Plans to cap benefits at two children.

[Daid]

Yes, laws such as this need changing at glacial rates, not over night.

 

Well that's snapped me out of my depression

[Xt500]

I'd be interested to know what plans the government have drawn up to cover all of the children that are likely to end up living in extreme poverty because of these measures. Surely this has to mean that more children will be surrendered into care, as has happened in both Greece and Spain due to their austerity measures? It's understandable that people should do this as the only alternative to protect their children when they can no longer afford to feed or clothe them.

 

Then the parents shouldnt have had them and expected everyone else to pay!

[Mr Clowning]

Has anyone realised how this lot has come to pass since the UK borders were opened up ?

 

 

Am I living up to your perception of me Mr Friday ?

[charmer]

I think that the way the welfare state has influenced society is obviously mostly positive. However, one negative is that it has removed the need for individual responsibility and replaced it with collective responsibility.

 

People need to take responsibility for themselves, if they can't afford children then they should not have them. Adding to the population should not be a right. I need a licence to drive a car, but not to have a baby, this seems absurd to me.

 

To those of you who think there is real poverty in this country, you are very very wrong. Poverty is classed as earning 60% of the countries average wage. That means that anyone earning circa 15k per year is officially classed as impoverished, this is rubbish.

 

I grew up as poor as you really get in this country. Sometimes we didn't have enough food for dinner and often we would have no heating because the meter had run out. This is about as bad as it can get in the UK. I used to think I had a poor upbringing, until I travelled the world and saw what had poverty really is.

 

I am all for stopping child benefits at 2 children, and feel that this should be applied to all new births immediately. Some notice period should be given (perhaps 24 months) for existing claimants.

[Anna B]

I agree but it should apply to those born as of when the law is announced or 12 months after that date to ensure children not living in poverty.

 

I believe there will be plenty of notice, and only apply to children born after that date. Seems reasonable in principle, unfortunately the children can't make the decision to exist and they are the ones who will suffer. Feckless parents are feckless parents, will they change?

[Pritt Stick]

Feckless adults might reconsider becoming feckless parents if this benefit is stopped. Apologies for lack of a link but I remember reading a few years ago (Guardian, I believe) that there was a link between benefits payments and child birth rates.

 

If I remember correctly....... and I think I do........ single moms used to get a set amount of a certain benefit (full of facts and detail, aren't I?) and this was reduced and nine months later birth rates went down a statistically significant level suggesting that some people made an active choice not to get pregnant / continue with the pregnancy because of income.

 

I'm gonna search for the link now.

[Mecky]

I agree but it should apply to those born as of when the law is announced or 12 months after that date to ensure children not living in poverty.

 

You mean so it doesn't affect you personally, right, now we are getting somewhere

 

---------- Post added 16-12-2013 at 14:50 ----------

 

I believe there will be plenty of notice, and only apply to children born after that date. Seems reasonable in principle, unfortunately the children can't make the decision to exist and they are the ones who will suffer. Feckless parents are feckless parents, will they change?

 

Mr Smith said it's ok to be a feckless parent if you can afford a few kids. Hardly a remedy to his UK is full claim.

[Supertramp]

You mean so it doesn't affect you personally, right, now we are getting somewhere

 

---------- Post added 16-12-2013 at 14:50 ----------

 

 

Mr Smith said it's ok to be a feckless parent if you can afford a few kids. Hardly a remedy to his UK is full claim.

 

 

What are you on about? Do you have 7 kids you can't afford to look after?

 

Is that why you're so excited? Or is it because a nasty Tory said it?

 

I don't have any kids BTW, my point was that families who already have kids and can't afford to support them without govt. help should continue to be supported. But if you make the choice to have kids in the future knowing you can't support them without help then you shouldn't.

[Pritt Stick]

http://www.ifs.org.uk/wps/wp0809.pdf

 

This report states that there is a causal relationship between benefits and the number of children people on benefits choose to have so I expect that if child benefit is capped at two kids then there will be a reduction in the number of families on benefits that have a third (or more) child.

[tzijlstra]

I think it is appropriate as part of an overall package to change the way benefits work.

 

As WeX said: Why should those with fewer children pay for those that choose to have more than 2. Having children is a choice after all. If you can't afford them, don't have them.

 

What frequently gets left out in discussions like this is that the government is also lifting the tax-free allowance of all our incomes to 10K.

 

Like this government or not, they are putting a stop to a culture whereby the population can expect to hold their hand up and where working is appropriately rewarded.