Page 5 | To think adding more child benefits is a pointless and futile policy?

MelissaExplainsItAll · 2025-02-27T10:30:36+00:00

[[https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/feb/26/parents-under-fives-could-be-exempted-two-child-benefit-cap-uk https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/feb/26/parents-under-fives-could-be-exempted-two-child-benefit-cap-uk]] I think child poverty would be better relieved in ways other than giving the parents more cash. For example: - better funded breakfast and after school clubs - better funded nursery hours (banning top up charges) - expansion of free school meals - better school funding - direct funding of school holiday clubs AIBU?

Wildflowers99 · 27/02/2025 14:17

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 14:14

Who made you judge and jury over others? This type of baseless judgement is unacceptable. You don't know many people at all, none of us do. Judging based on no knowledge is foolish.

Show quote history

I’m not judge and jury. I’m giving an opinion, same as everyone else. The fact is more and more children are entering reception very delayed and not properly cared for. This is having a huge knock on effect on the education system and benefits.

Original poster

MelissaExplainsItAll · 27/02/2025 14:15

Araminta1003 · 27/02/2025 14:10

My brother is in Switzerland, in his canton he gets to deduct money out of taxes for each child. It is not capped. It is acknowledged that richer people should also have tax deductions for children, to incentivise them to have DCs and make work worthwhile. They also make men pay for all children they father apparently. so yes, that would be sensible policy making, we do not have that kind of thinking here.

I believe it’s the same in America. Makes sense to me.

OP posts:

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 14:14

Wildflowers99 · 27/02/2025 14:08

Sadly a % of society can no longer be trusted to care for their children properly. So I don’t think it’s appalling at all.

Show quote history

Who made you judge and jury over others? This type of baseless judgement is unacceptable. You don't know many people at all, none of us do. Judging based on no knowledge is foolish.

Araminta1003 · 27/02/2025 14:10

My brother is in Switzerland, in his canton he gets to deduct money out of taxes for each child. It is not capped. It is acknowledged that richer people should also have tax deductions for children, to incentivise them to have DCs and make work worthwhile. They also make men pay for all children they father apparently. so yes, that would be sensible policy making, we do not have that kind of thinking here.

Wildflowers99 · 27/02/2025 14:10

tiger2691 · 27/02/2025 12:45

The main driver of child poverty and the increase in child poverty is the 2 child benefit cap, Starmer knows it, everyone it, but just like they know that council Tax has become the new poll tax, they all sit on their hands. Giving children a bowl of porridge and a piece of fruit for breakfast will not stall the ever increasing deep and entrenched poverty and social inequality, nor will it reduce it.

Anyone interested in such matters should read this...

www.jrf.org.uk/uk-poverty-2025-the-essential-guide-to-understanding-poverty-in-the-uk

We have no more money for benefits. The amount we spend on them is absolutely terrifying.

To think adding more child benefits is a pointless and futile policy?

Itisbetter · 27/02/2025 14:09

Wildflowers99 · 27/02/2025 14:08

Sadly a % of society can no longer be trusted to care for their children properly. So I don’t think it’s appalling at all.

Show quote history

And you think household income is a good indicator of that? Seriously?

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 14:08

x2boys · 27/02/2025 14:04

But we are not talking about child benefit, that's NOT limited to two children
It's the child element of universal credit ( and tax credits For those still on them that's limited to two children.

Show quote history

Yes I see that now, see above.

I was opposed to the cap when it came in, so support any unwinding.

Wildflowers99 · 27/02/2025 14:08

Itisbetter · 27/02/2025 10:48

So basically you feel that poor children should be cared for and fed away from their parents as much as possible?

No. I think that’s an appalling idea.

Sadly a % of society can no longer be trusted to care for their children properly. So I don’t think it’s appalling at all.

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 14:06

Mrsttcno1 · 27/02/2025 14:00

The fact you are talking about child benefit makes me think you actually don’t even understand what this policy is about enough to support it or not.

There is no limit on the amount of children you receive child benefit for.

The policy is about the child element of Universal Credit, which is a totally different thing and does have a 2 child limit.

Edited

Show quote history

Oh apologies, I was typing distracted and didn't read properly!

I am in favour of the two child benefit cap being removed. It's a small number of people, the evidence is the money all gets spent, it will lift families out of poverty.

I was opposed to the introduction of the cap.

x2boys · 27/02/2025 14:04

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 13:51

Oh this thread is bollocks.

Child Benefit is a pittance but on principle should be paid.

I support this policy proposal, because I oppose child poverty.

But we are not talking about child benefit, that's NOT limited to two children
It's the child element of universal credit ( and tax credits For those still on them that's limited to two children.

Mrsttcno1 · 27/02/2025 14:00

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 13:51

Oh this thread is bollocks.

Child Benefit is a pittance but on principle should be paid.

I support this policy proposal, because I oppose child poverty.

The fact you are talking about child benefit makes me think you actually don’t even understand what this policy is about enough to support it or not.

There is no limit on the amount of children you receive child benefit for.

The policy is about the child element of Universal Credit, which is a totally different thing and does have a 2 child limit.

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 13:56

Araminta1003 · 27/02/2025 13:51

From a child’s point of view, it is better to be born into a well off family. So they should be encouraging well off families to have more children by offering tax incentives out of wages. That would be in the best interest of the actual children born.
Encouraging poorer people to have more kids and then cutting benefits at 5, is just cruel both on those children and families.
And the big one is of course making men who have kids pay for their kids, not society. Contraception is widely available, if you choose not to use it, you pay.

This is nonsense, just prejudice and money-grabbing dressed up as 'policy'.

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 13:53

offmynut · 27/02/2025 13:50

Ive been saving from the age of 16 its not hard to put a bit a side every payday.
It soon builds up over the years.

Show quote history

You have to have spare in order to save.

Many people don't have spare.

verycloakanddaggers · 27/02/2025 13:51

Oh this thread is bollocks.

Child Benefit is a pittance but on principle should be paid.

I support this policy proposal, because I oppose child poverty.

Araminta1003 · 27/02/2025 13:51

From a child’s point of view, it is better to be born into a well off family. So they should be encouraging well off families to have more children by offering tax incentives out of wages. That would be in the best interest of the actual children born.
Encouraging poorer people to have more kids and then cutting benefits at 5, is just cruel both on those children and families.
And the big one is of course making men who have kids pay for their kids, not society. Contraception is widely available, if you choose not to use it, you pay.

offmynut · 27/02/2025 13:50

Sinkintotheswamp · 27/02/2025 13:35

What amazing job did you do to save 14 months of living expenses then? Is it something easy that lots of people could manage?

Show quote history

Ive been saving from the age of 16 its not hard to put a bit a side every payday.
It soon builds up over the years.

DragonFly98 · 27/02/2025 13:50

Mrsttcno1 · 27/02/2025 12:23

There is already additional funding available for those families with disabled children.

Show quote history

Haha ok.

Mrsttcno1 · 27/02/2025 13:49

ExercicenformedeZ · 27/02/2025 13:46

I don't understand all the fuss about the two child cap. If you want more children than that, pay for them yourself!

This is the thing for me, you have the amount of children you can afford.

In an ideal world where money is no object I would love a huge family, the reality is that we can’t really afford to have more than 2 children so we will only be having 2 children.

MyLimeGuide · 27/02/2025 13:47

MelissaExplainsItAll · 27/02/2025 13:42

Is the answer to give their parents bigger and bigger houses (meaning prioritising building those houses) when we have a huge housing shortage and thousands of kids living in B&Bs?

Show quote history

It's a bad answer!! And oversight. As usual in the UK.

ExercicenformedeZ · 27/02/2025 13:46

I don't understand all the fuss about the two child cap. If you want more children than that, pay for them yourself!

MyLimeGuide · 27/02/2025 13:45

offmynut · 27/02/2025 11:44

Why should the tax payer pay for others to keep having kids.
If you want them you pay for them not use a job center UC because you know the government will pay.
Ive seen some have kids for money and some are working there arse off just to raise one child without any benefits they work to pay for there child.

Show quote history

100% this. I'm sick of entitled people thinking they can keep having children (when they are skint) at everyone else's expense. Having a child is self indulgent IMO. Everyone has the right to be a parent regardless of income, but poor people shouldn't have more than 2. IMO if it wasn't funded eventually these inconsiderate breeders will reign it in.

Original poster

MelissaExplainsItAll · 27/02/2025 13:42

x2boys · 27/02/2025 13:40

There is a big difference in relative poverty and absolute poverty
I would hope no child in the UK goes to bed hungry and has adequate clothing and foot wear but that's very basic, dome kids are still living in very over crowded less than ideal living conditions

Show quote history

Is the answer to give their parents bigger and bigger houses (meaning prioritising building those houses) when we have a huge housing shortage and thousands of kids living in B&Bs?

OP posts:

Wildflowers99 · 27/02/2025 13:41

I’m not in favour of any more cash benefits, to anyone.

Original poster

MelissaExplainsItAll · 27/02/2025 13:41

Tandora · 27/02/2025 13:37

I’m guessing you think this because you are too well off to be eligible for benefits? And/ or you don’t have more than 2 children.

Show quote history

The vast majority of families with dependent children don’t have more than two. Only 14% have three or more.

OP posts:

MoreDangerousThanAWomanScorned · 27/02/2025 13:41

MelissaExplainsItAll · 27/02/2025 12:08

The cynical would say that kicking it down the road by five years makes it another government’s problem…

Show quote history

I am also cynical about the under-5s suggestion, but I think it's not the kicking the can down the line, it's that the general public are generally more sympathetic to babies and very young children. The problem Labour has is that research shows that the two-child cap is driving child poverty and their own activists and most of their MPs hate it - but it's an objectively 'popular' policy. 60% of the public back it - 70% of the over-50s, who are such a key demographic in voting terms. I think dropping it for under-5s is an attempt to make dropping it more palatable to the voters.