Revolt of the Mothers
George Osbourne’s proposals for cutting child benefit to high earners does not appear to have gone down well with those who will be affected. But his other proposal to limit the amount of benefit to a particular family to £500 a week seems to have been well received by the same high earners.
They can’t have it both ways!
But you have to look at the statistics here! Women are now having their children later, often after or midway through a good career. So perhaps, Osbourne’s apparent child benefit robbery will have a classic Newtonian reaction and mothers will wait until they get the finances right before having their children. I know we didn’t do that in the 1970s, but then, child benefit in those days was very insignificant compared to what it is now!
As to the benefit limit of £500 per family, this will have some beneficial effects. Most of these high benefits are paid in the form of housing benefit in areas, where rental property is expensive. Landlords will not let their properties stand empty, so we might see rents fall in another classic Newtonian reaction.
The Anonymous Widower 
I think both plans are good ones. Child benefit has needed to be reviewed for some time now, many families really dont need the money.
I also think maximum payable benefit amount being capped at around average household income is a great idea. It may also bring down the birthrate, since people with 7 or 8 children will be subject to the same limit as people with 2 or 3. The maximum level of housing benefit has been capped since June, £260 for a one bed property, £400 for a 4 bed property. Anyway, it is based on local rents, not sure how they decide that, but it does stop people renting very swish places privately. A distant relative got in a mess with it all, and I looked into it all so I could try and explain to him what he was entitled to.
Comment by Liz P | October 5, 2010 |