FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

What about the children

Jump to newest
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

Already here? All very well for the George to say that the number of children should be capped for benefits but what does he propose to do about the children already here? Wearing shoes, eating food, needing clothes and a roof over their heads...

You may have produced those children at a time you could afford them and then life throws you a whack on the head. The poverty/debt field is seeing more and more newly poor middle class people.

You are now expected to remain at home until you are 25, further infantalising young people. You have to be over 34 to get more than a room rate allowance for housing benefit.

I know times are bad but I really can't see the sense in many of the proposals.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That's because they give too much to foreigners & lazy scroungers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I've always thought you should only get benefits for your first child. That way you really have to think about wether you can afford it. It'd be payable to the mother only unless she's deceased. If you have twins or more then fair enough.

But it may stop people breeding just to reap the benefits. And also cut back on the population boom.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"That's because they give too much to foreigners & lazy scroungers "

The price of food goes up but benefits stay the same.

Now they are on about taking houseing benefit away from under 25's.

So they have done what has been asked gone to uni but theres no jobs.... so we now put them on the streets.

Ok i agree it should be capped if they are on them benefits long term and keep having babies....

Not if they have had children before.

Would be nice if he looks at helping the older over 40s get back to work when they have lost jobs.

Not just forgetting them to rot.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've always thought you should only get benefits for your first child. That way you really have to think about wether you can afford it. It'd be payable to the mother only unless she's deceased. If you have twins or more then fair enough.

But it may stop people breeding just to reap the benefits. And also cut back on the population boom.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What about having children once you've secured a home for them and know you can afford to give them a good life without claiming off the state?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"That's because they give too much to foreigners & lazy scroungers

The price of food goes up but benefits stay the same.

"

Lets not forget there are a lot of working people that have not had pay rises because of the recession.

I have personally thought for a long time that child benefit should be capped at a couple of kids. Its great for people who want big families, but why should the state pay for them?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"What about having children once you've secured a home for them and know you can afford to give them a good life without claiming off the state?

"

some dont and never have any intention of doing so..

however, most do and sometimes that thing called LIFE with all its unforseen happenings changes peoples situations..

can any of honestly forsee whats around the corner, illness, death of a loved one, redundancy etc etc..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I've always thought you should only get benefits for your first child. That way you really have to think about wether you can afford it. It'd be payable to the mother only unless she's deceased. If you have twins or more then fair enough.

But it may stop people breeding just to reap the benefits. And also cut back on the population boom.

"

thats all well and good but what about those like me that had my children when I could afford them... then at one point ended up on benefits.. I have paid my taxes and why shouldnt I get some help.

Cali

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Child benefit is not where the big bucks are made tho lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

when i wass growing up we had too save up to be classed as poor! i was raised by my grandparents so i believe they were entitled to benefits as they were retired pensioners and did not ask for a baby but took me on too save me from the care system, so in some situations it is needed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

There will always be heart breaking changes of circumstance that has resulted in people being given help.... they deserve every penny.

and there will always be scroungers in life.

People already on the system should remain unaltered but new people claiming should be told that any additional children won't see any increase in the amount paid.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Quite agree..thats what the benefit system is for..x

this system is abused and something needs to happen

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By * pool 1Couple
over a year ago

Liverpool

Hope some of the people on here dont end up on benefits if you have paid into the system you will get them for 6 months and if your partner is working dont expect anything after that ! they call it the bread line, so what should we do with the children open up the workhouses again get real wake up there are kids going to school hungry and winter on the way they will be cold and hungry count your blessings you are very lucky.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Child benefit is not where the big bucks are made tho lol "

no..I have four kids and its £60 pw...

so hardly loads.. its £19 something for first child then £10 something for other kids.

Cali

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uby In StockingsTV/TS
over a year ago

Cheadle

All I know is that twenty five years ago, everyone in the west was slating China for its hard "one child" policy, but look at their economy now in comparison to many others.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London

Smoke and mirrors!

Do you really think any government will let children suffer because of feckless parents?!!

It sounds good for those that believe those on benefits are the cause of all our ills, but the truth is, people will breed regardless and we'll continue to support them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"That's because they give too much to foreigners & lazy scroungers "

Nothing to do with the ideology of the New Right then.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London


"That's because they give too much to foreigners & lazy scroungers

Nothing to do with the ideology of the New Right then."

Oh come on, every story needs a vilan...enter stage left - scroungers and foreigners!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not all of us are in a situation of being on benefit because we wanted to be, i have 3 young children and im a lone parent, but until a yr ago i was happily married, i worked hard my ex worked hard we were comfortable and well off, but then he ripped our family apart, and now im alone, so should i be capped to getting benefit for one child only? having been to loan parent meetings at job centre is was calculated that in the school term i would be 10 pound a week better off but in the school holidays i will be 30 pound a week worse off. so what do i do??

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"All I know is that twenty five years ago, everyone in the west was slating China for its hard "one child" policy, but look at their economy now in comparison to many others."

i actually agree with China..shame i had sex twice more!! Lol it was the faulty contraceptive pill..honest!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn


"Not all of us are in a situation of being on benefit because we wanted to be, i have 3 young children and im a lone parent, but until a yr ago i was happily married, i worked hard my ex worked hard we were comfortable and well off, but then he ripped our family apart, and now im alone, so should i be capped to getting benefit for one child only? having been to loan parent meetings at job centre is was calculated that in the school term i would be 10 pound a week better off but in the school holidays i will be 30 pound a week worse off. so what do i do??"

I dont mean this to sound harsh so apologies if it does

the school weeks you shouldn't be worse off..... your ex who fathered the children and caused your situation should raise his money and help you....

I know often easier said than done

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Benefits should be capped for the number of children present/not planned when first claiming benefits to stop the breed for more culture, also any foreign national coming to this country without means of support should be made to contribute to society ie cleaning streets rather than being better off that a tax payer.

Not this government or the previous have got it right and its about time the poor tax payer was considered as well as those unable to gain or keep employment for health reasons.

Who will I vote for in the next election..............the choices are always the same. NO-ONE is any good

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uttyMan
over a year ago

Local to you maybe


"What about having children once you've secured a home for them and know you can afford to give them a good life without claiming off the state?

"

Nothing ever that cut and dried, accidents do happen amongst other things. Everything has risen with the way the economy is today, except wages. If you were unlucky enough to lose your job and extinguish your savings would you say no to what the state give you?

Just my _iew mind

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *almh5Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

The majority of benefit claimants are in work, Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, FTC and WFTC for example, with WFTC being reduced of course. Should the Govt not being doing something to ensure this shouldnt be necessary rather then the unemployed and disabled?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ENDAROOSCouple
over a year ago

South West London / Surrey


"What about having children once you've secured a home for them and know you can afford to give them a good life without claiming off the state?

Nothing ever that cut and dried, accidents do happen amongst other things. Everything has risen with the way the economy is today, except wages. If you were unlucky enough to lose your job and extinguish your savings would you say no to what the state give you?

Just my _iew mind "

This happened to us not that long ago and the state gave us buggar all! Did we turn our nose up at the £35 per week they gave us, no but they expected us to jump through hoops for it and be grateful.

If you own/mortgage a property then you are stuffed. We were just lucky that our families could help us out in the short term to stop us losing everything.

Just hope that we never find ourselves in that position again as it was not a nice experience.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *idnight delightMan
over a year ago

London


"What about having children once you've secured a home for them and know you can afford to give them a good life without claiming off the state?

Nothing ever that cut and dried, accidents do happen amongst other things. Everything has risen with the way the economy is today, except wages. If you were unlucky enough to lose your job and extinguish your savings would you say no to what the state give you?

Just my _iew mind

This happened to us not that long ago and the state gave us buggar all! Did we turn our nose up at the £35 per week they gave us, no but they expected us to jump through hoops for it and be grateful.

If you own/mortgage a property then you are stuffed. We were just lucky that our families could help us out in the short term to stop us losing everything.

Just hope that we never find ourselves in that position again as it was not a nice experience.

"

I hope everything is okay for you now.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"What about having children once you've secured a home for them and know you can afford to give them a good life without claiming off the state?

Nothing ever that cut and dried, accidents do happen amongst other things. Everything has risen with the way the economy is today, except wages. If you were unlucky enough to lose your job and extinguish your savings would you say no to what the state give you?

Just my _iew mind

This happened to us not that long ago and the state gave us buggar all! Did we turn our nose up at the £35 per week they gave us, no but they expected us to jump through hoops for it and be grateful.

If you own/mortgage a property then you are stuffed. We were just lucky that our families could help us out in the short term to stop us losing everything.

Just hope that we never find ourselves in that position again as it was not a nice experience.

"

I was in a similar situation after a redundancy. As I have never been out of work since leaving school and have always paid my taxes, needless to say I was truly fucked off at the system.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes and I agree that the benefit system should be used in such cases..

I have been in the situation where i had a mortgage..a big one! which i continued to pay when my husband kindly walked out and left me with 3 children. I didnt get any help from the state..so upped the hours and worked my arse off and have continued to do so. Im buggered if im gonna lose what ive worked hard for over the years.

I wasnt born with a silver spoon in my mouth but have got what i have through blood, sweat and many tears. lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

TBH the only thing the conservatives seem to be good at is stigmatizing / vilifying the poor and pandering to their richest constituents whims.

there is an element of truth though in that their is a culture of "career" breeding - those who don't work.. strategically pop them out for the benefit cheques . that is wrong and needs to be discouraged to a certain degree .

outside of that though it's hardly fair to penalize a child for their parents lazy / slothful / parasitic behavior.

to quote a line from a well know film (a taste of honey) "a bit of love.. a bit of lust - we don't ask for life it's thrust upon us".. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7LK_-rUfdU

the government should help kids irrespective of their birth circumstances then when they reach school age decrease benefits and put these parents in mandatory back to work programmes.. it's better for the child to grow up around parents that work - it fosters a culture of work ethnic.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By * starr -Woman
over a year ago

Burton on Trent.

im on benefit, and would class myself as disabled, tho im not on paper, i struggle to find work suitable, and if i do, do i then tell them the problems i have or keep it quiet? if kept quiet and they find out i could possibly be sacked and end up on benefits again.

i had 2 kids and worked while i had them, and was married, my life fell apart, divorced, kids adopted, and im back on benefits.does this make me a scrounger??? and ive made a conscious decision to not have any more kids because i dont think it would be fair for my boys to have been adopted and then for me to go and have more.plus it wouldnt be fair on the new child.and i myself was adopted, grew up in a poorish family but i am grateful for what i have now.i just wish i had enough to just cover my bills, i dont or expect to have "rainy day money" but to not be in debt with general household bills would be nice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By * starr -Woman
over a year ago

Burton on Trent.

and why pay the "big wigs" so much money?? if money were spread out more, would those on benefits have more children???

maybe china was right putting a stop to kids, but then the chinese are coming here and having more than one child!!!!

ludicrous

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

We seem to be entering a new era of the undeserving poor. The proscribed behaviours approved of will ensure you are deserving and anything else is truly deviant and undeserving.

What with Hunt wanting to lower the abortion rate to 12 weeks you're doubly stuffed if you find yourself pregnant and you've already had your allowance of children.

Now for scheme to get rid of those pension guzzling old scroungers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We seem to be entering a new era of the undeserving poor. The proscribed behaviours approved of will ensure you are deserving and anything else is truly deviant and undeserving.

What with Hunt wanting to lower the abortion rate to 12 weeks you're doubly stuffed if you find yourself pregnant and you've already had your allowance of children.

Now for scheme to get rid of those pension guzzling old scroungers."

so.. leave things as they are?

you've pointed these proposals out and (rightly) pilloried them ..

if you were in a position to alter things - what would you do? ;p

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum

First Collector: At this festive time of year, Mr. Scrooge, it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the poor and destitute.

Ebenezer: Are there no prisons?

First Collector: Plenty of prisons.

Ebenezer: And the union workhouses - are they still in operation?

First Collector: They are. I wish I could say they were not.

Ebenezer: Oh, from what you said at first I was afraid that something had happened to stop them in their useful course. I'm very glad to hear it.

Only a matter of time.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtydanMan
over a year ago

Blackpool

ive always worked have three lovely daughters one 25 twins 17 i love them all we only expected to have two children as soon as the children was born i went and had my nuts cracked id have loved more but i couldnt afford them simple as that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The problem is that our welfare system is creaking under the strain of too many claimants and not enough money.

At one end you have people living longer through better living and medical care. Trouble is that they still need to use the welfare system for those last years to keep them going.

At the other end you have an endless stream of babies. Every one using the welfare system to one degree or another and not contributing back to it until they start work.

And in the middle you have the people who need welfare for other reasons, some that have been stated in previous posts.

The problem is that the growth at either end is stretching the money available for the middle. And the solution is to stop one of the ends pulling too much.

Not suggesting a Logans Run style euthanasia at a certain age as that's daft. But you could try and get people to consider wether they can afford to have children without state help.

All this is quite apart from the fact that economic growth is not infinite and there will never be enough jobs to support all the children currently growing up. Plus we're all going to run out of food and power in the next 10-20 years as neither of those resources can keep up with demand.

So I'd say that telling people that from now on, all new pregnancies will only be

state supported if its your first child is a good start, but not enough.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"We seem to be entering a new era of the undeserving poor. The proscribed behaviours approved of will ensure you are deserving and anything else is truly deviant and undeserving.

What with Hunt wanting to lower the abortion rate to 12 weeks you're doubly stuffed if you find yourself pregnant and you've already had your allowance of children.

Now for scheme to get rid of those pension guzzling old scroungers.

so.. leave things as they are?

you've pointed these proposals out and (rightly) pilloried them ..

if you were in a position to alter things - what would you do? ;p

"

I would have different spending and cutting priorities. I would spend on infrastructure to prepare the country for a future and to stimulate jobs and innovation. I would ring fence work to British nationals on these projects. I would cut spending on arms and I would stop profits from taxes being gained by private sector companies who ONLY operate on public contracts.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It is a myth that China had a blanket one-child policy. It only applied in urban areas as China knew it still needed rural workers and those people were encouraged to raise their families as they saw fit. The one-child policy in China has now been abandoned.

I am not in favour of the govt implementing any form of controlled breeding as it smacks too much of Big Brother for my liking. People should have the amount of children they feel comfortable with and the govt should run the state in the most cost effective manner thus ensuring that there are funds available for all who need help when they need it.

I think the govt should call an all out war of tax dodgers of any tax bracket and hammer them mercilessly as it is those people who are stealing food from our children's mouths to feather their own nests. Tackle that problem and the govt will soon see a swell of support come election time. Hammering parents who are down on their luck (for whatever reason) is a surefire vote loser.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"It is a myth that China had a blanket one-child policy. It only applied in urban areas as China knew it still needed rural workers and those people were encouraged to raise their families as they saw fit. The one-child policy in China has now been abandoned.

I am not in favour of the govt implementing any form of controlled breeding as it smacks too much of Big Brother for my liking. People should have the amount of children they feel comfortable with and the govt should run the state in the most cost effective manner thus ensuring that there are funds available for all who need help when they need it.

I think the govt should call an all out war of tax dodgers of any tax bracket and hammer them mercilessly as it is those people who are stealing food from our children's mouths to feather their own nests. Tackle that problem and the govt will soon see a swell of support come election time. Hammering parents who are down on their luck (for whatever reason) is a surefire vote loser."

Good points.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum


"I think the govt should call an all out war of tax dodgers of any tax bracket and hammer them mercilessly as it is those people who are stealing food from our children's mouths to feather their own nests. Tackle that problem and the govt will soon see a swell of support come election time. Hammering parents who are down on their luck (for whatever reason) is a surefire vote loser."

Got to agree with this. Osborne is looking at cutting the benefits bill by £10bn, yet the Govt recently let Vodafone off an £8bn tax bill. I am really not sure why the majority are getting punished for the minorities mistakes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uggers nemesisCouple
over a year ago

london

[Removed by poster at 08/10/12 18:16:39]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

How can it possibly be fair that a working family needs to consider if they can afford to have another child... and yet living next door, someone or a couple who have never done a day’s work in their life can sit back popping out babies until the cows come home and expect the tax payer to pick up the bill?

Of course it would be wrong to cut back benefits retrospectively...... but does that mean a line can't be drawn in the sand...... absafuckinglutely not!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *upitersmileCouple
over a year ago

Manchester

I agree with most of the points made over these posts, but there's something bugging me. Some of you have said to put a cap on number of kids per family (which I agree with in theory), but if a family had a child they could not realistically afford, they may lose the option to abort presuming they found out after ther 12 week mark (which is very common), if this were to be implemented. This could then mean the child ends up in state care. Now this has the potential to be a much bigger burden on state finances. Surely it would make sense to leave the child with the family and award benefits?? Thoughts?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

One man's tax dodging is another man's cheap duty free Old Holborn....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uggers nemesisCouple
over a year ago

london


"It is a myth that China had a blanket one-child policy. It only applied in urban areas as China knew it still needed rural workers and those people were encouraged to raise their families as they saw fit. The one-child policy in China has now been abandoned.

I am not in favour of the govt implementing any form of controlled breeding as it smacks too much of Big Brother for my liking. People should have the amount of children they feel comfortable with and the govt should run the state in the most cost effective manner thus ensuring that there are funds available for all who need help when they need it.

I think the govt should call an all out war of tax dodgers of any tax bracket and hammer them mercilessly as it is those people who are stealing food from our children's mouths to feather their own nests. Tackle that problem and the govt will soon see a swell of support come election time. Hammering parents who are down on their luck (for whatever reason) is a surefire vote loser.

Good points."

Excellent anaylasis.

One poster claims we will run out of food within the next 10-20 years,does anyone believe this right-wing tosh?

As a nation we have no problem handing over billions a year to the lords and ladies and barons etc,thats fine,yes we know they have never done a days work in their lives but they have a title in front of their names so they must be fine upstanding people deserving of our money.So yes it makes perfect sense to ignore that and try and claw back what we can from the poor,great stuff.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

I think a lot of people in this country, because they have never known there not to be a benefit system treat it like a god given right.

It is a privilege to live in a country which has a benefit system which extends a helping hand to those who fall on hard times.... privileges should not be abused.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *upitersmileCouple
over a year ago

Manchester

One poster claims we will run out of food within the next 10-20 years,does anyone believe this right-wing tosh?

I would love to hear their reasoning behind this....I'm in the mood for a giggle, this is getting very serious!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *upitersmileCouple
over a year ago

Manchester


"I think a lot of people in this country, because they have never known there not to be a benefit system treat it like a god given right.

It is a privilege to live in a country which has a benefit system which extends a helping hand to those who fall on hard times.... privileges should not be abused.

"

Couldn't be better said!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"I agree with most of the points made over these posts, but there's something bugging me. Some of you have said to put a cap on number of kids per family (which I agree with in theory), but if a family had a child they could not realistically afford, they may lose the option to abort presuming they found out after ther 12 week mark (which is very common), if this were to be implemented. This could then mean the child ends up in state care. Now this has the potential to be a much bigger burden on state finances. Surely it would make sense to leave the child with the family and award benefits?? Thoughts? "

This is the problem with departmentalised thinking and governing. The 'savings' in one area create a cost in another.

A good example of this is the cuts to youth funding last year. The riots, the redundancies and the costs of closing and then trying to resurrect schemes has cost us more than keeping the schemes going. I know the Mark Duggan shooting element could detract from this example but looking at the reports, particularly for those outside of Tottenham, Mark Duggan was incidental.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

One poster claims we will run out of food within the next 10-20 years,does anyone believe this right-wing tosh?

I would love to hear their reasoning behind this....I'm in the mood for a giggle, this is getting very serious! "
I am going to run out of chocolate this evening the way I am getting through it reading this thread. Does that count?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

A good example of this is the cuts to youth funding last year. The riots, the redundancies and the costs of closing and then trying to resurrect schemes has cost us more than keeping the schemes going. I know the Mark Duggan shooting element could detract from this example but looking at the reports, particularly for those outside of Tottenham, Mark Duggan was incidental."
The cuts to youth funding has created no end of problems in Worcestershire and Herefordshire.... and it has been so very very shortsighted...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

we re tories thru and thru but i wish this lot had some ideas for creating wealth rather than clobbering the less well off x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"How can it possibly be fair that a working family needs to consider if they can afford to have another child... and yet living next door, someone or a couple who have never done a day’s work in their life can sit back popping out babies until the cows come home and expect the tax payer to pick up the bill?

Of course it would be wrong to cut back benefits retrospectively...... but does that mean a line can't be drawn in the sand...... absafuckinglutely not!

"

Social apartheid on child-bearing? What happens when you pop out lots of babies you could afford at the time but something occurs and you now have the babies but can't afford them?

I agree that some of the choices people make are not always great for them or wider society but where do you draw the line?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester


"How can it possibly be fair that a working family needs to consider if they can afford to have another child... and yet living next door, someone or a couple who have never done a day’s work in their life can sit back popping out babies until the cows come home and expect the tax payer to pick up the bill?

Of course it would be wrong to cut back benefits retrospectively...... but does that mean a line can't be drawn in the sand...... absafuckinglutely not!

Social apartheid on child-bearing? What happens when you pop out lots of babies you could afford at the time but something occurs and you now have the babies but can't afford them?

I agree that some of the choices people make are not always great for them or wider society but where do you draw the line?"

I draw the line at one baby for those who have never lifted a finger in their life... if they want more they need to work out how to fund them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum

I personally think that this is sailing close to eugenics and social darwinism, as it is only the poor that will be affected by it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Closing loopholes and chasing tax avoiders would help the situation certainly. But considering the country borrowed 14.4 Billion in August alone it would only be a small help.

Most multinationals would just move permanently to a lower tax regime country to protect their profits in the long term.

Fundamental change to the benefit system is needed. People need to think about wether they can afford the second kid now. I've been in constant employment and paying NI/tax since I was 16 and have no

kids. I've had treatment for various things on the NHS but never claimed benefit for anything. But as far as I'm aware the rate of NI/tax you pay is not related to how many dependents you have. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). So I'm paying as much as a man with 5 kids who's on a similar salary to me.

And this is the basic failing of the system. So on top of capping benefit at one child how about increasing NI/tax slightly on the parents until the child has grown up and is non-dependent. That hits everyone across the board, rich and poor.

Is always assumed that the kids will grow up and start paying into the system themselves with work, and the whole cycle would be complete. But that's not happening as there aren't the jobs available for all the people we have.

Something is going to give before long, and it won't be nice when it happens.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester


"I personally think that this is sailing close to eugenics and social darwinism, as it is only the poor that will be affected by it. "

Have another think about the situation as it is.

The rich can have kids obviously.

The life long benefit claimers can have as many kids as they want.

The bottom end of the working class..... what about them? Are they not in the position of having to weigh up their low income against the cost of having more children?

Cap benefits and give more tax releif to the poorer working families.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplits OP   Woman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"Closing loopholes and chasing tax avoiders would help the situation certainly. But considering the country borrowed 14.4 Billion in August alone it would only be a small help.

Most multinationals would just move permanently to a lower tax regime country to protect their profits in the long term.

Fundamental change to the benefit system is needed. People need to think about wether they can afford the second kid now. I've been in constant employment and paying NI/tax since I was 16 and have no

kids. I've had treatment for various things on the NHS but never claimed benefit for anything. But as far as I'm aware the rate of NI/tax you pay is not related to how many dependents you have. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). So I'm paying as much as a man with 5 kids who's on a similar salary to me.

And this is the basic failing of the system. So on top of capping benefit at one child how about increasing NI/tax slightly on the parents until the child has grown up and is non-dependent. That hits everyone across the board, rich and poor.

Is always assumed that the kids will grow up and start paying into the system themselves with work, and the whole cycle would be complete. But that's not happening as there aren't the jobs available for all the people we have.

Something is going to give before long, and it won't be nice when it happens."

I have a lot of sympathy with this post. I have been working for 30 years and have claimed nothing except NHS care. Generation X did very well for themselves, have reaped the benefits but fucked things up in lots of ways. Now we are paying for it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum


"I personally think that this is sailing close to eugenics and social darwinism, as it is only the poor that will be affected by it.

Have another think about the situation as it is.

The rich can have kids obviously.

The life long benefit claimers can have as many kids as they want.

The bottom end of the working class..... what about them? Are they not in the position of having to weigh up their low income against the cost of having more children?

Cap benefits and give more tax releif to the poorer working families."

I have mixed feelings about it all to be honest. I agree that things have to be done, but how? If benefits are removed from people having children while out of work, surely the children will suffer just as much as the parents.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" I agree that things have to be done, but how? If benefits are removed from people having children while out of work, surely the children will suffer just as much as the parents. "

To implement a system that works would require intrusive questions of all benefit claimants, and means testing them to prove their credibility as claimants. But we don't like that kind of government interference in our lives, as has been proven time and again when govt has tried to take these kinds of initiatives.

So that's a no-go area.

The govt have tried to set up 'shop a cheat' networks that encourage communities to report benefit cheats, but that hasn't worked either as those reporting their neighbours didn't feel safe in doing so, and there have been instances of informant's details being made public. We don't favour spying on our neighbour systems of combatting benefit fraud either.

What else can we do?

We can't penalise people who have children whilst out of work as we're basically saying to them "while you're unemployed you're not allowed to have sex".

What can we realistically do?

Put up with it, that's what. We must accept that in a social system involving millions of people abuse of that system will be great too, but we can take steps to heavily penalise those caught doing it. Not by imprisoning them as that doesn't help them, their children, or the system. We must make it clear that if someone is caught claiming fraudulently then they are cutting their right to govt assistance in the future. It should be a 'One strike and you're out' blanket policy that applies to all.

If an individual chooses to live outside of the rules that 99.9% of us are happy to live within then they must accept the consequences of that decision.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think a lot of people in this country, because they have never known there not to be a benefit system treat it like a god given right.

It is a privilege to live in a country which has a benefit system which extends a helping hand to those who fall on hard times.... privileges should not be abused.

"

I completely agree.

What makes me sick is people taking from the system and putting nothing in. The rest of the world may be envious about our health and benefits system, but they must wonder why the hell we are so generous to all and sundry

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top