Child Benefits

[DAVIE]

Wouldn't it make sense to simply stop further child benefits per child after a couple has had their second child?
My view would be that it would stop unemployed couples having over 4 children and it would apply to every single couple over the UK. Secondly it would probably save the Goverment a bit of money and we could use it on better things...
Please give your own views....:)

[Peterb]

Wouldn't it make sense to simply stop further child benefits per child after a couple has had their second child?
My view would be that it would stop unemployed couples having over 4 children and it would apply to every single couple over the UK. Secondly it would probably save the Goverment a bit of money and we could use it on better things...
Please give your own views....:)
Hey Davie, can't agree with you on this one my friend.
This assumes that people having children is decision arrived after careful consideration. If I am correct and the kids just keep coming, who is going to suffer? The poor.
Whenever we have economic woes, it is always the poor and disadvantaged that have to pay.
How about diverting our attention to Vodaphone who have evaded millions in tax, the Royal Family, who despite being stinking rich still recieve public money, and the rich who can afford to pay accountants to help them avoid paying their dues.
Here's a suggestion, privatise the royal family, let them earn their keep.

[DAVIE]

I just want to let you know that every family in UK has an extra £2,800 per child per year and that's why these unemployed couples have over 5 children to get more benefits into their back pockets! I just don't think it's fair to people who are working on minimum wage and want bigger families themselves. I know there's no jobs out there, but if these couples actually used contreception and actually looked for work and looked for things to do within the community then there wouldn't be need to fork out all this money to those types of people who just can't be bothered doing anything.
Another issue I want to bring up is that our population is rising extremely high on this small island and if we actually limited child benefits, it may have benefits in bringing down the population slightly.


That is very interesting about Vodaphone, I want to know more....and the Royal Family? Well, that's why I'm a Smiths fan!

[Peterb]

I just want to let you know that every family in UK has an extra £2,800 per child per year and that's why these unemployed couples have over 5 children to get more benefits into their back pockets! I just don't think it's fair to people who are working on minimum wage and want bigger families themselves. I know there's no jobs out there, but if these couples actually used contreception and actually looked for work and looked for things to do within the community then there wouldn't be need to fork out all this money to those types of people who just can't be bothered doing anything.
Another issue I want to bring up is that our population is rising extremely high on this small island and if we actually limited child benefits, it may have benefits in bringing down the population slightly.


That is very interesting about Vodaphone, I want to know more....and the Royal Family? Well, that's why I'm a Smiths fan!
Hi Davie, fair enough. I still disagree but I'd only start repeating myself if I carried on arguing.
Neverthless, I still love you.

[DAVIE]

Hi Davie, fair enough. I still disagree but I'd only start repeating myself if I carried on arguing.
Neverthless, I still love you.

I really do understand your side of the argument though, Peter. I'm umemployed, I'm poor and I understand we're being kept poor! Prices going up everywhere! Food, transport, the lot....I just hate it when I see these people on nearby estates having all this money and then they influence people my age to have these massive unemployed families, as they show they are being kept cosy by the state.
So basically if I'm a failure in life and I want to be a bit richer, then I should have loads of children and get rewarded by the Goverment! It's pathetic!

.....maybe there are big families who genuinely need these bigger benefits after loosing their jobs. I believe people who have worked for a large amount of time do deserve them. But not the lazy folk. I don't dislike large families at all, I just dislike the parents of large families who have not worked for a single penny and live happily in their homes, which are being paid by the state also.

[billy scissors]

Jezza says "PUT SOMETHING ON THE END OF IT!!"

[DAVIE]

Jezza says "PUT SOMETHING ON THE END OF IT!!"

hahaha that's what it boils down too :p

[CrystalGeezer]

Who's Jezza? I thought that was a verb that started the whole mess.

[DAVIE]

Who's Jezza? I thought that was a verb that started the whole mess.

Jeremy Kyle....The UKs version of Jerry Springer. A chat show host!

Jerry doesn't really help much though, whilst Jeremy does more to help his guests :D

[Peterb]

I really do understand your side of the argument though, Peter. I'm umemployed, I'm poor and I understand we're being kept poor! Prices going up everywhere! Food, transport, the lot....I just hate it when I see these people on nearby estates having all this money and then they influence people my age to have these massive unemployed families, as they show they are being kept cosy by the state.
So basically if I'm a failure in life and I want to be a bit richer, then I should have loads of children and get rewarded by the Goverment! It's pathetic!

.....maybe there are big families who genuinely need these bigger benefits after loosing their jobs. I believe people who have worked for a large amount of time do deserve them. But not the lazy folk. I don't dislike large families at all, I just dislike the parents of large families who have not worked for a single penny and live happily in their homes, which are being paid by the state also.
No, I think I understand where you're coming from Davie. It must be very frustrating for you.

[peptastic]

This is a hot issue in England too?

But where is the line drawn?
Would you make exception for twins?
[It used to piss my mom off that people said she had too many kids. We're twins! It wasn't an issue over benefits just judgemental people. My older sis got the same treatment for having three kids though she was married and worked two jobs.]

My mom is really anti-tax, social security, all that jazz now she makes a good living.
She forgets she did recieve social security after our father died. I don't agree with the press that this is a social benefit. if you paid into it while working then your kids ought to have it if you die.
A lot of people use these social benefits and put themselves through school and pay back into the system. Not everyone does thus we got the Welfare Queen stigma.
The welfare system in America is viewed the same way. People have kids to recieve the benefits, etc.

Not all government benefits are being abused. I know that a lot probably are [I'm not naive] but punishing parents for not fitting the right salary bracket [or should we look at assetts as well less someone's circumstance change?] isn't going to put a stop on the child problem. It might interfere with people's religious beliefs to not use contraceptives for one.
[que up Monty Python's every sperm is sacred. I'm afraid it's the orphange for the lot.]

In Florida you have to take a drug test to qualify for benefits. If you pass the test it's free but if you don't then you have to pay for the test and don't recieve the benefits. Unless you find a way around that too such as fake illnesses, etc. I know of people who do that. They let the kids grandparents take care of their kids while they sell the food stamp cards [ebt] for drug money.
Every system is going to find someone to abuse it. :(
It's just the way it is.


What I know about this issue is from reading the Guardian so please correct me if I'm wrong. Are two parent households who make enough money receiving benefits just for having kids? Like how Germany does it or differently?
i read in France you don't pay taxes if you have three kids but this might not be true.

And does England not have the child support system? I once read in a Elizabeth Hurley article no less [when she got knocked up by some dude] that the mother can't sue the father for child support in the U.K.
I would think if this was true that making either parent who skipped out support their kids is the way to go.
Though of course I know how flawed that system really is. We get 1989 cases from time to time.
Really effective.