# ARGHHHH! The Bloody Government!!!



## Mariaa

For chrsit sake?!?!?!
The tories dont penilise the people up the top making millions, just the people down the bottom. Messing around with benefits and cutting things left right and center.

Anyone know whats happening with tax credits and child benefit, apparently child benefit is going down?!

Why only take away from the poor, they are are making rich families lose their tax credits and pay more tax... ironically..THEY CAN AFFORD IT. Yet they will still take away from us.

Sorry. I just needed a rant because i think they're all over paid-wa*kers who dont know what they're doing!!!!!!!

:growlmad::growlmad::growlmad::growlmad:


----------



## Boony

i think you should read up on the budget!

They havent lowered child benefit and they are giving an extra 150 to people that claim the child element of tax credits.

Poor people wont be suffering at all its middle earners that seem to be suffering the most!


----------



## Boony

and its those high earners that pay tax that help you claim your benefits in the first place they pay 40% tax as it is already!


----------



## LOZANDEVIE

Child benefits been froze,so it wont go neither up nor down. I dont think anyway.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Its actually been a pretty good budget tbh x


----------



## Evolution<3

Boony said:


> and its those high earners that pay tax that help you claim your benefits in the first place they pay 40% tax as it is already!

There is no way that high earners pay 40% tax...That would mean if you received a $1000 pay check you would only go home with $400. The welfare line would be more packed than it already is


----------



## Mariaa

oh lordy. everywhere says different things. where can you read the actual budget?!
i havnt even applied for child benefit or credits yet as we're still to register nellie, and otherwise my OH works, so we dont get other benefits. i just dont want them to mess with the only thing ill be claiming!!


----------



## jenniferannex

i think the new budget is great, it will be better for everyone in the long run, more jobs etc. the country has been in so much debt, this is the only way fo sorting it out.
me and OH lose £60 a year in child tax credits, but we are £265 better off a year for not paying as much income tax. to me thats better. why should people who dont work get our money? i understand people with disabilities etc. but these days people dont work cos they know they will get benifits, getting paid for nothing. 
you should check out the budget calculator on the bbc website, this will tell you what you will lose and gain, that way you will understand it more.

this budget will sort this country out, we all knew it was going to be hard, but like they say its definatly fair. people earning over 40k a year shouldnt get tax credits as there earning over 3 grand a month, where as me and OH earn under a £1,000 a month.


----------



## LOZANDEVIE

I dont at the minute claim neither, and its screwed my head up haha! I'm going to let them deal with it though lol... I just rang up the Jobcenter and they took me through everything im eligable for.. got me an interview with a specialist adviser etc. I got Lillies birth certificate back from the hospital today as thats where they have to send it off to now so i will be sending all my forms off that i've had fun filling in haha! xxx


----------



## Char&Bump-x

Evolution<3 said:


> Boony said:
> 
> 
> and its those high earners that pay tax that help you claim your benefits in the first place they pay 40% tax as it is already!
> 
> There is no way that high earners pay 40% tax...That would mean if you received a $1000 pay check you would only go home with $400. The welfare line would be more packed than it already isClick to expand...

You'd go home with $600. 



Mariaa said:


> For chrsit sake?!?!?!
> The tories dont penilise the people up the top making millions, just the people down the bottom. Messing around with benefits and cutting things left right and center.
> 
> Anyone know whats happening with tax credits and child benefit, apparently child benefit is going down?!
> 
> Why only take away from the poor, they are are making rich families lose their tax credits and pay more tax... ironically..THEY CAN AFFORD IT. Yet they will still take away from us.
> 
> Sorry. I just needed a rant because i think they're all over paid-wa*kers who dont know what they're doing!!!!!!!
> 
> :growlmad::growlmad::growlmad::growlmad:

Why dont you stop complaining and read it. Child benefit is NOT being touched, its being frozen for 3 years, meaning it can not go up or down for 3 years.

& Tax credits are only being changed for those earning over £25k (maybe 26?) which realistically is not 'poor'.


----------



## stephholloway

Boony said:


> i think you should read up on the budget!
> 
> They havent lowered child benefit and they are giving an extra 150 to people that claim the child element of tax credits.
> 
> Poor people wont be suffering at all its middle earners that seem to be suffering the most!


Well said ignorance is no excuse for not knowing what is going on

https://lmtf.lilypie.com/2gMTp1.png 
https://tickers.fortunebaby-download.com/pregnancy-tickers-ladyes/11/28/2009/1/pregnancy-ticker___.png


https://tickers.TickerFactory.com/ezt/d/1;10017;42/st/20100904/dt/5/k/dee9/preg.png


----------



## stephholloway

Evolution<3 said:


> Boony said:
> 
> 
> and its those high earners that pay tax that help you claim your benefits in the first place they pay 40% tax as it is already!
> 
> There is no way that high earners pay 40% tax...That would mean if you received a $1000 pay check you would only go home with $400. The welfare line would be more packed than it already isClick to expand...

Doesnt quite work like that here hun, when they say hi earners the mean like $10000 a month its obscene how someone can earn that much lol but they get taxed 40% so they take home $6000, no welfare for them! 
https://lmtf.lilypie.com/2gMTp1.png 
https://tickers.fortunebaby-download.com/pregnancy-tickers-ladyes/11/28/2009/1/pregnancy-ticker___.png


https://tickers.TickerFactory.com/ezt/d/1;10017;42/st/20100904/dt/5/k/dee9/preg.png


----------



## Boony

I said high earners pay 40% tax! taking home 1000 a month isnt high earnings!

if you eanr over 40,000 a year you pay 40% tax

https://www.direct.gov.uk/en/YoungPeople/Money/TaxesAndYou/DG_10027647


----------



## jenniferannex

yeh you need to read it hun, the child benefit it being frozen, which mean it will stay at £80 a month/£20 a week. like everyone else has said take a look at the bbc website on the budget calculator, read up on the facts and dont just listen to people talking about it. theres alot more to it than that. in the long run we are all going to be better off. x


----------



## Raven24

why should people who earn alot of money be penilised for it? because they work hard to earn that money, yeah thats fair.:nope:
i think the budget isnt too bad it could have been worse.
i dont think anyone is going to dramatically suffer from it but we all need to be aware that we may need to cut back on things till the country is sorted its just the way it is.


----------



## wispa86

high earners are very much penalised! they end up paying the benefits of all the low earners and for all the scroungers that just cant be bothered to get a job.

child benefit has risen about £3 in 6 years so you wont even notice that its been frozen, it just means next year you wont be 10p better off a week.

what makes me angry about the government is that because my husband earns a reasonable wage they wont help us if we get into poo one month with money, i cant just pop down the job centre for a crisis loan and the banks wont help us because they arent helping anyone!


----------



## jenniferannex

zoe.speed22 said:


> why should people who earn alot of money be penilised for it? because they work hard to earn that money, yeah thats fair.:nope:.

i think people earning over 40k a year not recieving benefits is fair, they have enough money with that. i earn less than 5k a year and i work hard aswell, even on benifits it doesnt even make it up to 6k.
just because you earn alot of money doesnt mean you work harder than people on a lower paid salary. :nope:


----------



## Mariaa

> just because you earn alot of money doesnt mean you work harder than people on a lower paid salary. :nope:

very true, lots of highly paid people work very hard, but if you think about it, lots of them are in high up positions in a company so dont actually have to do alot whereas people on a low income have to graft bloody hard and lots of hours on min wage! xx


----------



## mummy3

Theres no reason why most people couldnt get a high earning job if they have enough ambition:shrug:


----------



## Char&Bump-x

Haha, are you kidding? of course people in higher positions have to still work hard.

Your opinion of work is a bit out of tune if you ask me.


----------



## Mariaa

some of them work very hard i know that, especially those who worked hard to get high up in their jobs, but some dont. My Nellies godfather for example, as lovely as he is, worked in a company for so long, grafting for years, got to the top and now does pretty much nothing by his own admission cos everyone lower down gets the hard jobs, yet JUST his bonus this month was £26,000.

Its ridiculous, he even admits it!!

My baby gets good presents though :)


----------



## Mindy_mini

Evolution<3 said:


> There is no way that high earners pay 40% tax...That would mean if you received a $1000 pay check you would only go home with $400. The welfare line would be more packed than it already is

In the UK we have staggered tax limits. the first approx £7k isnt taxed (this has been increased in the budget) then you pay about 22% on everything between 7K and 40K (i think its 40K) and then everything above 40k you pay 40% on if that makes sense....

and im sorry but your maths are wrong.... if it was a flat 40% and you earned 1000 a month your take home would be 600 NOT 400


----------



## wispa86

Mariaa said:


> very true, lots of highly paid people work very hard, but if you think about it, lots of them are in high up positions in a company so dont actually have to do alot whereas people on a low income have to graft bloody hard and lots of hours on min wage! xx



ya what?!?!?!

my dad works his arse off for 70 hours a week and worked damn hard to get to where he is. he contracts so if he doesnt work he doesnt get paid......simple as.


----------



## jenniferannex

wispa86 said:


> Mariaa said:
> 
> 
> very true, lots of highly paid people work very hard, but if you think about it, lots of them are in high up positions in a company so dont actually have to do alot whereas people on a low income have to graft bloody hard and lots of hours on min wage! xx
> 
> 
> 
> ya what?!?!?!
> 
> my dad works his arse off for 70 hours a week and worked damn hard to get to where he is. he contracts so if he doesnt work he doesnt get paid......simple as.Click to expand...

she didnt say that, she said 'lots' of them, not all of them.
i agree with her, some people get to sit on their arses at a desk getting paid alot, yet other high earners do work really hard, but it varies and its different for everyone. look at Simon Cowell, multi millionaire for working on the X Factor judging how people sing, anyone could do that.
but thats not the point anyway, what we are trying to say is that people on lower paid salarys work just as hard.
like i said i earn 5k a year, and i work extremly hard.


----------



## Mindy_mini

It does make me angry how people have this attitude that its only the poor who are being affected. the high earners are being charged an extra 10% income tax, the capital gains tax has increased, higher earner spend more on luxuries so they are paying the higher rate of VAT.

I have to agree with the comments that the opening poster should read up on the budget before ranting about how hard done by she is. I think the budget is fairly reasonable and the only thing I woud like to see if more tax on fags and booze. 

At the risk of being slated i do think that if the freeze in child benefit makes it so you cant afford to live then you shouldnt be having children..... child benefit tends to increase by about 10p a month so if £1.20 a year makes that much difference to you, you REALLY cant afford children.

I also dont understand why people have such an issue with the sure start grant being limited to the first child. Everything we have bought has been unisex with the intention that we will be able to use it again in the future for another baby.

(and i'll get off my soap box now)


----------



## jenniferannex

Mindy_mini said:


> At the risk of being slated i do think that if the freeze in child benefit makes it so you cant afford to live then you shouldnt be having children..... child benefit tends to increase by about 10p a month so if £1.20 a year makes that much difference to you, you REALLY cant afford children.
> 
> I also dont understand why people have such an issue with the sure start grant being limited to the first child. Everything we have bought has been unisex with the intention that we will be able to use it again in the future for another baby.
> 
> (and i'll get off my soap box now)

i agree with all of that, £500 per child is alot of money for the sure start, and most of it probably wont go the baby anyway.
the child benifit it fair enough, £1.20 a year doesnt really make a difference, and once again, some people wont even spend it on their children


----------



## wispa86

jenniferannex said:


> she didnt say that, she said 'lots' of them, not all of them.
> i agree with her, some people get to sit on their arses at a desk getting paid alot, yet other high earners do work really hard, but it varies and its different for everyone. look at Simon Cowell, multi millionaire for working on the X Factor judging how people sing, anyone could do that.
> but thats not the point anyway, what we are trying to say is that people on lower paid salarys work just as hard.
> like i said i earn 5k a year, and i work extremly hard.

yeah but at the same time a lot of low earners and benefit claimers dont work hard either, its general society that dont work hard not just the higher earners.

what about those people that CHOOSE not to work because they would get more off the government. thats the true definition of money for nothing!


----------



## Mariaa

jenniferannex said:


> wispa86 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mariaa said:
> 
> 
> very true, lots of highly paid people work very hard, but if you think about it, lots of them are in high up positions in a company so dont actually have to do alot whereas people on a low income have to graft bloody hard and lots of hours on min wage! xx
> 
> 
> 
> ya what?!?!?!
> 
> my dad works his arse off for 70 hours a week and worked damn hard to get to where he is. he contracts so if he doesnt work he doesnt get paid......simple as.Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she didnt say that, she said 'lots' of them, not all of them.
> i agree with her, some people get to sit on their arses at a desk getting paid alot, yet other high earners do work really hard, but it varies and its different for everyone. look at Simon Cowell, multi millionaire for working on the X Factor judging how people sing, anyone could do that.
> but thats not the point anyway, what we are trying to say is that people on lower paid salarys work just as hard.
> like i said i earn 5k a year, and i work extremly hard.Click to expand...


Reckon i could judge better than Simon Cowell anyways :D

And i agree with the sure start thing, 300 of mine was spent on baby stuff, but 200 admittedly was spent on carpet, which was for the bedroom where nellie sleeps with us, but still, not directly on the baby. So it is a lot of money to dish out, but then again some people really need it.

TBH whatever they do theres going to be people who are affected and people who arnt, people who loose out and people who dont. Its sad, but true. And at the end of the day, Britain voted them in. I sat here a couple of months back and said to my OH, 'whoever we vote in, everyone will be moaning as soon as they try making changes' And its true.!!


xx


----------



## xdaniellexpx

Evolution<3 said:


> Boony said:
> 
> 
> and its those high earners that pay tax that help you claim your benefits in the first place they pay 40% tax as it is already!
> 
> There is no way that high earners pay 40% tax...That would mean if you received a $1000 pay check you would only go home with $400. The welfare line would be more packed than it already isClick to expand...


it is true my dad is on 170k a year ond only actually sees arond 107k of it and he works his arse off


----------



## jenniferannex

wispa86 said:


> jenniferannex said:
> 
> 
> she didnt say that, she said 'lots' of them, not all of them.
> i agree with her, some people get to sit on their arses at a desk getting paid alot, yet other high earners do work really hard, but it varies and its different for everyone. look at Simon Cowell, multi millionaire for working on the X Factor judging how people sing, anyone could do that.
> but thats not the point anyway, what we are trying to say is that people on lower paid salarys work just as hard.
> like i said i earn 5k a year, and i work extremly hard.
> 
> yeah but at the same time a lot of low earners and benefit claimers dont work hard either, its general society that dont work hard not just the higher earners.
> 
> what about those people that CHOOSE not to work because they would get more off the government. thats the true definition of money for nothing!Click to expand...

yes thats true, it varies, so theres no right or wrong, i just think this will all be better for us in the long run, more jobs etc.
and the people who choose not to work cos they will get money off the government will be better. as everyone who is claming disability benefits will have to be assessed, and so on.



i


----------



## Mariaa

very true, there was that fella in the Sun on disibility saying he ciiuldnt walk more than 50 yards alone AND suffered panic attacks if he went outside his house, and they got pictures of him up ladders and climbing over balconies running a window cleaning service!!
And a woman in the mags saying she has 9 kids, wont stop until she has 14, and 'deserves' more benefits, even though they have 3 cars, 2 psp's, 2 play station 3's, tv's in every room etc. Thats really disgusting!!

the last government shouldnt have let people off so lightly to get us into this position.


----------



## annawrigley

:roll:


----------



## danniemum2be

i think its ok, then again my mind boggles with it, the only things i got wer child tax credits are going up and child benefit is sticking, but gutted theyve scrapped the child trust fund x x


----------



## jenniferannex

Mariaa said:


> very true, there was that fella in the Sun on disibility saying he ciiuldnt walk more than 50 yards alone AND suffered panic attacks if he went outside his house, and they got pictures of him up ladders and climbing over balconies running a window cleaning service!!
> And a woman in the mags saying she has 9 kids, wont stop until she has 14, and 'deserves' more benefits, even though they have 3 cars, 2 psp's, 2 play station 3's, tv's in every room etc. Thats really disgusting!!
> 
> the last government shouldnt have let people off so lightly to get us into this position.

agreed, if she wants to have 14 kids then fair enough. but she shouldnt expect more benefits. definatly not.

if labour wernt running this country in the first place the country wouldnt be in this mess and this budget wouldnt of even been set.


----------



## danniemum2be

the budget was fair enough, and were all gunna have to sacrifise, but rather sacrifice a little now compared to how it could turn out dwn the line if this budget wasnt done


----------



## xdaniellexpx

some people in some countrys get sweet fa but some get better am nt bothed 2 be honest at least we have all got food in r fridge roof ova r head and were helthy


----------



## flubdub

Evolution<3 said:


> Boony said:
> 
> 
> and its those high earners that pay tax that help you claim your benefits in the first place they pay 40% tax as it is already!
> 
> There is no way that high earners pay 40% tax...That would mean if you received a $1000 pay check you would only go home with $400. The welfare line would be more packed than it already isClick to expand...

Your Maths is wrong, and yes, it is 40%.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

I think the budget is totally fair tbh

Child benifit is frozen for 3 years which you won't really notice as it doesn't go up by much

I don't really like the tories but they seem to be doing ok so far.
xx


----------



## Mariaa

tbh as much as we'll all moan as long as we're fed clothed and dry with healthy babies, we're alot luckier than some :)


----------



## Lauraxamy

The budget I think is fair, I did expect much worse but it wasn't too bad. You've got to think about what kind of country you want your children to grow up in and to be honest all the government is trying to do is get this country out of a big big mess.


----------



## jenniferannex

annawrigley said:


> :roll:

i dont quite understand what the rolling the eyes smiley was for?


----------



## aob1013

I think the budget is bloody brilliant, i agree with everything they say. I was expecting worse tbh!


----------



## AppleBlossom

Tbh I am surprised the budget was as good as it is. All I can say is thank the lord the bloody HIP grant is going!


----------



## annawrigley

jenniferannex said:


> annawrigley said:
> 
> 
> :roll:
> 
> i dont quite understand what the rolling the eyes smiley was for?Click to expand...

because i don't see the cause for this thread, it will only become a debate and the OP seems to have backtracked since being proven wrong..


----------



## Mariaa

annawrigley said:


> jenniferannex said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> annawrigley said:
> 
> 
> :roll:
> 
> i dont quite understand what the rolling the eyes smiley was for?Click to expand...
> 
> because i don't see the cause for this thread, it will only become a debate and the OP seems to have backtracked since being proven wrong..Click to expand...

oh not at all, i was sat reading bits about it and it got me angry, i guess if you read someones bad opinions you take them on, some of the girls just set me straight and i since read some other opinions on it. My mind is just boggled now. I give up really!


----------



## Mariaa

oh and aswell, a good debate never did any harm for the 'mummy' brain. sometiumes i think we need to talk about something other than babies to feel like humans again.


----------



## Eternal

Ok to clear up the problem with the 40% bracket ... though earning over £38,000 ( i think) pay the higher rate of 40%, (think there is going to be a 50% for those earning over £150,000 too). 

but they dont take a whole 40%, i think its between £10,000 - 38,000 you pay 22%, so if you earn $40,000 a year the first £38,000 is at 22% and the other £2,000 is at 40%. 

hope that clears it up a bit, still sucks though :'(


----------



## Lauraxamy

Mariaa said:


> annawrigley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jenniferannex said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> annawrigley said:
> 
> 
> :roll:
> 
> i dont quite understand what the rolling the eyes smiley was for?Click to expand...
> 
> because i don't see the cause for this thread, it will only become a debate and the OP seems to have backtracked since being proven wrong..Click to expand...
> 
> oh not at all, i was sat reading bits about it and it got me angry, i guess if you read someones bad opinions you take them on, some of the girls just set me straight and i since read some other opinions on it. My mind is just boggled now. I give up really!Click to expand...

It is confusing and everyone was saying different things and just assuming!


----------



## jenniferannex

at the end of the day its changing, nothing we can do about it, the forum is for information and opinions x


----------



## annawrigley

Mariaa said:


> annawrigley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jenniferannex said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> annawrigley said:
> 
> 
> :roll:
> 
> i dont quite understand what the rolling the eyes smiley was for?Click to expand...
> 
> because i don't see the cause for this thread, it will only become a debate and the OP seems to have backtracked since being proven wrong..Click to expand...
> 
> oh not at all, i was sat reading bits about it and it got me angry, i guess if you read someones bad opinions you take them on, some of the girls just set me straight and i since read some other opinions on it. My mind is just boggled now. I give up really!Click to expand...

aha me too, i vaguely understand but i just figure that until it directly affects me im not gonna worry my little head about it. easier to keep out! :p i do think the tory lib dems or whatever they are calling themselves are trying their best tho x

and clegg is sexy



Mariaa said:


> oh and aswell, a good debate never did any harm for the 'mummy' brain. sometiumes i think we need to talk about something other than babies to feel like humans again.

yeah i quite agree its just theres a few subjects that always get people backs up and this is one of them, ive seen so many threads on this topic turn nasty over in the baby club.

"People earning over £40k should have tax credits cut because they're rich"
"We are not RICH, we have mortgages, tax, bills, and no government help, we're not sat around on benefits like you."
"Its not my choice to be on benefits, but i am actually better off not working than if i returned to work."
"Well i am going out to work to pay for you to sit at home on benefits."
"Well actually..."

i do see and respect both opinions but AARGH!


----------



## jenniferannex

well, i dont know what to say now, whatever will be will be :D i suppose no one can win.

everything will be better in the future, all be good in the long run


----------



## clogsy90

I dnt like getting involved in these kinds of topics as dnt like to rub anyone up the wrong way lol. I can see all views and with each side there are things I agree with and disagree, but an example is oh's aunt she had 5 children with the youngest starting full time school in September so govt told her either go college and do training or get a job and guess what she chose jump into bed with someone and get pregnant after 2 weeks. She got surestart grant yet wanted mine and oh's cousins baby thing as she was having same sex baby as us, yet both us and oh's cousin worked to buy our baby things, btw her baby is only 4 weeks younger but wanted nb clothes when my lo is still in still in the :0 sorry I suppose my bit was about the aunt lol. But hope ppl can see where I'm coming from. I work hard weeks leading to finding out I was preg but whilst I was I was working 60 hrs a week starting at 4am 7 days a week actually only had 1 day off in 4 weeks and I came out with £1000 after being taxed I think nearly £300 gutted lol


----------



## MummyGooch

Eternal said:


> Ok to clear up the problem with the 40% bracket ... though earning over £38,000 ( i think) pay the higher rate of 40%, (think there is going to be a 50% for those earning over £150,000 too).
> 
> but they dont take a whole 40%, i think its between £10,000 - 38,000 you pay 22%, so if you earn $40,000 a year the first £38,000 is at 22% and the other £2,000 is at 40%.
> 
> hope that clears it up a bit, still sucks though :'(

Yup your right. For example; a person earning 46k a year doesn't get taxed on the first 7k (was 6k before budget announced), then the next 33k is taxed at 22%, and the final 6k is taxed at 40%. So a person on *46k* a year takes home around *29k*.

The higher earners will always pay that little bit more tax than everyone else, but the idea is that yes they can afford it, simply because even after tax they will still not be short of the basics. Yes they may only just be living within their means, but they can always downgrade house, car etc. Whereas a very low earner is likely struggling just to pay basic living essentials. It's the same for middle earners, yes they get stung quite a bit being on the bit between not needing welfare but still having to pay out for alot of things, but they can also downgrade and adjust spending if needed.

Level of pay does not indicate how hard working someone is tbh. As an example my OH is on a low amount per hour, but we are 'middle earning' simply because of the _number_ of hours he works. It all depends on the individual circumstances. I did laugh at a previous poster who said that anyone can earn a higher amount if they had ambition, that is simply not true. It is that kind of attitude that makes degrees so worthless nowadays, the government policy seems to be 'if you want to go uni, we will make it so you can go, no matter how poor your grades you can try and try again and _someone_ will take you'.


----------



## wispa86

the child trust fund was a gigantic waste of money, if you paid £10 a month into it until the baby was 18 the government would then take £3000 in charges!!!!

as for the HIP grant, it doenst really bother me, i didnt get it with Ben (missed out by a month!) but i will get it with this baby and its going to buy the carrycot attachment for Ben's pram


----------



## jenniferannex

wispa86 said:


> the child trust fund was a gigantic waste of money, if you paid £10 a month into it until the baby was 18 the government would then take £3000 in charges!!!!

really? thats ridiculous!!


----------



## danniemum2be

omg didnt know that, thats awful, its meant for the baby when they grow up, not for the bloody government!!! well id ather set up her own that the government cnt rob from x x


----------



## jenniferannex

i know me 2! thats so stupid! x


----------



## 08marchbean

.


----------



## clogsy90

we put the 250 in an account but we won't tuc it now any money we give her wiill g in her savings account, purely for the reason of losing money


----------



## wispa86

clogsy90 said:


> we put the 250 in an account but we won't tuc it now any money we give her wiill g in her savings account, purely for the reason of losing money

thats what we did, we put the voucher into a trust fund and then opened him a seperate savings that we pay into every month


----------



## jenniferannex

that sounds like the best thing to do, better than getting £3000 took out!! x


----------



## flubdub

*jenniferannex* :wave: Just seen you live in Preston. I live in Garstang :mrgreen:


----------



## annawrigley

wispa86 said:


> the child trust fund was a gigantic waste of money, if you paid £10 a month into it until the baby was 18 the government would then take £3000 in charges!!!!

glad i read this, i was gonna set up a monthly payment to the account noahs voucher is in today, but think i'll open a seperate account instead!! xx


----------



## wispa86

if you leave the £250 alone it will get interest and be a bigger amount when they are old enough to withdraw, i cant tell you how much because we worked it out at £500 because of the second voucher which they now arent getting lol


----------



## jenniferannex

flubdub said:


> *jenniferannex* :wave: Just seen you live in Preston. I live in Garstang :mrgreen:

Ohh not too far then. I'm in lostock hall I just always say Preston cos most people know where it is lol xxx


----------



## rubixcyoob.

The budget wasn't as bad as it could have been and tbh sure we may loose out on a little bit of money here and there, but better this than our economy going completely tits up because the spending keeps going the way it is.

Everyone will be affected by the benefit cuts and increases in tax. The upper, middle and lower classes. However, people do need to read up on stuff and not be so ingorant as to make snap judgements about how hard people work due to earnings, how bad the budget is, how it is all one-sided etc.


----------

