Why do we pay child benefits at all?

[donkey]

So supposing the UK birth rate were to suddenly drop off dramatically. Who do you think would pay your pension? I'm pretty sure the government don't have it saved up and waiting for us in a special investment account marked 'pensions'. Furthermore, what kind of economic power do you think we would be in thirty years time, if most the population were over 60?

[HeadingNorth]

So supposing the UK birth rate were to suddenly drop off dramatically. Who do you think would pay your pension? I'm pretty sure the government don't have it saved up and waiting for us in a special investment account marked 'pensions'. Furthermore, what kind of economic power do you think we would be in thirty years time, if most the population were over 60?

 

Why are so many people so obsessed with us having status in the world? Many of the world's happiest countries have virtually no "power" in the world at all; Switzerland would be a fine example. Nobody is ever too worried about upsetting the might of the Irish, come to that.

 

If we stopped producing children of our own, the economic gap could be filled by some of the starving billions who already live in the world and can't find jobs where they are. They could come and do jobs over here.

[Tony]

So supposing the UK birth rate were to suddenly drop off dramatically. Who do you think would pay your pension? I'm pretty sure the government don't have it saved up and waiting for us in a special investment account marked 'pensions'. Furthermore, what kind of economic power do you think we would be in thirty years time, if most the population were over 60?

 

This is the dilemma that we face though. Facts are that population is the biggest, nay the only threat that humanity faces.

 

Are we capable of finding a new way of living short of a Logan's Run Carousel? It's hard to see how and if you believe the inestimable Jim Lovelock we're already had it. It's a bit grim isn't it?

[HeadingNorth]

Just as an aside, the financial value of crimes committed by people who have money far exceeds those crimes committed by the poor. Can't remember the exact figures (though i will try to find them) but it is a ridiculous ratio, in the 1000s:1 kinda range.

 

Wouldn't a large part of that be because a guy on JSA can only commit fraud to the tune of £65 a week, but a wealthy person working in a major bank could rip off millions?

 

I've always put it down to opportunity rather than scale of wickedness. A guy willing to defraud £65 a week would surely be willing to defraud £65,000 a week if only the opportunity existed for him. A crook is a crook.

[liam1412]

Yes, we all have the right to have children, but I think we should only have what we can afford and support by ourselves. We should never choose to have children based on the knowledge that other people will be paying to support you in this decision.

 

I have one child, and, there are many reasons why I do not wish to have any more, but a minor one of those reasons is because I simply could not afford to do it, and with this in mind, I do not expect the rest of the country to cough up in order that I can. If I don't pay, some other bugger has to. Is THAT fair? I think if people thought a lot more like this, then a lot more money would be spent on a lot better things, than people's desire to have multiple children that other people support!

 

I pay more per month in tax and insurance than the benefits I receive. So in actual fact I am paying myself, im just not putting as much into the "pot" as others.

[donkey]

Why are so many people so obsessed with us having status in the world? Many of the world's happiest countries have virtually no "power" in the world at all; Switzerland would be a fine example. Nobody is ever too worried about upsetting the might of the Irish, come to that.

 

If we stopped producing children of our own, the economic gap could be filled by some of the starving billions who already live in the world and can't find jobs where they are. They could come and do jobs over here.

 

If only it were that simple. Over population is something that has to be tackled on a global scale. The countries which have achieved population equilibrium are all wealthier countries. There is a direct correlation between poverty and over population. What makes you think that if the UK population were replaced by people from different cultures where birth rates are high, that the new arrivals would cease tio reproduce at the rates they do in their native cultures as soon as they get here, and seamlessly take over the running of our highly technological and culturally alien society?

[donkey]

This is the dilemma that we face though. Facts are that population is the biggest, nay the only threat that humanity faces.

 

Are we capable of finding a new way of living short of a Logan's Run Carousel? It's hard to see how and if you believe the inestimable Jim Lovelock we're already had it. It's a bit grim isn't it?

 

I agree with you, it's a huge problem. the biggest problem the world faces. But the answer is not - as some people including the OP suggest - for the countries where birth rates are no longer rising (such as the UK) to go into voluntary unilateral population free fall in the expectation that this self anihilation will somehow also reduce birth rates in the vast poverty stricken regions which are the genuine engine behind the continuing global population explosion.

[Ms Macbeth]

I don't think child benefit should be stopped. Its one of the few universal benefits that isn't means tested. Means testing to the 'nth' degree must cost a fortune in administration. It would be much easier to pay people a standard pension, or a decent disability benefit and take back any excess from those with high incomes through the tax system.

 

What a fiasco for some families - the government takes income tax with one hand, and then, the family has to complete a complex application to get some or all, or even more, back. Then the government, through a different calculation, has to work out how much CTC or WTC the same family is entitled to - and its often wrong. Raising the tax threshold could increase the take home pay for the lowest earners at a stroke, and is extremely simple to apply. Just a change in tax code.

[TeaFan]

Now that Bombay Sapphire retails at around £25 per litre, it's frankly disgraceful that Child Benefit is still only £20 per week.

[Darth Vader]

Now that Bombay Sapphire retails at around £25 per litre, it's frankly disgraceful that Child Benefit is still only £20 per week.

 

Aaaah. A G+Teafan.