Advanced search

To wonder why all benefits are not limited to two children only

(426 Posts)
SuzysZoo Wed 10-Aug-11 13:59:25

Ok. I know that this is going to be a bit contentious. I don't mean retrospectively either. I just wonder why, in these cash strapped times, the government doesn't just say that all benefits, child benefit etc should be limited IN THE FUTURE, IN AT LEAST 9 MONTHS TIME, to 2 children per family only...... My point being that if you have more you should support them yourself. AIBU?

GypsyMoth Wed 10-Aug-11 14:00:40

why is 2 the magic number??hmm

BooyHoo Wed 10-Aug-11 14:01:34

why 2? have you got 2 or intend to just have 2?

BertieBotts Wed 10-Aug-11 14:01:40

Because reducing benefits has no effect on birth rates, but massive effects on child poverty.

Because some people lose everything after having 2 children.

worraliberty Wed 10-Aug-11 14:02:19


I know it's frustrating to see the permanently entitled in our society, go on and on to breed with no intention of getting a job...but you can't take it out on the innoccent children and push them into extreme poverty....that would be disastrous for society as a whole.

You also can't force people onto contraception of force them out to work unfortunately.

GypsyMoth Wed 10-Aug-11 14:02:20

would you also make it compulsory that they must have a mum AND a dad in the home (mortgaged) too....make it all nice and tidy and 'nuclear'??

LolaRennt Wed 10-Aug-11 14:02:25

I think 2 is fair numnber because if you want more, you can still afford them.. You just have to make cut backs. Food gets cheaper, clothes get cheaper, rooms can be shared

BooyHoo Wed 10-Aug-11 14:02:34

hell, why give CBfor any children if that'syour line of thought? if people want any dcs they should support them themselves eh?

Pootles2010 Wed 10-Aug-11 14:02:48

Have you got 2 children by any chance OP?

Thistledew Wed 10-Aug-11 14:02:59

Because you shouldn't punish and deprive children for the decisions of their parents.

BertieBotts Wed 10-Aug-11 14:03:00

Because what happens if you have children from a previous relationship and enter into a new one where there are more children, or you decide to have more children with your new partner?

Because why should only the rich be allowed to "breed"? (Since that will be your next argument, I'm sure)

Memoo Wed 10-Aug-11 14:03:03

What if you are both working and can easily afford 4 kids and then you are both suddenly made redundant?? How are you then surpose to support 4 children whilst looking for a new job?

LolaRennt Wed 10-Aug-11 14:03:44

Also I think it might encourage only families who genuinely want children to have more than 2. Not those who just can't be arsed to used protection so they have 6 and let them run feral.

BertieBotts Wed 10-Aug-11 14:03:47

Also, what happens if you have triplets? When you already had one child?

BustySinclair Wed 10-Aug-11 14:04:11

yes i agree OP, and even the labour MP canvassing looked shamefaced when i asked why we pay for 6, 7 and 8 kids in a family.

if you think the benefits in some of these families all go for the benefit of the kids, you are a bit naive

more like fags, booze and sky telly not to mention ipods and iphones

VeronicaCake Wed 10-Aug-11 14:04:34

Last time I checked third children don't get a lot of choice in the matter of being born. If we give benefits to families to support their children then either all the children should count or none of them should.

I agree that people should generally consider their resources when family planning. I just don't think this is the way to engineer that outcome.

GypsyMoth Wed 10-Aug-11 14:04:43

all benefits op??

so a family has the nerve to go on and have number 3? its ok though,they will pay for it themselves,thats ok isnt it?

til that child turns out to have SN or a disability,and will need a benefit to reflect that......but oh dear,no,sorry,we dont DO benefits for child number 3!!!!

seeing flaws in ou plan alreadyhmm

SuzysZoo Wed 10-Aug-11 14:05:06

Does it really have no effect on birth rates though? I thought in countries where there were financial incentives to have only two children, it did have an effect on birth rates. Two is not a magic number, no. Just that most people think two is reasonable and anything more a bit over the top, maybe? Yes, some people do lose everything after having more than two, that's true, but I'd say that was probably only a very tiny minority maybe.....

BooyHoo Wed 10-Aug-11 14:05:33

nice ignorantattitude lola hmm

because all families with 6 children let them run feral dont they?

naturalbaby Wed 10-Aug-11 14:05:38

angry what a load of rubbish


LolaRennt Wed 10-Aug-11 14:06:03

memoo wouldn't make more sens to have an emergency fund in those circumstances? Say a year of benefits? but not unlimited

BustySinclair Wed 10-Aug-11 14:06:12

im not saying for people who are made redundant, i am saying for people who have never worked a day in their lives and keep on having unwanted kid after unwanted kid a la Karen Matthews and the like

LolaRennt Wed 10-Aug-11 14:07:03

Did you read what I said?? I said it would make people who wanted children work to have them. SO fuck off before you misquote me.

BooyHoo Wed 10-Aug-11 14:07:05

3 children is overth top? are you for real? [shocked]

GypsyMoth Wed 10-Aug-11 14:07:10

crap idea you go,think up something else,we could all do with a laugh!!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now