Cap child tax credit after four children, says MP

They give tax subsidies of around 500 million a year for land owners with wind farms, which Prince Philip told us are "fairtytales", but they want to cut child benefit for families with more than 4 children. Why?

What is the real cost per year to the small number of families with more than 4 children? How many such families are there. Why don't they tell us in the media, what the real numbers are? I think it is because the figures would not shock us at all when we comnpared them to their "green" tax subsidiies.
It's not about saving money, it's about much more than that, and France won't go along with it.

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2064081/Hurrah-Prince-Philip-Wind-power-ruinous-folly-age.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

ledkr please note the title of the thread and then come back to me.

Do I believe TAX CREDITS should be capped if you have a larger family? Do. I. Fuck. Tax credits aren't a benefit for scroungers. They're a benefit for working families on low income. Without them we'd never have gotten back on our feet and been able to start again. We used vital capital to start a business which is now paying our wages. Otherwise we'd have had to live off that capital to live - hence no future. The tax credits helped us to pay our bills. If I'd have had 5 children but only been paid out for 3 or 4, I'd have struggled. Can you see my point of view or are you still reading the Daily Mail to get your answers?

Financially the French are fucked whatever their population policies. They do however have the benefit of a much larger country which is far less densely populated than UK. They have a similar population to us but loads more land.

boffin but thats different,those people havent chosen to keep having children when they are already on tc.I have a large family and am currently on unpaid portion of mat leave,we have jsut had to cut back and live on dh's wages which inccidentally are low enough for us to qualify for a large amount of tc,had i not been returning to work.
Obviously there has to be allowances for those circumstances.

Why do some countries like France bend over backwards to encourage larger families and some governments and many greens try to discourage large families?

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4856992.stm

What's in it for France and what's in it for the greens and other governments?

'With all this, it is maybe not surprising that France is managing to buck the trend of European depopulation. With a fertility rate of 1.916, it is second only to Ireland in the birth stakes and, unlike many countries, its population is growing strongly.'

'Throughout its modern history France has been obsessed about population levels. Experts have established that around the time of the revolution, French mothers stopped breeding - no one knows why - and a population that had been the largest in Europe fell during the 19th century behind Britain and the emerging Germany.

The massive loss of life in World War I helped spread the conviction that national survival was linked to numbers.

Today, French governments of left and right put the "family" high in their election manifestos, and every year there is a much-publicised Conference on the Family, attended by the prime minister, parents and campaigning groups.'

Why are the French (both right and left) different to the greens and other governments? Are they stupid or do they understand what the greens and other governments want to do?

FFS

You are stuffed if you have a steady job, have a large family, and then you are made redundant in a rural area, or get hit by a bus then.

Presumably you should send a few kids to the poor house while you get on your feet again?

Towit twooo me nice?woah there haha.

You are wise because you look at things objectively. and were very nice to me on a dog thread once

fanny stop fannying around and make your point. Do you actually think that the state should just continue to cough up for as many children as a a family choose to have whislt many who are not on any benefits have to limit their families to what they can afford. Do you? Really?

People have been referring to me as wise a lot recently.I may start to hoot and be awake at night. Oh hang on,i am already awake all night

I have 5 children.Not the norm i agree.I had the 5th with my new dh who has none of his own.We will alwys be abit sad we can only have the one but we cannot afford anymore this is because our income will not increase if we do have anymore,it didnt increase with the birth of dd either,we have just had to manage.Why cant others?

I said it before... You're all right. Nothing else to add. Nice being part of a wonderful community on MN that picks odd numbers of kids allowed to be born.

Thank you wise Ledkr, but it's Kevlar body armour on these threads.

Real life?

It is you who need a jammy dodger here! I don't know anyone with 5 children in "real life". It is feckless to have 5 children (excepting unexpected triplets +) unless you are wealthy.

Fanny what is the difference? You shouldnt have a massive brood of children unless you can afford it end of story.Its unfair on the children.

And dont forget you can still be pretty poor even if you dont get tax credits,you may get enough money to not qualify for tax credits but if you have a big mortgage or other debts then you can still be poor.In fact many people who get tax credits also get hb,free prescriptions and dental treatment,childcare help and maintainance which isn't included in their income for tax credits assessment purposes so could actually be better off than those not entitled.

Fanny,

You don't sound like a sponger at all. And, for you, the credits are probably just claiming back money you have already paid to the exchequer many times over.

That does not mean that spongers don't exist and that the state has to sponsor people having 5 children who cannot afford them, unconditionally. I only proposed that the state manage the children's money beyond a certain number of children.

Christ, who can afford 5 kids? We're not exactly on the breadline but going from 2 to 3 children even would be a huge expense. If you care at all about their quality of life.

So if I HAD have had 5 children, that makes me feckless how? Remember we're not talking Jeremy Kyle bigoted views here, this is real life.

Yes I do work, my husband runs two businesses. We pay tax, VAT and NI. I even have an Accountant. Lucky me. I've also had to claw my way back from ruin. Luckily for me, we only had 3 children. All of which were born when we were very wealthy. However after both DH and I were nearly facing bankruptcy and 17 years of paying my taxes, we needed to
claim tax credits to feed my children. I
am a hard working, non smoking, tee total mother of 3 who runs half marathons in my spare time. Not your typical sponging bastard.

Fanny.

Love it. "Just because they have 5 children". As if 5 is perfectly average and normal.

For every tax credit received someone else has to make up the tax. So the tax rate for everyone else goes up. It is a zero sum game. So, you have 5 children and penalise everyone with less. I don't think that is fair.

What is the difference.

If you cannot afford the children (beyond a certain number), don't have them. Tax credits and benefits are the same spectrum.

Arghhhhhhh it's not about parents fecklessness!!!!! It's about tax credits!!

Hmm it's Tax Credits we are discussing - not benefits per se. Tax credits are provided for families who work for a low income. So YOU want to take money off families who work just because they have 5 children? Shame on you. This isn't about the minority of lazy bastards who produce kids like I have cups of tea. They're always going to be there. They don't register on my radar. However a large portion of hard working couples need help. FACT. Like I've said, educate yourself about the real world. You need to.

I think that this is a really interesting problem in a free society with a welfare state. How can it possibly be fair that people not receiving anything from the state rationally decide on the size of their family according to what they can afford, yet those living on the state can have any number of children without any personal sacrifice. I am, by most peoples standards, "rich" yet money would definitely come into our decision as to whether to have a third child.

On the other hand, it is clearly unfair to penalise a child for their parents' fecklessness. So, what is the solution. I think that we have to agree on an amount of children the state is prepared to subsidise (2 or 3) and, if people have more children than that, all the money for their children would be managed by a guardian appointed by the state. So, the parents would actually lose the freedom as to how to spend the money but the children would, if anything, gain as the money would definitely be spent on food, children's clothes etc and not fags and booze. In addition, housing size should be dictated by need, not desire. There is no reason that 2 children should not share a bedroom.

I think that most here will think that I am a rabid DM reader. However, I really do think that 70% + of the population is aghast when they learn what is available from the state vs what hard working people have to pay for.