VideoPro Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 So. After getting a thorough pasting on the forced sterilization thread, the new proposal is to slowly starve these families to death? No. Because it is inhuman. By god there are some twisted buggers on here these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 So. After getting a thorough pasting on the forced sterilization thread, the new proposal is to slowly starve these families to death? No. Because it is inhuman. By god there are some twisted buggers on here these days. Well, only if you work really hard to twist what people have been saying, which you seem to take to a new high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 ...I'm guessing you have 2 winkles? The idea is ludicrous and would increase child poverty. How could that be a good idea? If parents cared more for their children than themselves there would be no child poverty in the UK, even the people that don’t work receive enough for their children, but many choose to spend it on themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 It's not about the parents it's about the children that will be brought into a family with zero benefits just because they happen to not be the 1st born. It's not their fault, they didn't ask to be born. It is the height of naivity to believe you can stop people from having children even with the threat of benefit cuts. The best we can do (which still baffles me why it hasn't yet been seriously considered) is to make it so that benefits are paid to a special debit card whereby only certain items can be purchased, making sure money gets spent on the child. They would have to put mechanisms in place to prevent a trade in special debit cards; there are people that would trade their £100 card for £50 of booze drugs and fags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukdobby Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 ...I'm guessing you have 2 winkles? The idea is ludicrous and would increase child poverty. How could that be a good idea? No I have 1 who's well past recieving Child benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukdobby Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 In that scenario you could just as easily argue that people who continue to have children that they have no means to provide for are the ones that cause an increase in child poverty. It is isn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Should the amount of benefits received reduce with each extra child that a 'family unit' (whatever that be) has? So, for example... 1 child = maximum benefits 4 children = no benefits What would be the good things and bad things about such a plan? What's the moral basis for it? Family with 4 children, 2 working adults, both loose there jobs. They're in need of support now until they find work, but by some strange logic the number of children they have to feed means that they get given nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 So. After getting a thorough pasting on the forced sterilization thread, the new proposal is to slowly starve these families to death? No. Because it is inhuman. By god there are some twisted buggers on here these days. You took the words right out of my mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 In that scenario you could just as easily argue that people who continue to have children that they have no means to provide for are the ones that cause an increase in child poverty. You could make that argument, but it would still be the state that chose to maintain them in a state of poverty instead of deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossdog Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 So. After getting a thorough pasting on the forced sterilization thread, the new proposal is to slowly starve these families to death? No. Because it is inhuman. By god there are some twisted buggers on here these days. Ay!............and there's some daft buggers too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.