In thinking the Coalition government have got it in for families?

[citytovillage]

The government have said they want Britain to be the "most family-friendly country in Europe". So why since getting into power have they launched an all-out attack on the services and support for families by cutting them or proposing to cut them?
First it was child tax credits, then child benefit, sports in schools, bookstart and now Sure Start centres. Where will this end? My local county council are proposing to axe around a third of the sure start centres, so what are families with young children going to do. By removing the child benefit for some families and proposing means-testing access to Children's centres, where will families get the money to pay for these? It wasn't young children who got this country into the mess they claim it is in.

My partner works a regular job, we have 3 children. We get £180 PER WEEK from the government for tax credits, that is without taking into account cb/hb/ctb. This is a fucking ridiculous situation.

Why can't a person working a full weeks work support his family. When my last child enters school,I will probably get a job. We will be no better off.

This situation is ridiculous, it's the whole system that needs to change. The whole system is obviously not working for the average individual. It is for the super fucking rich, which is why it will not change any time soon. Because obviously the fuckers hold all of the power.

oh bolloks ccpccp

should a public sector worker earn more than the PM yes they should.

should a head teacher be taking home than 200,000 in bonus no he should not.

the distrobution of wealth should be scrutinised.

should a devoted mother be looking to put her bautifull dc into care because she has no support no she should not.

yes I belive argument won, like I said roll on the day you require help!

Velouria - similar situation here except we receive very little in the way of TC's.

DH works all the hours god sends and on paper seems to take home a reasonable wage however by the time we factor in rent and council tax we are probably no better off than we would be if he was unemployed.

As for only the super rich reproducing, the gene pool will be super fucking shallow.

If you are going to have an ageing population you need people to look after them.

Im a bit elibrited with the wine and baileys and probably shouldnt but heres another Hi 5, to velouria

I;m not used to people agreeing with me .

I agree that there aren't as many manual jobs as there used to be. I'm not convinced we should be planning a future where that continues to be the case, and I certainly don't think we should use cuts that discourage poorer people from having children as a way of doing that (As an aside, have we given up on social mobility so much that we just accept poor children will become poor adults?).

We need to restructure the economy so that we actually produce something and have a more diverse economy. We are so dependent on the service economy now that banks can do pretty much anything they want and the Government has to agree to it or the banks will simply leave.

We cannot run an economy that benefits everyone if the elected Government cannot stand up to business. More cuts and a reduced quality of life for most of us is inevitable without economic change.

its all good velouria, just argue your point, thats the beaut of a forum it doesnt really matter what people think of you, if you have an opinion share it. it will enrich the lives of the less fortunate

so can I just say, before I go to bed, an indiscrimainate prick to whoever on this thread.

Let the fucking banks leave, what will happen? We will adjust, there are so many jobs which depend on nothing, moving money (money isn't real it's just a concept) it's all so pointless..

Let them leave, it would be painful, but we would survive. People have survived for millenia without bankers holding them to ransom. I'm pretty sure we could do again. I bet most of the greedy fuckers wouldn't leave anyway.

Have a good night tomhardyismydh :)

And sleep on this thought - we need our brightest and best to be having kids, else risk the UK turning into one giant sink estate.

Wish I was as pissed as you lot :(

And sleep on this thought - we need our brightest and best to be having kids, else risk the UK turning into one giant sink estate.

wasnt that what hitler was attempting to achive

Since the middle of last year I've heard that 'the people most affected by the deficit reduction plan will be.....' (in no particular order). Women. Pensioners. People with disabilities. Families with children. Public Sector Workers. The 'Squeezed Middle'. Can't all be right.

The people most affected are going to be 'the poor' - because they always will come off worst in any economic downturn, regardless of colour of government. And the people least affected will be 'the rich' - because if you have enough money you can be cushioned from anything.

A rich family with children will not suffer in the slightest.

wasnt that what hitler was attempting to achive

No Hitler didn't care if you were rich or poor, he murdered rich jews and saved and recruited poor German's with blonde hair and blue eyes, totally different agenda.
But it's what is always dragged up whenever there's a thread suggesting people should be able to afford kids before they have them, along with we could when I gave birth to all 7 but now my circumstances have changed, yeah right

we need our brightest and best to be having kids, else risk the UK turning into one giant sink estate.

mama, ccpcc did not mention rich or poor either as pasted above she said the brightest and best.