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.

In all these situations there should be a cut off point eg. From January 2015 anyone who gives birth to a third child will not receive XYZ for that child.
That way nobody is suddenly without money that is necessary to their household budget, however much you may disagree with the benefits system it will be the children who suffer if money is withdrawn with little notice. A cut off period allows people to make responsible decisions WRT having a third child or not, though admittedly will take much longer for any financial benefit to be seen.
Sadly DH and I were unable to have a second DC but I know categorically that a third would never have been on the cards for us as financially we just couldn't afford it. There are painfully few circumstances where a third child is totally unavoidable and the majority of people could and should make decisions based on their own means rather than expect the state to pay for them.

Yanbu - I don't think the cap will stop people having lots of children if they want to tbh.

There is some truth in what woohoo owl says about NRPs thinking they don't have to pay because people can claim universal things like child benefit (although that isn't universal any more) . However, the problem extends to employers as well, IMO some of whom have reduced what they pay staff to minimum wage because they assume the person can claim top ups in tax credits.

Its only about £30 a week isn't it for 2 kids. Hardly a huge amount. Would it really make that much difference if they scrapped it altogether?

£30 a week hardly a huge amount? I'd say it's quite a significant amount to loose out of your weekly budget if you have very little. Certainly difference between missing a meal (although probably this would be the mother, not the children) and being able to afford to pay a fuel bill.

Sorry, missing a few meals.

I have 3 dc and I did use the CB and needed it when they were younger. I still get it for my ds and again it is utilised.

Maybe 2 is a bit harsh, why not 3 or 4.

i don't agree with people who keep on having babies on low incomes or who are unemployed long term. I understand if people lose jobs, it happens all the time.

I also think it would be good to look at CB going abroad and checking how many dcs really exist etc.

YANBU, but sometimes when people talk about benefits on here, I think I've accidentally opened the daily mail website.

the problem extends to employers as well, IMO some of whom have reduced what they pay staff to minimum wage because they assume the person can claim top ups in tax credits.

Yes! Let's look instead at why you can both work hard and still be poor.

34DD good point about the room tax. It should not have applied to people already in that position. However about people you know of who take advantage of benefits that is a reason to chase after them not everyone who is poor even if working. The majority of people this applies to are in fact working.

Putting a cap on benefits to two children does not mean that we have to leave children to starve.. IF it applied only to single parents where the NRP wasn't paying and IF there were a plan to make them pay then that might be right, but that's not what they said they planned to do at all.

angelos02 I can hardly believe you said that. I bet you wish you hadn't now.

Employers aren't the ones in this situation that plan the children, so it's not their fault if employees choose to create children they can't afford.

I agree that they should pay more fairly in some cases, but when they don't, adults have to do what they can with the situation they have.

People who create children should be responsible for paying for them. It's that simple. And if they can't, that's why we have a safety net that should never be used as anything other than a temporary measure except in cases of severe illness or disability.

Exactly WooWoo

State handouts should be for people that have fallen on bad times. To have a child knowing that you can't afford to support it yourself is disgusting.

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.

angelos02 you're the one who is so well off that £30 is trivial so you would have trouble understanding how the real world works.

People who create children should be responsible for paying for them.

PEOPLE who create children. As opposed to WOMEN who create children. See this is where it falls down. A majority of the time, it's the woman that will be penalised in all this.

When they get a system that single (as in single, separated, divorced) mothers can access freely (as in without cost to themselves) to force the father to pay what he is supposed to be paying regularly, then perhaps it may be time to look at things differently. But until that time, this is a bad idea. As it stands right now, the single mother has the odds stacked against her and it seems the government wants to keep adding to the stack.

Agree with you Triggles, it WILL be women who lose out sadly.....women amd children.

Maybe 3 children because you might plan two and have 1 plus twins or whatever, unless they do an exception families who have 1 child and then a multiple birth

perhaps I should have aborted autistic ds.

as he is one of the reasons I and his 3 sisters are living off benefits. oh and not to mention having to leave my job to care for him and his sisters because id also suffered domestic abuse and was made homeless.

but yeah thats right im a feckless scrounger with too many offspring that lives the highlife. yeah I missed meals last week so they could eat.

Yeah we are scroungers alright me and my free school meal kids who are top set and doing really well.

This thread makes me Sick .

And has upset me no end

£30 a week....£120 a month would be a significant loss for me. I only have ONE child so this proposal wont affect me but life is expensive now. I dread to think how families with more children will cope.

A better idea would be to scrap Tax Credits and force employers to pay a wage that allows families to feed, clothe and house themselves without needing top ups just to exist. I don't think any other civilized country works in tbis way with the Govt allowing employers to pay such low wages that workers HAVE to claim benefits in order to live.

Or is the notion of paying people fairly for their work all wrong?

Its why I am now claiming benefits too bemused.

I had to leave a very well paid job to care for my son. I am fortunate enough to have found part time work .....and have good reason for only working part time at the moment. I am not a "scrounger" any more than you are.

bemused and JakeBullet same here. And £30 a week would pay for electricity and heating for me - or most of my groceries for the week. So frustrating to see people say £30 is negligible. It's a HUGE amount for some. How insensitive.

Bemused, why can you not afford to eat?

OMG, what business is it of yours as to why she can not afford to eat?

There may be a million valid reasons but her posts pretty much states what the issue more likely to be.

Wow, rude. Its a fair question i think, why is it anyones business that she has 4 children, or she suffered dv?