this Lordly geezer and poor peoplebreeding

[GabbyLoggon]

link all last nights news all todays papers what strange language the wouldbe Lord uses Is he part of the Tory "nasty party" that saidshould cameron censor him?

can we have a proper link please? can't see in on BBC news and have a 10 month old crawling all over me

Is there some without a radio? goodluck to the 10 month old...

The lords get 100 quid a day for just signing in. they dont have to stay. not bad is it?( no snow with us yet)

I think all he was saying was that there are working people that can't afford to have children whereas there are people that don't work, have never worked yet are having children-paid for by the taxpayer. I couldn't agree with him more. Common sense stuff. I think it was just the use of the word 'breeding' that people object to.

Badly worded but with a ring of truth. Middle-income earners have always been the ones to weigh up the extra costs and requirements (steady job, a home, paying off debts) before starting a family and statistics show that this is being left later and later. With the withdrawal of tax credits, CB and so forth, the cost is even higher. Wealthy families don't have the same income pressure. Poorer families, on the other hand, qualify for credits, help with housing costs and other assistance towards raising a child.

Hate the word - agree with the sentiment

im inclinded to agree with him im afraid..

Common sense. It's a situation we are currently in, never mind facing. The very wealthy have never had to worry, those on benefits don't need to worry because the taxpayer will pick up the tab.

The large majority of us who fall somewhere in the middle and need to pay bills have (largely) put having children on hold whilst they pay off student debts and try to afford housing which is more in keeping with trying to raise a family.

He's got that kind of look in his eye that suggests he'd like to bring back workhouses for the "breeders"

oh yay, now some toff with shit for brains has got people slagging off people on benefits again.
you know not everyone was on benefits when they had thier kids, but shits happens and jobs go,
and not everyone on benefits wants to stay on them, some are actually seeking work.
but come on much more fun for people to slag "them" off.
but do remember that the way jobs are going it could be you soon....
then people will slag you off.

ok - so he worded it badly. but what part of it isn't true. Totally agree with chil.

Middle income families will look at how many children they can afford and will basically plan according to those constraints. The uber wealthy and those who get their kids paid for by the state won't have the same financial pressures and constraints. That is a fact, so why is what he said so wrong?

I think they should look to their benefit system accuracy and implementation. My 2 BIL are on benefits and have been for years, and even my BiL was pissed off at his neighbour, who had 8 kids, and claimed child benfits for them all...for over 30 years. The benefit department couldn't work out what ages the children were so he was still getting benefit for kids who left home 3 years before and were all over 18.

So maybe the system is so crappy it is not surprising some people take advantage.

I will watch to see the change when the job losses hit home

It has truth to it but may have been badly worded. I can't afford to move to a bigger house so curb my family as I can't just ask to be rehoused due to overcrowding. That is what happens at the moment isn't it. I have a friend waiting for her larger house as her youngest is now over 12 months old so I am not talking out of my arse.

2shoes - why are there people on his forum almost gleefully waiting for others to screwed over when the job cuts come? it is beyond me!

I for one am not talking about the people who need benefits as a safety net when things go wrong. I think you will be hard pushed to find anyone who thinks benefits shouldnt be there for those who need it. That being said, there is a class of people who have no inclination to work and have children without any thought to trying to pay for those kids themselves. And the truth is that the current benefit system does allow this behaviour to continue.

I have a toff aquaintance who used the term 'breeding again ?' when he discovered I was expecting no 3.

I was a bit but I think its just in the vernacular for the aristocracy.

I actually can see his point, but think it was worded very, very badly and probably taken out of context.

Isn't the term 'breeder' the term used by Hannah Betts in her Times column?

Not my fave word but not the sole preserve of the aristocracy.

My mum's family are all dairy and beef farmers and some of their terminology for human reproduction and birth is straight from the farmyard.

Thats the "nasty tory party" side of it covered.

But what about Cameron censoring ill-bred
Flight?

The wouldbe Lord should have stoody up to bossy Camerooney.

I think Lord "on your bike" Tebbitt should take cameron on over this.

Is there no room left for prejudiced Tories to speak their mind? Class prejudice is potty NOY illegal

I did this subject on the radio Sheffield phone-in at noon. It was lively , but relevant

mistletoekisses You are right
I have had a think and think I got all caught up in me iynwim, tbh I don't think peopel are talking about people like me and my family who are using it as a safety net, more the people who use it as a life choice.
but maybe saying people on benefits it too big a group and does make it sound like it includes all people on benefits.
hope that makes sense

It's what you'd expect from an old tory, ooh the serfs are being encouraged to breed.

everyone can get benefits if they need em, regardless of income, if you are putting off having kids because you have no money it all goes on the mortgage and cars, then thats your prerogative, you class those things more important, doesn't mean the system is failing you it simply means you value things differently to others, who will have children when they have nothing because the safety net will catch them.

The safety net will catch us all, one day we all may need it, so be thankful it's there.

Yes, we will always need a decent safety net

I suspect ours is better than Americas

It's frighteningly Orwellian.

I think TOFF is a neater word than aristocracy

Cameron has silenced "Lord" Flight