Cap on benefits for children

  Strawballs 13:33 25 Oct 2012
Locked

It is rare I agree with the Tories but I do on this one If I had gone to my boss and said I need a pay rise because we are having another child he would have just said you should have thought if you could afford it first.

Benefit cap

  Forum Editor 14:18 25 Oct 2012

This is a nettle that needed grasping. Successive governments have wanted to do it, but all of them have shied away out of fear for the negative reactions it will generate.

In truth it would contribute little in terms of savings towards our economic recovery, but that's not the main point - it will send a message to those who live inside the benefit culture that the gravy train is slowing.

  oresome 14:27 25 Oct 2012

Not an easy one to call.

I have no wish to see children disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

On another thread I suggest we have too few workers to support the rising number of pensioners. One solution to that problem is to increase the number of workers by encouraging a higher birth rate.

We won't develop a highly skilled workforce by raising children in poverty however.

  Aitchbee 15:31 25 Oct 2012

I totally agree with this proposal as it will discourage the proliferation of foreign 'baby-machines' that milk the system.

  Forum Editor 15:43 25 Oct 2012

UK spending on family benefits as a percentage of GDP is the third highest of all major economies, and I see no reason why people should assume that they can keep on producing children, even if they can't afford to support them, secure in the knowledge that the State will provide them with more money.

Of course there would be problems if this policy was introduced, and of course there will be the 'child poverty' argument, but that doesn't mean it couldn't work. It means that there should be lots of consultation, and a great deal of careful planning, but that's what governments are for, isn't it?

  Nontek 16:28 25 Oct 2012

I mirror wiz-king's comments exactly.

  john bunyan 16:52 25 Oct 2012

I agree with wiz-king and Nontek. Not only on the grounds that "Why should others expect me , via tax,to pay them to have children they cannot afford", but also because the world population is already too high and if anything we should pay to reduce it (Except for the problem of too few youngsters to pay for too many oldies, some of whom have not been able to accumulate a pension on top of the "state" one.)

  johndrew 19:37 25 Oct 2012

In addition to a cap on the number of children that benefit is paid for, another area that needs attention is the amount going out of the country where a claim is made and the individuals return to their own country but continue to claim here.

  Strawballs 22:54 25 Oct 2012

If you are going to use the child poverty claim then people that work should also get a bigger benefit if they want more children (on top of child benefit which out of work people also get) as I said if I went to my boss and asked for a pay rise to pay for more children he would laugh and say it was my choice not his, oh also I need more money because I need a bigger house as well by right!!

  Quickbeam 10:21 26 Oct 2012

Isn't it odd that after the introduction of the wonder of birth control, that was supposed to free women of the drudgery of domestic slavery, to allow them to lead free and fulfilled lives, we have those choosing to breed little benefit earners to maintain their lifestyle of paid for booze fags and 100" TVs...

  Forum Editor 10:54 26 Oct 2012

Cream.

"So no doubt they will all be entitled to child benefit and subsidiary benefits"

If they have 'right to reside' status, yes, they will. They'll be entitled to claim child benefit, child tax credit, state pension credit, jobseekers' allowance and employment and support allowance.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

How to watch the Huawei Mate 30 launch live: Munich, September 19

Create live VFX

iOS 13 release date, time & new features

Comparatif : Apple Watch Series 5 vs Series 4