'Rape clause' row as Keir Starmer says Labour will not scrap two child benefit cap

So what are you planning to do to encourage working, non benefit 'reliant' mothers to have more children, because fewer and fewer of those are, and removing benefits for third children does nothing to encourage those either.

At what point do you start euthanising pensioners? After all, if you're so aghast at people being dependant on welfare and benefits but are serious about dealing with the problem, that's your other option.

Child Benefit was introduced as a mechanism for ensuring that a fraction of family income was under the control of the mother. It meant that male breadwinners didn't have total control. Don't lightly throw it away.

I think the two cap rule is fair. Surely if (some) woman/ teenagers think they can continue to have children at the expense of the tax payer then you can bet your bottom dollar there will be some mothers that will continue to have them, I mean why would they not? Sounds like a perfect plan if any of above just happens to be work shy. That's my opinion anyway, I'll wait until someone tells me how unfair im being.

Contraception is a thing. Used correctly, ‘accidents’ do not occur as often. People should not be having more children than they can afford.

The cap at 2 is perfectly reasonable. Being Labour doesn’t mean a free for all. But when the ‘self-ID’ bomb is dropped in, it becomes clear Labour can do no right until they say they’re anti trans. Reminds me of the Christian church I left who discussed Mr Cameron as the only believer and moral candidate. What they meant was ‘anti-gay’.

Child benefit should be scrapped completely. If you can't afford them don't have them.

Pretty sure I have never received Child Benefit.

Well IMO we really shouldn't be encouraging women who are reliant on child benefit or benefits in general to have more children. It's not the best case scenario for the child if the parent is reliant on it for starters.

You have to pay it back (if you claim it) once you earn 60k so not sure what you are on about. It's also tapered after 50k!

Thank you for pointing out that the Chinese one-child policy was nothing like the benefits cap.

I can't believe anyone would think the benefits cap is "on a par" with the one-child policy unless they were completely ignorant about it.

@MistyGreenAndBlue no they don't

EVERYONE gets child benefit regardless of income.

It's perfectly possible to make your point without characterising women as 'pushing out' children. It's demeaning and insulting to both the women and the children.

They'll detonate a bomb in education with their private school fees plans. Fine, plan a long term programme to gradually remove private school - make the case for it. But don't cause overnight chaos. It's so irresponsible.

No I think that’s reasonable.

The cap doesn’t apply to multiple births.

I do agree with it too - it is reasonable to restrict some benefits to two children only.

Starmer is a Tory. Controlled opposition, same as Blair.

I'm very left. I do think for the sake of the planet, we should not encourage people to have more than two kids. But those that are here should not live in poverty either.

"The taxpayer" subsidises ALL children born in the UK. We're facing an ever growing tax burden thanks to our ageing population, so the only credible solutions to that problem in the mid to long-term involve upping the birth-rate to redress the balance. More children = a larger workforce and larger tax take, so we should be encouraging ALL women to have children, even if that means the State has to subsidise some to a greater degree than others.

The idea that this country is, in any way, going to become better off by discouraging women from having children is risible.

Ok but why do they need to come from people who are reliant on child benefit to raise them? We need more children maybe but maybe not ones that the taxpayer needs to pay for perhaps

Nail
on
head

of those children then also live of the state

if those children also live off the state.

Declining population and a growing tax burden. "The country" needs more women popping out more children

And I have no problem with that, as long as the parents pay for them.

No point funding somebody to have loads of children of those children then also live of the state. That only makes the problem worse rather than better.

Ok but why do they need to come from people who are reliant on child benefit to raise them? We need more children maybe but maybe not ones that the taxpayer needs to pay for perhaps? (yes, i know, my comment is gross etc etc)

Declining population and a growing tax burden. "The country" needs more women popping out more children.

Not sure what's gross about it, but you are entitled to your opinion; as am I.

Fully agree on the two child cap. The country cannot afford for people to be popping out children like pinball machines.

No it is not.

The Chinese one-child rule was appalling, a modern day horror imposed with the utmost cruelty, imposing forced abortions and sterilisations.

The two child benefit rule simply reduces the load on tax payers, many of whom have limited their own families because of the expense.