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

"cut their cloth"? Cut their cloth ?!

These sponging politicians make my blood boil

I get it. There are, whether we like it or not, a minority of people who take the royal wee out of the benefits system. They're not all single parents or doleys who have 9 children and live in 7 bedroom council house in Windsor for free though. That is a fallacy.

Want to talk about cutting cloth Mr MP? Then don't buy two houses if you can't afford them both yourself, don't re-furb properties at the taxpayers expense 'because you're entitled'. Let's strip your pay packet back to just a pay packet, make you pay for work expenses up front and then find you can only claim half of them back and see how you fare-and more to the point how much the country saves.

Don't see MP's on the fourth year of a pay freeze with impending redundancies and the pension you've worked towards for years in tatters.

But no, you're absolutely right, lets pitt the masses against each other based on 'number of children' and hope you can keep the cream while they're all busy fighting over who's more entitled and worthy of the milk.

I think this is a good idea simply because at the moment the propoganda/daily mail hysteria has made people look at all larger than average familes with suspicion and in some cases hatred. This policy would at least reduce that.
I have 5 and the last 2 years have steadily been getting more stick for it - for example just a few weeks ago i dared to get on a bus with them and a group of three women at the front started actually verbally abusing me for having children they claimed were by different fathers (they have different hair colours therefore that must be the case you know ) and relying on benefits which their taxes paid and that as OAPs they were losing out. It was like the dailymail brought to life.

Nevermind the fact that I am married, the children have the same father, we both work in fact we run our own business which employs others as well and we have never claimed benefits other than child benefit which isnt exactly what we live on.

I am really, really sick of being put in a group with people like karen matthews etc. We planned a large family, we built our own business so we could have it and so we wouldnt need to pay for childcare. I think people SHOULD have to plan for their own family size.

If you lose your job and you already have 3 or 4 or more children benefits should be paid for what you have and no more.

10 children ghostship really? And many of them?

I'm sure there aren't many with 10 children, plenty with four or five though. I once sat in a supermarket in a very rough area by the ciggie/lottery counter and saw a woman with four kids cue for about three minutes and she whacked each one if them around the head at least twice in the time it took her to be served her B and H, what a sterling job she was doing thank goodness we all dragged our arses off to work do she could concentrate on what she's good at.

yes...lets not "free people on benefits from the financial pressures of having children " (as if £80 actually does that)..lets actually stop them from having more children.

Because that is what people are saying.

in the extreme

5dcs..

"I think this is a good idea simply because at the moment the propoganda/daily mail hysteria has made people look at all larger than average familes with suspicion and in some cases hatred. This policy would at least reduce that."

That is awful that you are made to feel like that..and is indeed how they want people to feel with their crappy propaganda.

Unfortunately I was visiting family what can you do

I don't know anyone in RL that has the mythical 10 children families. That the Tories like to bang on about

Just turn on jemery bile and there they are in 7 days a week and now state side

Mosman made me giggle

oh no Mosman, how terribly awful that you had to slum it like that temporarily

I think if you read my post again freetoanyhome, you would see that I said I was all for the proposal REGARDLESS of whether parents were working, not working, on benefits, off benefits or whatever.
I did not say that all non working people drink, smoke and take drugs.
Many people, from all walks of life have these habits - and many more do not.
I fund all my own bad habits.

mrsdever and Pochemuchka

Not quite ten but I've seen families with 6,7,8 children.

Mosman how do you know what benefits this woman claims?

It is, essentially, a policy to keep the 'undesirables' from reproducing.

At least in China it's a blanket rule - none of this 'ok for some but not others' rubbish and they've the honesty to say 'we only want you to have one child' and not dress it up as a benefits issue
All those people arguing that there are some people who exploit the benefit system seem to be happy to punish all for the sins of the few. Brilliant. As long as you can carry on your merry way, never mind anyone else.

Tragically I spent the first 18 years of my life and 7 months as an adult surrounded by it all. If you've lived amongst it you have a whole different perspective

I don't care whether she was on benefits or not she was still out of her depth with four children. If she had two maybe she'd be better able to cope.

So mosman, you're basing your entire view of larger families in impoverished areas on one encounter in one place with one family.

Scientific.

maybe she had a crap day and was parent of the year at other times? As i assume you are if you are judging like this?