To think capping child tax credits at two children will plunge more families into poverty

[SoonToBeSix]

Can't link but article is in the Daily Fail. A Tory mp has proposed capping child benefit and child tax credits at two children in order to win votes.
What happens to those children whose parents circumstances change ie redundancy or there is a contraception failure?
This government is taking welfare cuts too far while continuing to let the very rich avoid paying the correct taxes.

It wont stop unless there is forced abortions or sterilisations it will never stop.

More than Christmas

We can we don't get anything apart from CB
But if it were removed form us we could still feed our children

We have no child are as I am a stay at home mum we are not rich just cut our cloth accordingly my oh works for the NHS

The children don't always have what they want but always have what they need

And before any one says I have a teen and a baby

Add message | Report | Message poster annieorangutan Sun 15-Dec-13 19:09:34
It wont stop unless there is forced abortions or sterilisations it will never stop.

Another emotive response designed to stop discussions

There are 1000s of poorly educated people qho have babies for all sorts of reasons it is impossible to stop. If it wasnt the 1000s of social workers etc wouldnt be so busy and there wouldnt be 1000s of families who arent quite struggling enough but still carry on with having children. I see it every day and it is impossible to stop even if you cut benefits to very meagre amounts.

I could discuss this all night sadoldbag

I dont begrudge children help no matter what the circumstance and there arent many couples that work as hard as dh and I, but I still wouldnt begrudge children money.

Is that not for the parents to think of before the event

You appear to have missed the point that if you have kids while you have a good income and lose it then you are still not going to get money to support the 3rd/4th child.

What would you say to well off people who have 3 children? Are they being irresponsible?

But you are begrudging children money Annie as when it is spent in one place, there is less to spend elsewhere.

You are begrudging them a decent education - less money for schools - healthcare, services in the council, the chance to go to university without huge debts.

Children grow!

Annie I have worked worked with sw and I can tell you the mothers you are talking of would have many children if CB were 1p and ultimately there children are usually in care so it dose not effect them

Also these "poorly educated people " you talk of that have ss involvement the money seldom gets spent on the children so taking the CB away has no effect of the children

I

If you have this policy you also have to have a policy for what actually happens to the third child. "We will no longer pay benefits for more than 3 children isn't enough.

Also, what is the policy if somebody has 2 children and then has a 3rd child with somebody who has no children? Do you each get to claim for 2 children each?

I work with plenty of children who are on low incomes and most would continue to have children even if cb is 1p as I said this wont make a blind bit of difference they can cut it as much as they want but will end up paying for it financially in other ways.

There are 1000s of poorly educated people qho have babies for all sorts of reasons it is impossible to stop. If it wasnt the 1000s of social workers etc wouldnt be so busy and there wouldnt be 1000s of families who arent quite struggling enough but still carry on with having children. I see it every day and it is impossible to stop even if you cut benefits to very meagre amounts

You're constantly acting as though these people have no control over themselves, I think that's a bit patronising to be honest.

I see it everyday too. I go into people's houses who need me to visit. I see the children running round with dirty worn clothes, asking their mums for a slice of bread to eat, and then it completely blows my mind to see their mum pregnant again.

Because in the cases I'm talking about (no working parent, completely reliant on benefits) even though they have benefits they still cannot afford the child they are doing to have, despite the extra money they'll get post birth. It just about gets them by. But still people don't take the bloody responsibility they need to. I understand that accidents do happen, but in an awful lot of cases they don't. I get all sorts like 'oh we wanted a christmas baby' 'i was pissed' 'i didnt get me pill prescription up it was raining'. It is the blaze attitude that allows it to happen.

It just gets me quite upset when people.

1. bring children into the world they cannot afford by relying on other people's money to do so
2. allow their existing children to suffer because they chose to stretch the resources further

Take back responsibility for their bodies? Perhaps we should be thinking about telling all women they're entitled to say no.

It doesn't matter how clear-cut it is, but if a woman makes a thread on Mumsnet about not wanting any more children and being unwilling to have PIV sex without sufficient contraceptive measures, (hormonal contraceptives being ineffective or actually dangerous to her health, and condoms not being safe enough, and her consultant told her another baby would risk her life), a small but significant number of posters will tell her she is not entitled to place conditions before she consents to PIV sex. And Mumsnet is pretty feminist and the userbase isn't fully representative of wider society.

merry mouse you've posed a good point, like I said before it would be hard if not impossible to implement. Especially for men

Sadoldbag.

That's my point though, not everybody is in your position, maybe they are a sahp and their oh works, or they are a sp who works, or both parents working with a low income.
The only have em if you can afford them applies to a very small minority of people. Most people can't support their dc without some financial help from the state.

BackOnlyBriefly like I said In my above posts if me an oh both lost our jobs and there were no care work which there always is no farms to pick fruit from which there always is hence immigration issues we have (off topic)

We couldn't get any job at all I guess we would have to claim

however I would expect the tax payer to be furious and would understand people anger
I would also expect that it would be time limited and that the taxpayer would not allow me to get back to work when I am good and ready and yo take work when it's avavible

a small but significant number of posters will tell her she is not entitled to place conditions before she consents to PIV sex

Really?!!! That's ridiculous.

Once they removed CB from families with one higher rate tax payer, this was always going to happen. I have spent many times on here on threads about the removal of CB from higher rate tax payers, having lost mine for 3 dc. Being just over the threshold we have felt the loss of £200 a month. The government knew that if they took it from that group, it would not elicit much sympathy from everyone else. I knew that it was just the start and they would go much further. The solidarity reduces for universality once benefits are removed from certain groups.

Also someone said earlier on that there would have to be an exemption for multiple births, but I seriously doubt that would happen. Why would it?

poster MoreThanChristmasCrackers don't agree I think most people find 1 or 2 children manageable however it's those who have more than 2 and still expect money once your getting on with 3,4or give children even on a good income you will need help and that's not on.

Baubles - If you work with it then you will know that stopping it is impossible. I would be pretty impressed if a politician stopped it juat by taking a little bit of money away. Since the cuts where I am many more people are having babies

Sadoldbag not sure what you are saying there about "have to claim" and "time limited". Maybe you mean all benefits generally?

Because I was trying to make the point that if you carefully considered your options and decided to have 6 kids because you could afford it and then fell out of work this scheme would refuse benefit for 4 of your children.

Even though you had been sensible and not had kids until you could afford it suddenly you would be penalised for having too many.

Backonly

I wouldn't be happy if people who had adopted sibling groups of multiple borths we're not expect and they should unless you had some sort of ivf then a naturally conceived set of twins is out if your control.

Also again if you have adopted a sibling group in my view not only should you have the money the treasury should send you a thank you not for the money you are saving them keeping the children in care which is estimated to cost more than sending a child to eaton

The thing is, I think cb is cheaper than children's homes, hospitalisation/incarceration of adults who have not been able to access education or work because of poverty, and more pleasant than child labour/child begging. You pays your money and you takes your choice. However, be very clear about what you are buying when you decide to punish children for existing.