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

Benefit Cap

Jump to newest
 

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

So the Government is thinking of capping child benefit at 2 children.

And about time too....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackandkateCouple
over a year ago

Truro

Two for the guy and two for which ever partner he's with this week?

Can't see the great unwashed putting up with this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

what about families with more than 2 children?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *edangel_2013Woman
over a year ago

southend

Screwed if you have triplets then!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Why? What happens if someones second child turns out to be twins? They get an abortion to stay in the limit?

How about we get rid of the employment agencies which siphon off 1/2 the value of someone's labour?

Or shoot the tax dodgers who cost many times more than the benefits bill.

Or close the borders so that wages have a chance to rise again, relative to the cost of living, so that poor people can afford to eat things which aren't tomato sauce sandwiches?

Or are you of the opinion that Choice is the best thing to have in society, so long as you are rich, the poor can make do with what they are given

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

It won't happen

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Why? What happens if someones second child turns out to be twins? They get an abortion to stay in the limit?

How about we get rid of the employment agencies which siphon off 1/2 the value of someone's labour?

Or shoot the tax dodgers who cost many times more than the benefits bill.

Or close the borders so that wages have a chance to rise again, relative to the cost of living, so that poor people can afford to eat things which aren't tomato sauce sandwiches?

Or are you of the opinion that Choice is the best thing to have in society, so long as you are rich, the poor can make do with what they are given"

Good point

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Screwed if you have triplets then!! "

Not really....just won't receive a government handout for the third. A fairer system would be means tested. A lot of families don't really need it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Seems reasonable to me, you decide to have a large family, you should support it. I don't think saying we, the nation, will support two children but no more is unreasonable. However in practice if it means a child suffering because of no benefit.........then perhaps the idea falls down.

Obviously all child benefit is spent on the child.

The welfare state should be a safety net for those in need, not a lifestyle choice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

There is no problem with child benefit. The problem is with some parent(s)who spend the child benefit on other things and the children are neglected.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Screwed if you have triplets then!!

Not really....just won't receive a government handout for the third. A fairer system would be means tested. A lot of families don't really need it."

Exactly!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"There is no problem with child benefit. The problem is with some parent(s)who spend the child benefit on other things and the children are neglected."

Do think drugs testing should be introduced

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Good idea.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

It's not like child benefit is a lot..it's £11ish per week for children after the first.

It is only going to put more children on the poverty line

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uby0000Woman
over a year ago

hertfordshire

my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I did hear only if your jobless, the third child does not get it.

Nette

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much "

I think the cap is at about 48k per year

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"There is no problem with child benefit. The problem is with some parent(s)who spend the child benefit on other things and the children are neglected.

Do think drugs testing should be introduced"

But alcohol first eh?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uby0000Woman
over a year ago

hertfordshire


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

I think the cap is at about 48k per year "

he earns way over that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London


"It's not like child benefit is a lot..it's £11ish per week for children after the first.

It is only going to put more children on the poverty line "

...if the parents continue to have children they can ill afford whose fault will it be if they can't afford them?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"There is no problem with child benefit. The problem is with some parent(s)who spend the child benefit on other things and the children are neglected.

Do think drugs testing should be introduced

But alcohol first eh? "
seen that one, tin of beans for the kids, bottle of vodka for them.

Nette

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"It's not like child benefit is a lot..it's £11ish per week for children after the first.

It is only going to put more children on the poverty line

...if the parents continue to have children they can ill afford whose fault will it be if they can't afford them?

"

Because not all couldnt afford them when they have them... It doesn't take much to find yourself unable to work. And child benefit is paid to all that earn under that limit.. so I'm sure it would be easier to cut the limit to a lower limit.. rather than stop it after two children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

So ... Foodbanks in demand..

Where will children get food from if they have rubbish parents.... Its crap parenting and lack of respect and ignoring contraception... That's why its a mess.

Yesterday lunchtime... 40 tags for mum, a donut in buggy for 2 year olds lunch.

Should be made to.attend parenting and nutrition classes and get supermarket coupons not cash if they cannot cope with responsibility.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much "

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *reelove1969Couple
over a year ago

bristol

a radical proposal maybe ..but why not scrap child benefit full stop !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uby0000Woman
over a year ago

hertfordshire


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it. "

they have never moaned about it and said they can support their son

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it. "

That's the challenge with lots of benefits. Does someone on £100,000 a year need free prescriptions? A bus pass?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"So ... Foodbanks in demand..

Where will children get food from if they have rubbish parents.... Its crap parenting and lack of respect and ignoring contraception... That's why its a mess.

Yesterday lunchtime... 40 tags for mum, a donut in buggy for 2 year olds lunch.

Should be made to.attend parenting and nutrition classes and get supermarket coupons not cash if they cannot cope with responsibility."
but how do you know that wasn't just a treat.. ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

That's the challenge with lots of benefits. Does someone on £100,000 a year need free prescriptions? A bus pass?"

Why not - they have paid plenty into the public purse over the years

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

they have never moaned about it and said they can support their son"

so then I don't really understand the point of your post.

good for your daughter finding a guy that earns a lot...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Screwed if you have triplets then!!

Not really....just won't receive a government handout for the third. A fairer system would be means tested. A lot of families don't really need it."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

That's the challenge with lots of benefits. Does someone on £100,000 a year need free prescriptions? A bus pass?"

no I don't think they do

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *histler21Man
over a year ago

Ipswich

It is not unreasonable to expect parents who make a life choice to have children - to be supported to a certain level if necessary. Two children seems to be a sensible limit - I could be persuaded at three though (as the average is somewhere between them).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uby0000Woman
over a year ago

hertfordshire


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

they have never moaned about it and said they can support their son

so then I don't really understand the point of your post.

good for your daughter finding a guy that earns a lot..."

just pointing out not everyone gets child benefit that was all

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Is this suggestion about child benefit or child tax credits? Or both? Cause they're not the same thing.

Plus what happens if you can afford say 3 kids and then the husband up and leaves you and pays not maintenance? What happens then?

It will never work and is pointless debating it as it will never happen.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

That's the challenge with lots of benefits. Does someone on £100,000 a year need free prescriptions? A bus pass?

Why not - they have paid plenty into the public purse over the years "

Hopefully they'll have paid what they're due to pay - just as everyone else should have done.

If 'from each according to their means and to each according to their needs' means anything, it means a degree of equity in such matters.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Is this suggestion about child benefit or child tax credits? Or both? Cause they're not the same thing.

Plus what happens if you can afford say 3 kids and then the husband up and leaves you and pays not maintenance? What happens then?

It will never work and is pointless debating it as it will never happen.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *reelove1969Couple
over a year ago

bristol

i know a guy who pays £1600 a month for a 2 year old ...talk about ridiculous that a 2 year old costs that much to maintain !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

That's the challenge with lots of benefits. Does someone on £100,000 a year need free prescriptions? A bus pass?

Why not - they have paid plenty into the public purse over the years

Hopefully they'll have paid what they're due to pay - just as everyone else should have done.

If 'from each according to their means and to each according to their needs' means anything, it means a degree of equity in such matters."

Unfortunately equity is often a matter of opinion in reality and not in theory

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

What happens if yr new partner has never had children and yr two kids are over 25 yrs. Will this still stop yr being paid ever if you both have always worked.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"What happens if yr new partner has never had children and yr two kids are over 25 yrs. Will this still stop yr being paid ever if you both have always worked."

blimey i'll be 52 when my youngest is 25 I think whether i'd get child benefit or not will be the least of my worries if I got pregnant then

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

[Removed by poster at 22/12/13 23:50:13]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"What happens if yr new partner has never had children and yr two kids are over 25 yrs. Will this still stop yr being paid ever if you both have always worked."
I don't see what difference it makes?

If this is affecting anyone's decision whether that should have children it not then they clearly shouldn't be.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I don't have children I can't support

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

There was a women in the papers that had 8 children and she was reciving 500 a week benfits, I was working 60 hours a week and weren't getting that much money so yes its fair to cap it, if they can't support their kids they shouldn't have them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"There was a women in the papers that had 8 children and she was reciving 500 a week benfits, I was working 60 hours a week and weren't getting that much money so yes its fair to cap it, if they can't support their kids they shouldn't have them "

I agree

the thing is the cap will only effect whoever is claiming for the kids, there's a guy near me who has 12 kids all by different women, he don't support of have anything to do with any of them really, he just shags about and buggers off when they get pregnant, he don't work nor do the girls who have his kids, as he don't have to pay for them he don't really care if he leaves loads of kids scattered about as its not his problem, so all his kids will get child support and all different women are claiming for them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rs and Mr PandoraCouple
over a year ago

LUTTERWORTH


"Two for the guy and two for which ever partner he's with this week?

Can't see the great unwashed putting up with this"

Who are the great unwashed ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *S_PennyTV/TS
over a year ago

Selby

Ultimately the people that lose out in this are the children. Remember they will have to pay their tax for much longer than some of us as they will probably be working until 75 before they get a pension whilst we've had ours at least partly paid for by them, unless of course you are one of those fortunate enough to have a half decent pension.

This irks of china almost. State control of birth rate? They are just taking the same types of policy as the Chinese govt did, ie financial penalties for having more than "allowed" number of children, just badging it up differently. Haven't seen that headline yet, Tory government using communist derived policies.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Ultimately the people that lose out in this are the children. Remember they will have to pay their tax for much longer than some of us as they will probably be working until 75 before they get a pension whilst we've had ours at least partly paid for by them, unless of course you are one of those fortunate enough to have a half decent pension.

This irks of china almost. State control of birth rate? They are just taking the same types of policy as the Chinese govt did, ie financial penalties for having more than "allowed" number of children, just badging it up differently. Haven't seen that headline yet, Tory government using communist derived policies.

"

would it be a bad thing if we did control births, the world in general is grossly over populated, people are having more kids, health care means we are living longer and it wont be long till there is no room, some countries are already building underground cities to house its bursting population, the damage we are doing to the earth is detrimental, maybe if we all took responsibility and had less kids it would be better for everyone and the earth in the long run

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

dont see why parents need child benefit. its our choice to have children and we should pay for them. My neighbour says she never had child benefit for her son mind you she is 91 years young xxx i have lots of lectures from her on benefits lol. thank gawd i work

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *S_PennyTV/TS
over a year ago

Selby

Not saying it is a bad idea. I'm just commenting on the fact it seems rather contrary to the governments general ideology to be using a policy previously used by China.

To be honest I think it would be rather ineffectual introducing it here. The problems are the birth rates in China, India and Africa as those are the ones that cause the problems globally really.

Hey why not euthanise people instead. Save us all a load of money.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rs and Mr PandoraCouple
over a year ago

LUTTERWORTH

Google the Beveridge report. Its the foundation of child benefit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Not saying it is a bad idea. I'm just commenting on the fact it seems rather contrary to the governments general ideology to be using a policy previously used by China.

To be honest I think it would be rather ineffectual introducing it here. The problems are the birth rates in China, India and Africa as those are the ones that cause the problems globally really.

Hey why not euthanise people instead. Save us all a load of money.

"

There's an argument that over population on our small island is a much bigger problem than elsewhere

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *S_PennyTV/TS
over a year ago

Selby

There is but when the polar ice caps melt and you lot are swimming around I shall enjoy my moorside ground and shooting you all off my land. .

I'll do my bit for population control then.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Not saying it is a bad idea. I'm just commenting on the fact it seems rather contrary to the governments general ideology to be using a policy previously used by China.

To be honest I think it would be rather ineffectual introducing it here. The problems are the birth rates in China, India and Africa as those are the ones that cause the problems globally really.

Hey why not euthanise people instead. Save us all a load of money.

There's an argument that over population on our small island is a much bigger problem than elsewhere"

Over population and all the migrant workers that come here are leaving ghost towns behind in their own countries x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *usrock_SullyMan
over a year ago

norwich

I think we need to remember that this money that the Government plays around with isn't theirs in the first place.,It is what we (tax payers) give them to use and distribute on our behalf.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eavy Metal BallzMan
over a year ago

Birmingham


"Not saying it is a bad idea. I'm just commenting on the fact it seems rather contrary to the governments general ideology to be using a policy previously used by China.

To be honest I think it would be rather ineffectual introducing it here. The problems are the birth rates in China, India and Africa as those are the ones that cause the problems globally really.

Hey why not euthanise people instead. Save us all a load of money.

There's an argument that over population on our small island is a much bigger problem than elsewhere

Over population and all the migrant workers that come here are leaving ghost towns behind in their own countries x"

Yay migrant workers has shown it's face!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *igSuki81Man
over a year ago

Retirement Village


"I don't have children I can't support "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Not saying it is a bad idea. I'm just commenting on the fact it seems rather contrary to the governments general ideology to be using a policy previously used by China.

To be honest I think it would be rather ineffectual introducing it here. The problems are the birth rates in China, India and Africa as those are the ones that cause the problems globally really.

Hey why not euthanise people instead. Save us all a load of money.

"

Why china is a capitalist country in all but name, it ceased being communist a long time ago suspiciously about the time it started becoming successful

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *S_PennyTV/TS
over a year ago

Selby


"Not saying it is a bad idea. I'm just commenting on the fact it seems rather contrary to the governments general ideology to be using a policy previously used by China.

To be honest I think it would be rather ineffectual introducing it here. The problems are the birth rates in China, India and Africa as those are the ones that cause the problems globally really.

Hey why not euthanise people instead. Save us all a load of money.

Why china is a capitalist country in all but name, it ceased being communist a long time ago suspiciously about the time it started becoming successful"

Yeah about the same time it officially dropped its one child policy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

Let them eat cake.

( )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Do people get a pay rise in employment, if they have another child?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I think we need to remember that this money that the Government plays around with isn't theirs in the first place.,It is what we (tax payers) give them to use and distribute on our behalf. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

No one is limiting the number of children anyone can have, just saying that if you choose to keep having them, then expect to fund that choice yourself.

We are not entitled to child benefit, tax credits or anything else. When we chose to have our children, the financial side was a consideration along with the rest.

neither of our employers increased our salaries when we decided to increase the size of our family, we have had to make sacrifices in order to have them.

Surely that should be the same for everyone!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *udistnorthantsMan
over a year ago

Desborough


"No one is limiting the number of children anyone can have, just saying that if you choose to keep having them, then expect to fund that choice yourself.

We are not entitled to child benefit, tax credits or anything else. When we chose to have our children, the financial side was a consideration along with the rest.

neither of our employers increased our salaries when we decided to increase the size of our family, we have had to make sacrifices in order to have them.

Surely that should be the same for everyone!"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

the poor can make do with what they are given"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iss_tressWoman
over a year ago

London


"I don't have children I can't support "

Radical: but then neither did I! Got sterilised at 31 after three kids as knew I couldn't afford four if my husband should bugger off (I always look at worst case scenarios).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

A donut for a 2year old... Really?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

another thread for the drama, drama, drama effect...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"my daughter cant get child benefit as her fella earns too much

individuals need be earning over 50k then they may be liable to a tax charge. My argument would be if you're earning that much you don't need it.

they have never moaned about it and said they can support their son

so then I don't really understand the point of your post.

good for your daughter finding a guy that earns a lot..."

My thoughts exactly..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

My two year old would love a donut!

saying that, so would I

alas, we are both having to make to do with scrambled eggs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"I don't have children I can't support

"

I didn't have children I couldn't support at the time we had them. We've had massive financial ups and downs in our lives due to five redundancies and we couldn't always support them without help. Neither of us could foresee the future when they were conceived....the first redundancy came out of the blue when our son was six weeks old, maybe we should have sent him back.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I don't have children I can't support

I didn't have children I couldn't support at the time we had them. We've had massive financial ups and downs in our lives due to five redundancies and we couldn't always support them without help. Neither of us could foresee the future when they were conceived....the first redundancy came out of the blue when our son was six weeks old, maybe we should have sent him back."

I don't think that anyone is saying that at all. That is exactly what the benefit system in general should be for - times when we need it to help us through a rough patch. Not something that people rely on as their only/main source of income. And I'm not including people that genuinely are unable to work for whatever reason in that comment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

And I thought this thread was about contraception for unemployed women.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otlovefun42Couple
over a year ago

Costa Blanca Spain...


"Google the Beveridge report. Its the foundation of child benefit"

Yes. This was the report used as the foundation stone of the welfare state. While many remember the first goal of the report, to tackle Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness. Many forget the other main point made.

The state "should not stifle incentive, opportunity, responsibility; in establishing a national minimum, it should leave room and encouragement for voluntary action by each individual to provide more than that minimum for himself and his family".

Sadly I think that is the part that has been forgotten. The welfare state was never intended to be a lifestyle choice, but for many that is what it has become.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex


"I don't have children I can't support

I didn't have children I couldn't support at the time we had them. We've had massive financial ups and downs in our lives due to five redundancies and we couldn't always support them without help. Neither of us could foresee the future when they were conceived....the first redundancy came out of the blue when our son was six weeks old, maybe we should have sent him back.

I don't think that anyone is saying that at all. That is exactly what the benefit system in general should be for - times when we need it to help us through a rough patch. Not something that people rely on as their only/main source of income. And I'm not including people that genuinely are unable to work for whatever reason in that comment."

But I wonder what percentage of people who genuinely have other opportunities do use the benefit system as their only source of income. Its extremely easy to say that a benefit cap is the right way to go because "people" (always someone else usually a feckless, layabout who breeds just to get child benefit )are misusing the system.

If we are short of money, if a benefit cap is teh right way to save money be honest about it, say that it is a genuine belief that the country can only afford to give child benefit to more than the first two children in a family and that the money is better off used elsewhere...don't make it about some mythical underclass of ne'er do wells.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

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


"I don't have children I can't support

I didn't have children I couldn't support at the time we had them. We've had massive financial ups and downs in our lives due to five redubndancies and we couldn't always support them without help. Neither of us could foresee the future when they were conceived....the first redundancy came out of the blue when our son was six weeks old, maybe we should have sent him back.

I don't think that anyone is saying that at all. That is exactly what the benefit system in general should be for - times when we need it to help us through a rough patch. Not something that people rely on as their only/main source of income. And I'm not including people that genuinely are unable to work for whatever reason in that comment."

Ok, I can appreciate that comment as mediating, but it also shows why benefit caps don't work, the majority of claimants are not twisting the system, they are otherwise hard working people affected by the worst down turn since the 30's, however they are the ones who get caught up, the (comparative few) dodgers are too wise to let themselves be caught anyway.

If you want to make work pay, raise wages don't lower benefits.

A few other facts:

Working age claimants cost to dwp = 45%. The other 55%? Pensions......

obr report states cost or benefit frauds £1.5 bn. Cost of tax evasion (illegal) £5 bn and avoidance £11.3bn.

By focusing on younger people the ban would be extremely cynical, would focus on the wrong thing (any expenditure would be more efficiently targeted on the larger problems of tax rather than benefit fraud, only a 10% like for like need be achieved to have the same effect as there is 10x the money to be retrieved.

Clearly concentration on benefit is inefficient in comparison to concentration on tax......

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