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

Nicecuppchar.

What on earth do you mean only people on benefit or wealthy can afford children?

What a pile of bollocks you spout . Everyone can afford kids, if you mean to afford childcare, that's something different as parents bringing their own kids up costs nothing. So you can't really use that as a reason.

As for wanting cuts to welfare, I hope your job is secure and your dh if you have one. You could end up falling a long way off that pedestal of yours.

Don't forget that on that £14000 you won't get free school dinners/ prescriptions/ eye tests etc. etc. etc.
Now that really is bollocks. You wouldn't get free school meals if you were in receipt of working tax credits (which you probably would be on £14K) but you would get prescriptions, eye tests, dentistry etc., and other in-work benefits.
I just love the way people present fallacy as fact on these threads.
helpful link for people who'd rather look at FACTS

Crawling Well my Dp earns 19000 and we are nearly 200 a week off than those on benefits and that's discounting my disability benefits so you do not need to earn 26000 to be better off as you get tax credits.

is that £200 p week correct? that's 10k pa so the family on benefits would get 9kpa, which surely is not correct.

Sorry, I was £1200 out. So you WILL qualify for free prescriptions etc. if you earn less than £15,200.
So above that , nada. yet all free when you're on benefits of £19,000.
that's just wrong.

Yep Dp fetches home 1300 a month and I get 600 ctc.

£600 every month in child tax credits!

Fucking hell, that's loads!

Just added again and it is wrong I get nearly 100 a week more, but I have the added benefit of being able to have a mortgage.

Just added again and it is wrong I get nearly 100 a week more, but I have the added benefit of being able to have a mortgage.

People are missing the point. There are people sat on their arse doing f#k all getting the equivalent of £26,500 before tax. Those people tha work and then get top ups I have no issue with (well some anyway). I have an issue with the lazy arse, work shy on £26,500 for doing jack sht and then carrying on having more kids on the tax payers expense.

I am sorry there is no justification for it. No one can justify that kind of piss taking! I am annoyed beyound belief!

We get £260 per week in Tax Credits because DH is on a low wage and I'm a carer for DD1.

Not everyone on benefits gets 26k. I got nowhere near that when I was on them and I have 2 kids.

And people wonder why we need a cap?

who is getting 26K a year in benefits? We got 800 a month for the 4 of us. I'm guessing 26K is very very rare.

800 per month is excluding housing?

lougle i understand you are a carer and your DH is on a low wage but people need to appreciate that someone in a job would need to earn an extra £16,000 a year to get the equivalent of the £260 per week in tax credits that you get.

Can anyone understand why it pisses people off?

We are low wage and get £150 per week for 2 dc. Obviously we got more when we had three. Ours will go down this year as ds2 leaves full time education.
Lucky us though mortgage paid.

Anyone getting at least £398 a week benefits including housing etc. is getting the equivalent of £26,500 a year before tax.

Littlechicken.

Why would somebody have to earn 16k more, surely earning less they would be entitled to the £260 per month. So clearly they are earning enough anyway.

"someone in a job"

Well, I was in a job until my DD1 came along and dared to have Special Needs, how about that?

It would cost a whole lot more for Social Services to provide support for her....

In a way, maybe having more and more children is what gives these large, unemployed families a sense of purpose in life. It must be pretty depressing being long term unemployed with nothing to do.

Is someone going to suggest introducing the "one child" policy next, like they have in China?

Yes I am a full time carer like lougle for gods sake get a grip.

more than those that are outside the band to get tax credits have to earn £16,000 on top of there wage to get the equvilant of he tax credits some get.

Does anyone understand how hard it is to get that kind of wage rise for these families?

LittleChickpea
People are missing the point.

People are not necessarily 'missing the point' because they don't agree with you. They just haven't been suckered into believing the old 'scrounger' rhetoric.

One of the reasons that we need benefit reform is so that payments for children are made separately to payments for disabilities. You can get child tax credits for having a disabled child, or because you can't be arsed to work and want to just have more children on someone else's bill.

If these two benefits were separated, it would cause much less confusion.