Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

No 10's Plan To Cap Benefit At Two Children: New Mothers With Three Children Would Lose £700 In £5Bn Welfare Crackdown


Recommended Posts

My concern is for the safety net.

Lets say that you have 4 kids in the house, two of your own and two from a second marriage. Every thing is ticking along fine, main earner is on 40k wife is part time at Mc.Donalds - they are coping ok.

The main earner loses his job. Now what? Kick em out into cardboard boxes? Put the kids into care?

You too may need the safety net. I agree that people have been taking the piss a bit, but the cuts need to start at the top.

And how Cameron can afford to subsidize millions of mortgages and can't afford to keep the safety net in place is questionable.

The point about single separated or divorced parents being hit if they find a partner who has children is a good point since limiting the benefit to 2 children will create a big incentive for these people not to form families with partners who also have children. I am not sure that increasing the number of one parent families is really what this country needs. In some ways limiting child benefit to second and third children etc as was done in the 1950s and 1960s might be a better measure. It would save more money, remove any incentives for young single girls to knock out a single kid for benefit purposes and might encourage one parent one child set ups to form two parent multiple child families.

Edited by stormymonday_2011
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

not wanting to generalize, but generally the families claiming benefits with loads of children, produce children that are a net drain on society, and who go on to produce more large families claiming benefits.

for scientific peer reviewed evidence of this, watch the first five minutes of Idiocracy

Agreed, even within my own family I can see this. Huge numbers of people are a net drain on society, even if they work part time.

What I cannot understand is why the lefties oppose any attempt to restrict this. After all, Red China does.

And why is it that every time something like this is proposed, instead of putting up any reasonable argument against it, they whine on about bankers.

Like it or lump it, we have to protect the banks and any idea of letting them go bust is idiotic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the numbers will be small but what if you have 1 child then twins come along? Divorce is quite high, a lot of people re marry often having more kids with new partners in the new families.

I'd rather see a banking levy, Tobin tax or taxation of assets to esse the burden of taxation falling so heavily on income. Or even means testing wealthy pensioners for their state pension would be a bigger saving.

Admittedly it would be good to see an end to the large families abusing the welfare state, but their numbers are small, and punishing 10 children for the mistakes of 2 adult parents seems unfair.

Mistakes??

People make a choice knowing that the state will support their selfishness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, even within my own family I can see this. Huge numbers of people are a net drain on society, even if they work part time.

What I cannot understand is why the lefties oppose any attempt to restrict this. After all, Red China does.

And why is it that every time something like this is proposed, instead of putting up any reasonable argument against it, they whine on about bankers.

Like it or lump it, we have to protect the banks and any idea of letting them go bust is idiotic.

Won't someone think of the bankers !!!

And my savings account !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You hard working family, you.

Speaking as a Northerner - pleb rather than posh - the benefit system of the last 30 years have been a massive economic neutron bomb for the area.

First you get unconditional benefits which pay out the more dysfunctional you are. Totally ruining working class independence+ resilience and replacing it with middle class public sector poor farming/neo-feudalism; doffing your cap to a load of fat, thick, clipboard wielding wimmin - Oh yes Ms Pauline from the DSS, Oh No Ms Pauline from the DSS.

Then tax credits which have removed 80% of the labour market into low-paid, part-time benefit subbed income.

No company is going to set up as there is no f-cking work force available - most of working age are either public sector 'worker', DLA bad backs or part-time dosser.

I can see that here in Wales in my own family.

My Grandmothers wedding ring, (to the great shame of the family) was regularly in the pawnbrokers in the 1920's.

Even to this day we have the tradition of what we call 'Bumming around the family' whereby someone who is skint goes around collecting a few quid off all the relatives. Of course, we all give freely because this is also our safety net.

Recently, I have helped my niece with her new born and also my Mother in Law. In return, my MiL irons my clothes, my niece cleans my house. This is working class resilience, each helping each other along.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 is less than replacement rate.

China are realising they've created a mega problem with their 1 child policy.

Kids are the future 'tax payers'. If you're going to do this nazi style social engineering then you're going to end up requiring more immigration to make up the numbers else become extinct.

Still, keeps the Daily Hate in copy.

China's problem with not enough children is relatively small compared the disaster it would have been if the population kept growing. Of course in China you can have more than 1 child if you are prepared to pay for them. Anyway, you've already lost the argument just by bringing the nazis into your argument. The planet is already

. Edited by JonathanR
Link to post
Share on other sites

China's problem with not enough children is relatively small compared the disaster it would have been if the population kept growing.

China's population was only growing so fast because Mao demanded Chinese have more kids as cannon-fodder for the coming war against America. Which never actually came.

Just another disaster of central planning...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Up tax codes to compensate for each child.

That way you get the ability to take home more of what you earn.

Oh wait that doesn't help anyone who sits at home and pops out kids. What's UC cap - £400 a week?

You have to make working pay.

You have to make it less attractive for families to spend a lifetime on the dole.

We have immigration because there are jobs people don't want to do - how did we get to that?

Will it take upping minimum wage to reduce the need for tax credits?

If we're going to hell in a handcart then you may as well give that a go.

Support businesses for a year and let them work out if they can actually employ people on a real wage. And if they can't (without the props of tax credits etc) thens omething has to change.

How many workers get tax credits? How much profit do all these companies make?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is is crazy to suggest that child benefit be scrapped altogether? People with no children pay loads for health, education, and additional local services for the offspring of others.

Yes, it is crazy.

There was a time before I had kids when I was paying for other people's kids. Now I have kids; other people might be contributing a bit (probably not in my case, but in general). In the future this will change again.

The consequences of NOT doing this - i.e. all health and education had to be paid for at the time - would be very, very unpleasant, and of course entrench class division even more than now; that the real-world result that is aimed for here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have immigration because there are jobs people don't want to do - how did we get to that?

This kind of logic is about the same as we see from people 'not giving away' their houses by selling 'for less than it's worth'.

You can (almost) always find someone to do a given job, with the right wage and conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to make working pay.

The government should make working pay by allowing the cost of living (especially housing) to fall relative to wages and by shifting some of the tax burden off of wages and onto things which are currently lightly taxed (e.g. land and non-wage income).

Edited by Dorkins
Link to post
Share on other sites

The government should make working pay by allowing the cost of living (especially housing) to fall relative to wages and by shifting some of the tax burden off of wages and onto things which are currently lightly taxed (e.g. land and non-wage income).

Isn't wage inflation easier?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you are pregnant for the second time and it turns out they are twins.. what then?

even china's one child policy has an exception for twins

Of course there would have to be exceptions for such cases. I know a woman (not on benefits) whose second child turned out to be triplets. She hadn't had IVF or anything - completely unexpected. Hard and expensive enough anyway.

I don't at all see what is unreasonable about this. Of course people can have as many children as they want, as long as they don't expect everybody else to pay for them. Most self supporting people stop at two. Why should those who in some cases have hardly ever worked expect to have four or five or even more funded by the taxpayer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 is less than replacement rate.

China are realising they've created a mega problem with their 1 child policy.

Kids are the future 'tax payers'. If you're going to do this nazi style social engineering then you're going to end up requiring more immigration to make up the numbers else become extinct.

Some are future benefit claimants. Possibly giving less benefits to people with children will make more less future tax payers.

If you're going to do this nazi style social engineering

Actually the Nazis encouraged people to have lots of children.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You hard working family, you.

Speaking as a Northerner - pleb rather than posh - the benefit system of the last 30 years have been a massive economic neutron bomb for the area.

First you get unconditional benefits which pay out the more dysfunctional you are. Totally ruining working class independence+ resilience and replacing it with middle class public sector poor farming/neo-feudalism; doffing your cap to a load of fat, thick, clipboard wielding wimmin - Oh yes Ms Pauline from the DSS, Oh No Ms Pauline from the DSS.

Then tax credits which have removed 80% of the labour market into low-paid, part-time benefit subbed income.

No company is going to set up as there is no f-cking work force available - most of working age are either public sector 'worker', DLA bad backs or part-time dosser.

I really wish you were an MP. Although I guess someone with your views would be unacceptable to the people you are talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with that.....but in the case of having children it is the men that give the children to the women, the women wouldn't otherwise get a child if it were not for the irresponsibility of the man....most men will support their offspring, some do for a while, many others expect and or are reliant on the state to support them.....

A child can't choose their parents, and a parent can't choose their children. ;)

Believe me there are some women so irresponsible that they plan to be single parents. Sadly I know this because some are related to me :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is is crazy to suggest that child benefit be scrapped altogether?

I would support that rather than imposing an arbitrary limit of 2 kids + I would want to tax the previous generation to recoup all the payments given to them over the years. We can start by means testing pensions, bus passes and fuel allowance.

It's going to be a very sad place for anyone who finds themselves single with tow kids and meets someone else who has kids. The will end up 'living apart' like most single mothers and fathers I know.

More faux separation, social disintegration - well done nasty party.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe mothers could also stay at home and bring up their children and the jobs they are doing now could be done by the unemployed 16 to 25 years-olds. Just a thought, but then the second wage would not feed directly to the banks via mortgage interest. And there was me thinking the aim of government was to work for the benefit of the country rather than the banks.

BURN THE HERETIC....BURRRRNNNN HIIIIMMMMM!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some are future benefit claimants. Possibly giving less benefits to people with children will make more less future tax payers.

Actually the Nazis encouraged people to have lots of children.

If you were German/Nazi.

Not so much if they were someone they didn't like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

China's problem with not enough children is relatively small compared the disaster it would have been if the population kept growing. Of course in China you can have more than 1 child if you are prepared to pay for them. Anyway, you've already lost the argument just by bringing the nazis into your argument. The planet is already

.

Who cares what Mike Godwin thinks.

We're about to find out what will happen with China. Their experiment is only half way to completion and they're now desperate to create a baby boom.

The planet will decided if it's overpopulate or not. It's got nothing to do with what we decided. In any event that has nothing whatsoever to do with fiscal policy. The planet doesn't give a stuff about IDS fiscal policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.