George Osbourne.

Joined
28 Oct 2005
Messages
31,282
Reaction score
1,998
Country
United Kingdom
He really is starting to talk a load of twaddle.

He wants to remove the child benefit of a single mum earning £50k - but wants to continuing paying a couple both earning £40K (£80K combined).

It's not going to happen George, not this year, next year or any other year.

He also reckons he's going to cap benefits at £26K (why not a years worth of the minimum wage?) and make 25,000 homeless (even though the Government has a legal duty to house any family with kids).

It's not going to happen George. Live in the real world mate.

Oh sorry, he can't - he comes from one of the UK's richest families and is set to inherit a billion quid.

Why do we elect his type? He's clueless as to the real world.
 
Sponsored Links
we didnt elect his type if you remember,

they are only in because of the lib dems hunger for a bit of the action.
 
I suspect, there are not many "Single Mum's " , earning £50,000 per year.
Having said that, they just have not thought this through enough. Someone where both partners are working and earning £43,000 per year each won't lose anything, but where a man earns £46.000 per year but his wife stays at home, they lose out.
Can anyone here justify giving people on a very good income, child benefit?
 
The last lot could not get anything right and this lot seem to be just as useless.

CHB should now be means tested and the test should be on the household income for either a single person or a couple. Anyone earning over £30,000.00 should not be eligible.
 
Sponsored Links
Why are we paying anyone to drop sprogs?.... Can't afford to have them? Tough
 
He really is starting to talk a load of twaddle.

He wants to remove the child benefit of a single mum earning £50k - but wants to continuing paying a couple both earning £40K (£80K combined).

It's not going to happen George, not this year, next year or any other year.

He also reckons he's going to cap benefits at £26K (why not a years worth of the minimum wage?) and make 25,000 homeless (even though the Government has a legal duty to house any family with kids).

It's not going to happen George. Live in the real world mate.

Oh sorry, he can't - he comes from one of the UK's richest families and is set to inherit a billion quid.

Why do we elect his type? He's clueless as to the real world.

For once I agree with you..It's like Kermit, says to Miss Piggy; <insert anything here as they don't have a clue>...

The population DIDN't elect him/them...the 1st he abuses are the middle class, you have £1 million in the bank, so losing a grand isn't an issue? help me? But they cause uproar! Bad move. So moving on, everyone unemployed has to work 40 hours a week, nice gesture, but if working, how can they look for a better job suited to them? Or - I don't understand this one, people that receive excessive amounts, because of the children they plopped out?

So the person with in excess of £45k, complain, as they lose a grand? They are hard up? The dolite with 10 kids, getting loads of cash....curtail that.

Where is the middle ground? What's a 'better job'?
 
Child Benefit:

It should only be paid for ONE child AND only if both parents are over 21 years old AND if the father is contributing towards the childs upkeep, to at least twice the value of what the benefit is (£20?).
Didn't get any for first child after the war, and until about 1970.
 
Agreed. Too many girls seem to think that being a baby making machine is a sure fire way to endless benefits and support from the state. This is also encouraging all the other waifs and strays from across europe to legally move here and play the system.

First sensible (if not popular) announcement made by this government. Also note that labour are curiously silent on this issue....
 
He won't make it stick. Human rights legislation says "Freedom from persecution" - that means that Georgie can't persecute them. "If I don't get me benefit I'l av to av an abortion" :rolleyes:
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top