Yesterday I made a sweeping statement under TV licence inspector, which drew some criticism. So I am just going to put my thoughts down.
I am married man and my wife and myself are both fortunate to be in full time employment. We both work hard and we both have to contribute via our taxes to the government. We don't have any children and have no wish to have any.
It seems that every time there is a budget the government thinks up a new way to distribute the taxes that we pay to people with children. Ie.family credit, family allowance, family tax credits etc. I dot know the whole range because I have never claimed them.
As a married couple any benefit was stripped away many years ago. At every budget we loose out financially every time. I cannot help thinking that if people want to have children, they should have the means to support them and should not rely on people such as myself having to dig deeper into our pockets all the time.
No, sorry, I can't agree with you. I am a single person with no children, and I too worked hard, at low paid jobs, for many years, as well as doing community work. Paying taxes which went on the welfare and needs of other people's children was one of the few things I didn't object to. It is other people's children who will have to look after me if I am ill or when I get old and can't cope. Educating these children and improving their circumstances can, surely, only benefit us all - they are the doctors, teachers etc of tomorrow.
There are plenty of things I do object to my hard-earned money being spent on, but children's needs aren't among them. And I do have to say that I was unhappy about people getting tax relief simply because they were married, even though they might have both been working in good jobs; I know this has ended now.
I'm sorry if this sounds discourteous or 'holier than thou' (there are some people who use this site who enjoy being unpleasant to others, but I don't happen to be one of them) but we all need children, whether our own or others, to keep the country going. Children cost a lot and, while I agree people should be responsible, if they only had them when they were sure they could afford it, there simply wouldn't be enough children in future to look after this generation.
Henry, I know it is very hard to see your money disappear into a ' bottomless pit' especially if after working hard all week, you may not be living the highlife...
But incredible as it may seem, children are our most precious resources, if children can have a better standard of life with the assistance of taxes so be it, and if you think about it Henry in the long term it will help the society that you as a pensioner will be living in if these children are well educated, have jobs, and are healthy.
In the past some people have been irresponsible by having more children than they could afford or parent, on the basis that they will get bigger accomodation etc., but with the increase in demand on social housing that is a path that is closing.
and the next time I see some of the little darlings screaming and yelling I shall try to remember the benevolent comments I have just made!
From an old gel living in penury, still working, still paying more tax in a month than I earned in my first job in a year!
I object to paying for a police force that appear to be running a revenue-focused service. I object to paying for the maintenance of the Queen's Gardens. I object to paying for that manky one-eyed chap that drivels hatred in the name of islam. I object to paying for the subsidies handed out to wealthy farmers for growing crap that no-one needs.
Here's a small list of my objections with regards to where my tax money goes on... by no means exclusive.
Paying for child benefit is strangely not on my list.
Am in full agreement about the tax situation of this country. It is however, more linked to governments in the past mis-managing the future needs of this country... Britain has a long way to go to catch up with the rest of europe. and that is what we are now paying for... Expect taxes to go much much higher !!!!
I don't know what salary you're on Henry, but I would imagine, being a pesky youngster myself, I'm probably on less than you. I pay my taxes and NI each month, make sure all rent & bills are paid, spend a little on myself, and still put some away for the future.
In short, despite my contributions, I still live a comfortable life. I'm sure you do too, and being that the benefits system is only likely to become more lenient, is it really worth stressing yourself out over being that you're doing relatively well for yourself?
[As Jai pointed out very funnily above] it's all part of living in a democratic society.
There will be plenty of things (different for each of us), that we object to our taxes being spent on. It's unrealistic to think that any party's policies will be totally in sympathy with all of an individual's preferences. But that's implicit in democracy.
There are only two ways to change this:
1) find a piece of land, not under the jurisdiction of any government, and live the Good Life. Remember, this wouldn't just mean growing your own goats. It would also mean performing your own surgery (human and animal) and dentistry, defending your own property and territory when required, lighting your own streets, collecting and recycling your own rubbish etc
2) find a political party most aligned to your set of views and do whatever you can do to get them elected
However, in both cases, it's likely that you'll be less than 100% satisfied.
I do sympathise to some extent with what you're saying. However, we are all in the same situation to a greater or lesser degree and most of us accept that there are a greater number of good things to be had from living in a society, according to its rules, than by not doing so.
What a small cacooned world some people think they live in. Your current comfortable life is only possible due to the hard work of others Did you make the clothes you wear? Did you grow the food you eat? The fact that you are able to share your ideas on this forum is due to the eforts of others. Were you not a child yourself once? Someone elses children were educated enough to get you to the posision you are in today. Human beings are an interdependant species otherwise we would all be fossilised remains in the british museum. I think you need to get out and about more often.
I don't want to be unpleasant about this, as everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it seems to me that the basic point is that taxation is supposed to be levied for the common good, and that it's not legitimate to object to it because it is providing a service you don't happen to want. If everyone could do this, we would have a nightmare situation.
It is surely legitimate to complain about paying for the NHS if it is inefficient, or for street lamps if they don't work, but this is an argument for making the NHS better and getting the street lamps to work. It is not an argument for not paying for the NHS because you are never ill or for street lamps becase you don't go out at night.
It seems to me far more important to make a fuss about paying enormous amounts of tax towards keeping the Dome empty and open, or providing rich law officers with fancy wallpaper, which are of benefit to no-one, than to object to paying tax towards children who will be responsible for us when we are old and ill.
I am a continental European living in London. I have lived in several European countries before I moved to the UK and pay considerably less tax here then in the other countries where I lived, whereas I earn more money here then I did there. I can't say however that that is a good thing-- I'd happily pay more tax if that meant that we would have better public transportation and shorter waiting lists at the NHS, whether I use these facilities or not.
I recently learned that about 70% of the council budget is spent on education and housing: I don't have children and I don't live in a council flat, but am happy to pay for that. I consider myself a priviliged man and an important aspect of paying tax is a sense of solidarity and care for others. We are living in a very prosperous part of the world which gives the obligation to share.