Being devil's advocate - should there be a cap on the number of children a family can claim benefit for?

[ReallyTired]

Flame throwers ready - play nicely everyone.

I feel uncomfortable about further cuts to the support that families already recieve. Young families have suffered enough. It would be interesting know how other developed countries help their young people.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31743031

There are plenty of people who think we don't have room for people fleeing for their lives from Islamic State. If Britain is full up then surely we should be discouraging people from having any lots of children. I think the labour policy of being more generous to families with child tax credits, pregnancy health grant, generous childcare subsidy has increased the birth rate. Maybe there is an arguement for discouraging people from having more children. I don't know. Many migrants are intelligent, hard working and frankly more of an asset to the country than many native born British people.

However capping child benefit combined with the loss of child tax credits will plunge families into poverty. Children have no choice in being born and should not be punished for the lack of responsiblity of their parents.
The child benefit/ child tax credit system is broke and does not help to allievate poverty.

So what would happen if everyone stopped having children immediately? Economic boom?

I'm sure as a scientist you're aware of the concept of relationships being non-linear, and in some cases non-monotonic.

"What would happen if no-one had any children at all" is not a useful question in the context of looking at population levels in a country, because they won't. TFR has been at most values between 1.6 and 2.9 over the past seventy years. The economic impact of that is noisy and difficult to discern.

There are 19.8m people aged 28 to 50 (born 1964 to 1986) in the UK. Had the birthrate of 1964 continued at its then level, there would be 29m, an extra 10m adults. Are you saying that the UK's economy would be 50% better had those extra 10m people been born? About the same? Worse? Difficult, isn't it?

This will lead to increased abortions. I support a woman's right to chose, but nobody should be forced to have an abortion because of money.

What about working families? Are they forced into abortions too?

I guarantee that if I had a 3rd or 4th child I wouldn't get a pay rise.

Colley - of course money is a valid reason to have an abortion. Its not ideal to have a child you can't support

Bolograph, if you want a pension, then people need to keep breeding.

Right, and then today's babies will need pensions as well and so we'll need more babies and so on. Meanwhile, we have seven billion people on the planet. It is patently obvious that we must break this pyramid scheme for everyone's sake.

Of course there should be a cap the number of children you can claim benefits for.

I feel very uncomfortable with the idea that only rich people should have children (the whole "if you can't afford it, you shouldn't have children" argument). Frankly, these days if you live in the south east of England, you need stupid money just to house more than yourself. Does this mean anyone earning anything less than stupid money shouldn't have children? Really?

colley I think that's right, and I think the right should be pressed on this.

At the very least if there is a genuine political will to deter people from having more than 2 kids unless they are rich, then early abortion needs to be made hassle-free and on demand, and the stigma needs to go. Perhaps the small-staters should promote abortion as a social duty.

It is not good enough to say don't get pregnant unless there is foolproof contraception available. You are basically asking people not to have sex.

100%. There should be a cap on 2 children, unless the second birth is a multiple birth.

To be enforced going forward, not retrospectively.

This will lead to increased abortions. I support a woman's right to chose, but nobody should be forced to have an abortion because of money.

Having an early, safe abortion is infinitely less stressful than bringing in a child into the world that you can't afford. There are lots of ways to prevent pregnancy in any case.

Also, I think there should be a way to incentivise the 'right' people to have children i.e. educated and in-work families via tax incentives.

I feel very uncomfortable with the idea that only rich people should have children (the whole "if you can't afford it, you shouldn't have children" argument). Frankly, these days if you live in the south east of England, you need stupid money just to house more than yourself. Does this mean anyone earning anything less than stupid money shouldn't have children? Really?

Right, because having 2 children is not really having children at all.

I agree it is very complex to look at the population growth figures over time and indeed whether the UK population is actually ageing. The last time I did it (a while ago and not at the forensic level) the data was completely skewed by immigration.

However even on a global basis, the World needs a next generation and it is my belief that the cost of this should be borne equally by society rather than just by parents. This is especially the case in societies like ours where care of the elderly, such as it is, is seen as a societal responsibility.

bottlecap UK birthrates are below the level needed to replace the working age population. I take it you are a keen proponent of immigration?

It is not good enough to say don't get pregnant unless there is foolproof contraception available. You are basically asking people not to have sex.

If you are on hormonal contraception and use condoms properly as well, there is about a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000001% chance of you getting 'accidentally' pg.

Most people who have accidents do not use the contraception appropriately.

Bottlecap - Don't be naive. Many people using contraception have unplanned pregnancies. And no someone working doesn't get a pay rise for a third child, but if they are low paid they did used to get more benefits.

No woman should be forced into an abortion. This will do that.

However even on a global basis, the World needs a next generation

And that's related to UK benefits policy how, roughly?

However even on a global basis, the World needs a next generation and it is my belief that the cost of this should be borne equally by society rather than just by parents.

Perhaps if the world were underpopulated and humans didn't have a biological imperative to reproduce that would be sensible. But no one is doing anyone a favour by having children today. You could say you mitigate the damage by doing a good job with them, but that's about it.

whois people are human, they make mistakes, and groups with high birthrates are often among the least educated and the most likely to get it wrong.

If the right wing answer is abortion then fine; I guess I would prefer that to children living in destitution.

Most of my friends have had unplanned pregnancies. Including one friend who was on the pill and used condoms, and then when she got pregnant took an early abortion pill. She still had a child.

But most of my friends have decided to go ahead with their unplanned pregnancies, they did not want to abort. Aborting a child when you do not want one, is very different from having an abortion when you don't really want one.

colley I have friends who've got pregnant using supposedly effective contraception including IUDs. My second was unplanned (but wanted).

I disagree with people being pushed into abortion against their will, and also with people having to make the choice between abortion or poverty,

At least on this thread there are some people who are honest enough to say that they are in favour of abortion for poor people who have exceeded their "quota". I don't agree with them but at least it's an honest and consistent position.

Bottle I don't want to live in a country / World populated by people older than me. I didn't realise that was an unreasonable aspiration to hold.

"Biological imperative to breed" - oh well I guess it can't be helped then and no point punishing people after the event.

Bottle I don't want to live in a country / World populated by people older than me. I didn't realise that was an unreasonable aspiration to hold

"Biological imperative to breed" - oh well I guess it can't be helped then and no point punishing people after the event.

howabout you've succeeded in making no sense at all.

How is deciding to have an abortion because you cannot afford another child now being equated with being forced into having an abortion?

There has to be a balance, fiscal and familial, when you have kids. "I want one" is never a god reason to have anything, if you cannot afford it.

We are, now, a country that is heavily dependent on government intervention, benefits and top ups, many of which were introduced in order to give UK businesses a boost. Now the economic climate is changing the benefit levels must also change, away from the tax payer and back towards employers.

That this is a financial necessity does not make it less harsh on individuals affected. That it will be harsh on individuals does not make it less necessary. Mix in with that the refugee situation, our political climate changing (UKIP, Corbyn etc) and we are living in that Chinese curse - interesting times!

Of course you are being forced into an abortion if you won't have enough money to feed your DCs.

Yes and no. A cap wouldnt stop people and then parents would choose to put the children in poverty to satisfy their own needs.

Either no benefits and free childcare for workers or increase child benefit to £100 a month and its a set amount regardless.

Increasing benefits every time people have a child is madness, workers don't get a pay rise every time so why reward the feckless?

Pensions need paying but the children have to be tax payers as adults to do that and the sad fact is many won't be.