to think capping benefits at 2 children is a good idea

[moogstera1]

Child-related benefits may be 'capped' at two children"
*Iain Duncan Smith said the current system, where families get more benefits the more children they have, was among changes being considered.

Families on benefits were often "freed from" the decision of whether they could afford more children, Mr Duncan Smith said, and must "cut their cloth".*

yes yes, before I get jumped on, if both your arms fall off and a previously hard working wage earner is jobless, there should be ( and I imagine would be)a safety net for those who then need benefits and have more than 2 chidren; but, in principle, I agree that working families seem to have to make much more difficult decisions regarding how many children they have than long term non working do, and it's mostly about finance.
The suggestion is that this would not be happening till 2015 and then only to new claimants so no comments about which children should be sacrificed, please.
The idea seems to be to only factor in 2 children wrt tax credits, child benefit

Gordy it's been said a few times now that the reductions wouldn't apply to existing children

i would be interested to hear if anyone proposing these draconian measures would be affected by these changes and also suffer financial hardship due to them.

I suspect not

The youngest. You only need a first-born hair and a spare. The aristocracy and upper middle-classes used to consign third-borns to the clergy, didn't they? Monasteries and nunneries? I'm sure the camerons will have contacts at the ready.

IDS has said that this isn't going to apply to current families (so those with more than 2 children now). So everyone who wants more than 2 will know (from a certain date) that benefits won't pay for their 3rd, 4th, 5th etc kids. So anyone having more than 2 children after that date will be putting their children in a situation where they suffer from financial hardship if they are reliant on benefits, not the taxpayer or government. That is their responsibility and they should be made accountable for making their children suffer in the full knowledge that they will have less money to go around.

grovel
IDS, as I understand it, just wants to take away the automatic element. This would save money but also free up money for more targeted benefits.

Again that sounds reasonable - yet I guesses many of us are cynical that would actually happen especially in the age of austerity.

I suspect this is yet another way of doing away with the whole concept. Yet another thing targeting DC rather than other sections of society - increasingly the wealth in this society is with the pensions or nearly pensionable age group who don?t seem to be facing cuts ? can?t remember who they vote for.

Probably not Fangs. People who are in support of policies like this tend to be people that believe in cutting their cloth to fit their means.

Going back to page 5, I'd like to know more about Mosman and when she had ICSI. Did you get it a bit cheaper because they put eggs back, not embryos?????

What a crock. Pathetic.

moog that doesn't help women in my situation in the future though does it

we really need to get away from the mythology surrounding the poor

Most single parents WORK, most women do NOT plan to be single or to have 46478648748 kids by different men, most benefit claimants don't have thousands of children, most people only claim when they need to and claim what they need

a lot of benefit goes unclaimed

the POOR and the working poor are not the problem or the enemy - stop believing the propaganda

seriously - I had to listen to en endless parade of tory apologists banging on about hardworking people paying for 'other peoples' housing benefit 2 weeks ago - all of them failing to grasp the 37% increase in the number of working people claiming housing benefit - HARD WORKING people - on shitty 0 hours contracts and shitty pay

Outraged..or live in some privileged world and just like to run off at the mouth about stuff they know nothing about

there was a reason the welfare state was created, post war no jobs rising poverty which was leading to a massive rise in crime. so it was brought in to not only stop people turning to crime and to raise the standard of living but to protect the rich from being targeted. so maybe when crime goes through the roof because people are turning to crime the tories will think oh maybe we should give them back there few hundred pounds a month to live on so we dont have to hire more police, nurses, build more prisons etc. its so ridiculous it is laughable and it makes me sad that people eat it up with a spoon. yes tory government tell us who the next evil group in society we need to hate is.

It's not just the poor it would apply to, though. It's everyone who gets tax credits, child benefit. Nobody is just picking on one part of society, just making people responsible for their own lifestyle choices.

it's the poor who would suffer for it though!

Oh dear, wankers out to play again?

This is all a complete smokescreen. Demonising the feckless over-breeding underclass and blaming them for all the ills of society and holding them responsible for the current economic recession - it's all COBBLERS. This is what the Tories do. It's what they have ALWAYS done.

So our current economic woes are all the fault of Labour encouraging the chavs are they? Do you know how many £billions have been spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how many £billions have been pissed away by the international banking sector over the past decade?

Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.

No Fangs, I expect they do know by the time they have had two children that sex makes babies thankfully.

yes...of course only right wing people know that

People obviously have strong feelings about this but what part of "don't have more than two children if you can't independently maintain that third, fourth, etc, child" is unreasonable?

Where is the suffering in only having two children?

my last post was to Outraged

Christ moogs I unhide the thread and it's turned into a rare old car crash!!
I actually agree in principle, it wouldn't actually affect any of our existing children or any born before 2015 so people could be prepared to a certain extent.
What's getting on my nerves is the constant Rich Tory twat bashing. I have never and will never vote Conservative, but do you honestly think that a different government would leave things as they are right now? In his last day in office Liam Byrne told his replacement that there was 'no money left' as a joke apparently... Ever thought it may have been true?
Politicians are politicians whatever their party colour. A simple truth is that many policies passed by any government would not ever touch the political classes in anyway, especially financial.
Yes many Tory ministers are rich. As are many Labour and Lib Dem politicians. Many of them went to private school, put their kids through private school and don't know the price of a loaf of bread until their SPAD tells them. They are ALL the same in my book arseholes.
Btw, IDS is not actually a privatley educated blah blah blah. He left a Catholic school at 14 to go a merchant navy school, went to Uni then Sandhurst before joining the Scots Guards.

he is just a Tory twat then

Exactly. It's all in the details fangs