becoming harder and harder to improve yourself, how can you when you can barely make the bills.Im from a working family but i will not be Brianwashed into thinking everyone that needs help are scroungers and need money cuts.I know people who have worked all there lives, never took a penny,and now they're too ill to work,what can they claim ...nothing.why?.. they're told they cannot claim jobseekers as they're not fit to search for work but well enough to work,at least some type of job,so not ill enough for help!! Age comes to us all,things will only get worse.Children are in poverty and we allow it? Because the tv tells us single parents are all scum,having babies as a sport.The ill are all blaggers, stealing our taxes.Everyone on the dole is living it up holidays, days out, nice food all for sitting on there ****...all to anger us,and it works! we work all the hours we can, 0 hour contracts pushed to the brink and still cant afford a break, nice things we barely survive.Im not being told who to blame i dont forget that we was recently in recession due to work being sent abroad, greedy banks, greedy multi conglomerate companys sqeezing every last drop out of our country and not forgetting the wonderful goverment and mps using our taxes as pocket money for a luxury lifestyle,all while dodging taxes.
We are led into believing we have choices,but we dont our rights are being taken away.Only the rich having the luxury of having a S.A.H parent.The poor stay poor and the rich will keep getting richer.All while we fight amongst ourselves, and one day when we need help it wont be available to us.we will fall through the gaps and people will judge us, our children will suffer. Because we will be second class citizens.
9 Likes
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.


I'd disagree. There are a minority of British families that have large number of children and don't bother to get work. They rely on benefits to the tune of £30k per year tax free.
There are also immigrants who come to the UK and do exactly the same thing.
The tax payers shouldn't to made to fork out for these.
8 Likes
123thisisme
What is that all women are going to be forced, seems a tad unfair that.
I'm fairly sure victims of rape routinely get offered the morning after pill, I would have thought most women would take it. The ones that dont, thats thier choice but having to fill in a form (even if it is by force) isnt the end of the world.

Surely you're trolling?

If not then you're a pillock.


Edited By: deeky on Apr 06, 2017 19:57

All Comments

(117) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
38 Likes #1
I will probably be in a minority here but I'd say not paying extra for a 3rd child seems sensible.
20 Likes #2
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
4 Likes #3
It should be like child benefit, less paid for each subsequent child on the basis of having hand me downs from the first so needing less
7 Likes #4
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)

Ignorance is bliss, situations are never static you never know what may happen so don't get to comfy.
3 Likes #5
Error440
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
Ignorance is bliss, situations are never static you never know what may happen so don't get to comfy.

Typical blanket approach, but I guess they have to do something to stop benefit breeders (_;)
#6
Error440
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
Ignorance is bliss, situations are never static you never know what may happen so don't get to comfy.

Yeah, the Tories might get in. ohhhhh
3 Likes #7
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.
1 Like #8
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.

No problem with that as long as THEY pay for them, encouraging more children is not the same as paying feckless breeders to pop kids out with no consequences (Prudhams for instance!).

Edited By: frakison on Apr 06, 2017 13:42
9 Likes #9
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.


I'd disagree. There are a minority of British families that have large number of children and don't bother to get work. They rely on benefits to the tune of £30k per year tax free.
There are also immigrants who come to the UK and do exactly the same thing.
The tax payers shouldn't to made to fork out for these.
6 Likes #10
This country has far too much of a benefit culture, I'm glad the government is focusing on working families, disgusts me some people
1 Like #11
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.


People can still have kids, that's not the problem. The problem is the ever increasing bill to the tax payer to pay towards parenting them.
#12
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/britains-most-shameless-mother-tattooed-5727894

Not a daily mail article!




Edited By: Chiptivo on Apr 06, 2017 13:49
3 Likes #13
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)

What if you can afford them, then get struck by redundancy or something else.....You haven't thought this through have you?
4 Likes #14
I just want to say im a single parent i only have 2 kids but i work as many hours as posaible around my 2 kids age 5 n 2 i get tax credits as my income is low and for people to come n comment on hear about scroungers getting it n dont have kids if u cant afford i agree that some people are like this but not all of us!!! Please take into consideration us mams who are on our own grafting as much as we can but its still now quite enough i dont smoke or drink or go on nights out i use every penny for my kids food school n clothing ect i might be 1 of few but pls dont tar us all the same
1 Like #15
I agree with you all regarding taxpayers paying for kids etc. But hopefully those kids will grow up and contribute much more than they take out. We may regret discouraging even benefit mums and dads from having kids in the long term.

Perhaps we should encourage working people to have kids with some form of working benefit.

When you reach retirement age there are going to have to be more people working to support the older generations, Obviously the welfare system is broken and everyone who is capable of work should work but sometimes it's not as simple as that.

I think they should focus more on flexible hours, More help for people who work, Make working pay.
#16
frakison
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.
No problem with that as long as THEY pay for them, encouraging more children is not the same as paying feckless breeders to pop kids out with no consequences (Prudhams for instance!).
Totally agree! The UK will not be short of children who will grow up to remain on benefits because they wont be able to contribute to an ageing population either!!
2 Likes #17
MR1123
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
What if you can afford them, then get struck by redundancy or something else.....You haven't thought this through have you?

You can take income protection insurance out against that unfortunate event
2 Likes #18
They need to stop sending foreign aid money over seas and letting immigrants in who live off the state and are more well off than our oap who either keep warm in winter or eat as the money they get to live on is ridiculous after working all there lives this government has its priorities all wrong also the people at the top that get paid thousands they should take a pay cut
3 Likes #19
dp36
MR1123
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
What if you can afford them, then get struck by redundancy or something else.....You haven't thought this through have you?
You can take income protection insurance out against that unfortunate event

Like I said you haven't thought it through.
#20
I think all the single parent who works as well married couples who look after their children should be proud of themselves of setting a good example to their children and all parents should show their kids how to save at the earliest opportunity so maybe if the benefits stop that they are ready and have plans still to succeed in life
1 Like #21
MR1123
dp36
MR1123
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
What if you can afford them, then get struck by redundancy or something else.....You haven't thought this through have you?
You can take income protection insurance out against that unfortunate event
Like I said you haven't thought it through.

Are you suggesting that you cannot take out insurance against redundancy ?
#22
we are meant to work and set a good example not the benefit route>

1. Not everyone without a job can live their whole lives in central London paid for by taxpayers.
2. You want kids, move where there are jobs to pay for em or don't have more.
3. Benefits are meant to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice.
4. If you are using your benefits to buy luxuries - gaming tech, Sky TV, holidays abroad then you really have lost the plot.
#23
davewave
we are meant to work and set a good example not the benefit route>
1. Not everyone without a job can live their whole lives in central London paid for by taxpayers.
2. You want kids, move where there are jobs to pay for em or don't have more.
3. Benefits are meant to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice.
4. If you are using your benefits to buy luxuries - gaming tech, Sky TV, holidays abroad then you really have lost the plot.

In total agreement. Something like this should have come in a long time ago. There is still a whole generation who will be leaching & will be a purge on the taxpayer / government budgets. Of course there are always exceptions but they are the minority.
1 Like #24
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.
there is a demographic timebomb, but its not simply a numbers game. Its about the level of skills . Unfortunately evidence shows us children from low income households are less likely to get a good level of education (as social mobility is getter harder) and they often dont value education. i for one would rather have high skilled immigrants contributing to our economy rather than less skilled people relying on the state,
4 Likes #25
zedman75
shauneco
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.
there is a demographic timebomb, but its not simply a numbers game. Its about the level of skills . Unfortunately evidence shows us children from low income households are less likely to get a good level of education (as social mobility is getter harder) and they often dont value education. i for one would rather have high skilled immigrants contributing to our economy rather than less skilled people relying on the state,
you cant give up on low skilled British children just because we need to improve doesnt mean we ship in skilled immigrant children and hope they perform better?!?
2 Likes #26
I fear we'll have to rely on cheap immigration in the future, people are already having less children and people are living longer. Simple economics, they should be encouraged to have more children not less. Short term fix to a forever bigger problem.

The statistic that women are having less children is not true, the total fertility rate have increased since 2001. Part of the reason for the inaccuracies is that the figures are based on total population, average age of the woman but more importantly includes childless women. Thus the low figure of 1.70 spouted by experts, but the actual TFR is far higher 1.82. Another matter is Live births this is mainly constant, since 2001 it has gradually increased to 777,167 babies in 2015. One mitigating factor that affects the overall population is the temporary and permanent migration of EU citizens with children, 2.5 million adults (NI card requests 2010 - 2015) and 450,000 child dependents of school age (2010-2015). Overall though is that the average family size from the early 1990's was 2.0 children per family to now 3.0 Children per family (4.0 for Ethnic families).

I agree with you all regarding taxpayers paying for kids etc. But hopefully those kids will grow up and contribute much more than they take out. We may regret discouraging even benefit mums and dads from having kids in the long term.

A few years ago (2010) I wrote an extensive post explaining that 69% of working population didn't pay or provide sufficient tax contributions for all their requirements from the State. i.e. Education, Welfare, Infrastructure, Health, etc. The worry is that figure is probably worse, with the gap of net contributions worsening due to working tax credits, welfare and other benefits. i.e. free Nursery child provision.



Edited By: nemesiz on Apr 06, 2017 15:24: correction.
2 Likes #27
MR1123
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
What if you can afford them, then get struck by redundancy or something else.....You haven't thought this through have you?

Well.. they should have also thought about that.

You normally ask yourself, can I afford to buy a house and pay off the monthly mortgage?
What if at some point, I lose my job? How long can my partner tolerate it.. etc

You do the same with kids, can you afford to have another child, and what if I lose my job?

Single parent? You technically shouldn't have more kids - use contraception.

He probably worded it wrong, but basically he simply meant you shouldn't have an x amount of kids if you cannot afford to have that many.
2 Likes #28
john767676
This country has far too much of a benefit culture, I'm glad the government is focusing on working families, disgusts me some people

Perhaps you'd like to come visit the job centre with me so you can see all the single mums who can't find work that fits around having to look after school children as "flexible working" is just a code for employers that means they want someone on call 24\7 regardless of the number of hours a week the job is advertised as.
And all the men over 50 left on the scrap heap.
#29
shauneco
I agree with you all regarding taxpayers paying for kids etc. But hopefully those kids will grow up and contribute much more than they take out. We may regret discouraging even benefit mums and dads from having kids in the long term.

Perhaps we should encourage working people to have kids with some form of working benefit.

When you reach retirement age there are going to have to be more people working to support the older generations, Obviously the welfare system is broken and everyone who is capable of work should work but sometimes it's not as simple as that.

I think they should focus more on flexible hours, More help for people who work, Make working pay.

You mean somekind of working tax credits? Yes indeed why hasn't anyone thought of that....oh wait
1 Like #30
Error440
shauneco
I agree with you all regarding taxpayers paying for kids etc. But hopefully those kids will grow up and contribute much more than they take out. We may regret discouraging even benefit mums and dads from having kids in the long term.
Perhaps we should encourage working people to have kids with some form of working benefit.
When you reach retirement age there are going to have to be more people working to support the older generations, Obviously the welfare system is broken and everyone who is capable of work should work but sometimes it's not as simple as that.
I think they should focus more on flexible hours, More help for people who work, Make working pay.
You mean somekind of working tax credits? Yes indeed why hasn't anyone thought of that....oh wait
Working tax credit does help but it only tops it up to a certain level, It doesn't make people better off when they've still got to pay out for everything like prescriptions, school meals, Rent, Council tax etc..

I think working should pay with more flexible hours etc..



Edited By: shauneco on Apr 06, 2017 15:20
1 Like #31
davewave
we are meant to work and set a good example not the benefit route>

1. Not everyone without a job can live their whole lives in central London paid for by taxpayers.
2. You want kids, move where there are jobs to pay for em or don't have more.
3. Benefits are meant to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice.
4. If you are using your benefits to buy luxuries - gaming tech, Sky TV, holidays abroad then you really have lost the plot.

Why should those in need have to be treated as second class citizens for the crime of being unable to find work you want them to suffer a life of no restbite being constantly reminded what a failure they are by their lack of having anything nice in their lives, children bullied and feeling singled out by the fact they are in poverty compared to their classmates,

people like you would love to punish the poor by making them live in conditions worse then prisoners get, living off baked beans until they somehow under all the strain and stress magically acquire experience, qualifications, confidence, motivation, full health etc required to get a job that would lift them out of the poverty trap, do you still not realise how stupid you sound?

Do you know what would be a good start, free education that's what no tuition fees for the skills that matter, the things we import people for like wielding and electrician. The abolition of the apprenticeship mw at at least raising it to a livable standard and putting rules in place that an apprentice should actually be learning life skills and the system not used as an excuse to employ people as half price office tea boys. Laws enforcing flexibility in working as it should be flexible to the employees needs not the wants of the business if they want people to call on 24\7 they can employ more staff.

Also on a side note the comments about OAPs are stupid they have not worked all their lives, women live longer then men, the number of female OAPs is far higher then men, now those women come from a era when the women stayed home to look after the kids, my mother for example gave up work in the early 1970s\ late 60s and started getting her state pension in the 90s i think maybe even the early 00s.

They did not work all their lives unless you count looking after the kids, not much has changed your still stuffed if your a single mum, everything is designed on the basis of two parent families still. Prime example being the schools themselves they are very much aware that the education hours are less then full-time and charge a premium to keep kids in for longer, and even then it still doesn't match up as working hours are getting longer and longer very few jobs are 9-5 unless your earning 30k+ in a office, probably the sane offices that come up with all these stupid cuts and rules to create all the catch 22s we have.
#32
Error440
davewave
we are meant to work and set a good example not the benefit route>
1. Not everyone without a job can live their whole lives in central London paid for by taxpayers.
2. You want kids, move where there are jobs to pay for em or don't have more.
3. Benefits are meant to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice.
4. If you are using your benefits to buy luxuries - gaming tech, Sky TV, holidays abroad then you really have lost the plot.
Why should those in need have to be treated as second class citizens for the crime of being unable to find work you want them to suffer a life of no restbite being constantly reminded what a failure they are by their lack of having anything nice in their lives, children bullied and feeling singled out by the fact they are in poverty compared to their classmates,
people like you would love to punish the poor by making them live in conditions worse then prisoners get, living off baked beans until they somehow under all the strain and stress magically acquire experience, qualifications, confidence, motivation, full health etc required to get a job that would lift them out of the poverty trap, do you still not realise how stupid you sound?
Do you know what would be a good start, free education that's what no tuition fees for the skills that matter, the things we import people for like wielding and electrician. The abolition of the apprenticeship mw at at least raising it to a livable standard and putting rules in place that an apprentice should actually be learning life skills and the system not used as an excuse to employ people as half price office tea boys. Laws enforcing flexibility in working as it should be flexible to the employees needs not the wants of the business if they want people to call on 24\7 they can employ more staff.
Also on a side note the comments about OAPs are stupid they have not worked all their lives, women live longer then men, the number of female OAPs is far higher then men, now those women come from a era when the women stayed home to look after the kids, my mother for example gave up work in the early 1970s\ late 60s and started getting her state pension in the 90s i think maybe even the early 00s.
They did not work all their lives unless you count looking after the kids, not much has changed your still stuffed if your a single mum, everything is designed on the basis of two parent families still. Prime example being the schools themselves they are very much aware that the education hours are less then full-time and charge a premium to keep kids in for longer, and even then it still doesn't match up as working hours are getting longer and longer very few jobs are 9-5 unless your earning 30k+ in a office, probably the sane offices that come up with all these stupid cuts and rules to create all the catch 22s we have.
giving people benefits does not give them experience or skills - work does!
2 Likes #33
SorJai
MR1123
dp36
Best not to have kids if you can't afford them....simples :-)
What if you can afford them, then get struck by redundancy or something else.....You haven't thought this through have you?
Well.. they should have also thought about that.

You normally ask yourself, can I afford to buy a house and pay off the monthly mortgage?
What if at some point, I lose my job? How long can my partner tolerate it.. etc

You do the same with kids, can you afford to have another child, and what if I lose my job?

Single parent? You technically shouldn't have more kids - use contraception.

He probably worded it wrong, but basically he simply meant you shouldn't have an x amount of kids if you cannot afford to have that many.

Yeah i should have thought what if this mans mental health goes south and he ends up being emotionally abusive and paranoid, walking out on us and leaving us on benefits?.

If we all thought of the future there would not be any children, what if one of the parents dies in a accident, what if one of the parents becomes disabled or chronically\terminally ill, what if they just walk out, what if, what if....
1 Like #34
davewave
Error440
davewave
we are meant to work and set a good example not the benefit route>
1. Not everyone without a job can live their whole lives in central London paid for by taxpayers.
2. You want kids, move where there are jobs to pay for em or don't have more.
3. Benefits are meant to be a safety net not a lifestyle choice.
4. If you are using your benefits to buy luxuries - gaming tech, Sky TV, holidays abroad then you really have lost the plot.
Why should those in need have to be treated as second class citizens for the crime of being unable to find work you want them to suffer a life of no restbite being constantly reminded what a failure they are by their lack of having anything nice in their lives, children bullied and feeling singled out by the fact they are in poverty compared to their classmates,
people like you would love to punish the poor by making them live in conditions worse then prisoners get, living off baked beans until they somehow under all the strain and stress magically acquire experience, qualifications, confidence, motivation, full health etc required to get a job that would lift them out of the poverty trap, do you still not realise how stupid you sound?
Do you know what would be a good start, free education that's what no tuition fees for the skills that matter, the things we import people for like wielding and electrician. The abolition of the apprenticeship mw at at least raising it to a livable standard and putting rules in place that an apprentice should actually be learning life skills and the system not used as an excuse to employ people as half price office tea boys. Laws enforcing flexibility in working as it should be flexible to the employees needs not the wants of the business if they want people to call on 24\7 they can employ more staff.
Also on a side note the comments about OAPs are stupid they have not worked all their lives, women live longer then men, the number of female OAPs is far higher then men, now those women come from a era when the women stayed home to look after the kids, my mother for example gave up work in the early 1970s\ late 60s and started getting her state pension in the 90s i think maybe even the early 00s.
They did not work all their lives unless you count looking after the kids, not much has changed your still stuffed if your a single mum, everything is designed on the basis of two parent families still. Prime example being the schools themselves they are very much aware that the education hours are less then full-time and charge a premium to keep kids in for longer, and even then it still doesn't match up as working hours are getting longer and longer very few jobs are 9-5 unless your earning 30k+ in a office, probably the sane offices that come up with all these stupid cuts and rules to create all the catch 22s we have.
giving people benefits does not give them experience or skills - work does!

So how many jobs are there that employ people with nothing Dave? I think you will find that kids leaving school are increasingly having to turn to internships to try and get something and thats only any use to those whos bed an board is not something they have to worry about.

At least years ago JSA people used to be able to go into further education or volunteering now they are very judgy of that and deem it making yourself unavailable for work and thus not eligible for JSA and if you don't get JSA no housing benefit for you either.
2 Likes #35
Error440
john767676
This country has far too much of a benefit culture, I'm glad the government is focusing on working families, disgusts me some people
Perhaps you'd like to come visit the job centre with me so you can see all the single mums who can't find work that fits around having to look after school children as "flexible working" is just a code for employers that means they want someone on call 24\7 regardless of the number of hours a week the job is advertised as.
And all the men over 50 left on the scrap heap.
Well
3 Likes #36
after watching Panorama last night I feel I am qualified to respond by saying that after many years of working full time I get paid less than the benefits threshold (£20,000) - felt gutted as have only ever claimed Child Benefit, nothing else.
2 Likes #37
Children don't ask to be born! Parents make a decision to have them or lack of contraception leads to it! If you can't afford them don't have them and if an "accident" leads to it don't expect someone else to pay for your mistakes take accountability for gods sake! If you can afford to have more.... carry on... simples xx
4 Likes #38
The absolute heartless crap written on here with facts from the manipulated newspapers really is hysterical......can't really expect much better with people that use "simples" at the end of a sentence.
Wait till you are affected, Lets hear You all cry then.
5 Likes #39
At the end of the day it's the children that will suffer.
12 Likes #40
History repeats itself.The poorest are always portrayed as the low lives.Its becoming harder and harder to improve yourself, how can you when you can barely make the bills.Im from a working family but i will not be Brianwashed into thinking everyone that needs help are scroungers and need money cuts.I know people who have worked all there lives, never took a penny,and now they're too ill to work,what can they claim ...nothing.why?.. they're told they cannot claim jobseekers as they're not fit to search for work but well enough to work,at least some type of job,so not ill enough for help!! Age comes to us all,things will only get worse.Children are in poverty and we allow it? Because the tv tells us single parents are all scum,having babies as a sport.The ill are all blaggers, stealing our taxes.Everyone on the dole is living it up holidays, days out, nice food all for sitting on there ****...all to anger us,and it works! we work all the hours we can, 0 hour contracts pushed to the brink and still cant afford a break, nice things we barely survive.Im not being told who to blame i dont forget that we was recently in recession due to work being sent abroad, greedy banks, greedy multi conglomerate companys sqeezing every last drop out of our country and not forgetting the wonderful goverment and mps using our taxes as pocket money for a luxury lifestyle,all while dodging taxes.
We are led into believing we have choices,but we dont our rights are being taken away.Only the rich having the luxury of having a S.A.H parent.The poor stay poor and the rich will keep getting richer.All while we fight amongst ourselves, and one day when we need help it wont be available to us.we will fall through the gaps and people will judge us, our children will suffer. Because we will be second class citizens.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!