To think the abortion rate will increase after April this year?

[RocketQueenP]

When the new rules on tax credits / universal credit come in ie when no one can claim benefit be it top up or otherwise for any more than 2 children

Sadly I am helping a good friend cope who has just had an early abortion, she did not plan the pregnancy and one of the main reasons is she and her DH are low earners/ They already have 2 at school, and won't be able to afford to have this baby. She is devastated and has admitted they could have squeezed another DC in if it wasn't for the new rules. I think this will happen a lot. :(

In times gone by people would adopt out children that were unplanned that they couldn't afford and I really feel that this is what we are headed back to. Not adoption but, you get my drift

I also think the government fully know this and its one of the reasons they have brought it in. Simple population control

Here in the US my county has deadbeat parents cleaning the parks, roads and other community projects

Just imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth which would break out if anyone suggested that in the UK ...

Are there any other tradeoffs, nceccoli? Would you like to identify the country?

Of course it is not right for the state to be paying for more than two children.

Two children is enough and if you don't want to have more then there is either the choice of a. Not having penetrative sex b. Using contraception. c. Have an abortion.

As for failed contraceptives well that's unlikely to start, incredibly unlikely if you double up. And if that still fails well tough should have chosen option A and not option B, and you still have option C.

It isn't right to have kids and expect other people to pay for your decision.

Honestly I think people should be thankfully they get any money at all for having kids, that doesn't fly in many many countries.

People die working in industrial accidents every year so that they can afford the lives they want including having a family. And so what? They can be better off on the dole?

We live in one of the most populated countries by people per sq mile in the world, we shouldn't be incentivising people to have kids especially from poor families and I say that as someone who was raised in one of the most deprived backgrouds you can get before the luvvies start whining on about compassion again.

Here in the US my county has deadbeat parents cleaning the parks, roads and other community projects

There would be wailing and gnashing, but not from me.

nceccoli i'd love to know the country as well - would you mind?

I don't think tax increases( highly unpopular and unlikely) are the only way. Cutting benefits where it is fair is one.There are others.

Fair distribution- what's that? I only see the middle getting squeezed with zilch in return.

The problem with the current system is that people like capricorn are paying for all these programs because the government daren't tax the top 1-2%. What happens is those who are in the top 5-20% income are paying far more than they should be and those in the top 1-5% income are paying less than they should be.

Corporate taxes are another huge issue. How the heck can a company like Starbucks be allowed to charge their UK company a 'fee' for using their branding and changes to dis-allow that sort of thing for tax purposes are not already in place? Our politicians have no back bone.

There are tradeoffs morally I think. It creates a cold and selfish society but you could argue overly generous welfare has created a cold and divisive here due to a backlash against benefits scroungers. It also means people exhaust themselves on the treadmill of work and view everything in terms of whether it would benefit them financially.
But hey expats from the UK and other EUropean or American countries love it! Low personal taxation, brilliant infrastructure, efficient clean and relatively inexpensive public transport, world class education, good health care and low crime rate!

It's a country in Asia.

Its Singapore right?

What happens is those who are in the top 5-20% income are paying far more than they should be and those in the top 1-5% income are paying less than they should be.

I totally agree. I felt a bit sick to read that the 8 wealthiest people on the planet have as much wealth as the bottom 50%. I like very much to see people doing well by taking risks and working hard, but to me this is a sign that something is very much out of whack.

I hope those of you moaning about paying taxes didn't vote for Brexit.

I was thinking a Singapore too. Funny (not really) because this rule under discussion is edging towards Singaporean style human rights abuses.

I had to call an ambulance there once, and got asked what ethnicity the injured person was.

It creates a cold and selfish society

I wonder if that's always the case though? Obviously I can't speak for wherever you are, but in the US where I spend a lot of time (and where welfare benefits tend to be less generous than in the UK) I've often noticed the sheer number of voluntary organisations who work to better the lives of the genuinely disadvantaged. Nor do the volunteers see it as charity - just their obligations to their fellow members of society

We have these in the UK too of course, but I find there seems to be more of the "I've done my bit through paying my taxes" thing here

sad for those facing such a harsh position but for those saying we're not bankrupt, technically the UK is or would be if it were a firm. Our borrowings stand at 1.68 trillion and our treasury minister garnered praise yesterday for only borrowing 68billion this year.

Agree with want2bs post at 16.23

Thats dreadful somerville

Not all types of contraception suit everyone. I can't use hormonal contraception and after various traumatic experiences the thought of having a coil fitted causes a panic attack.

That reduces my contraceptive options somewhat.

DH is allergic to latex.

@somerville singapore is strangely obssessed with ethnicity under the guise of maintaining multi cultural and multi ethnicity stability. However, Asking someone's ethnicity will not determine whether or not that person has access to public services or the ambulance which was required that day. It is simply something public services want to have on record possibly for other meta data purpose

The to earners are already paying over 1/4 of the country's income tax. No, they do not need to be taxed even more.

Our current tax system is upside down in relation to overseas charges and companies because of the UKs long colonial history of exploiting the fuck out of Africa and Asia (the De Beers case being an excellent example). Our tax system - much like the mentality of much of the country it seems - hasn't caught up yet to the fact we're no longer an Empire. It all needs sorting out and our modern place in the world humbly accepted.

Why should we support other people's children....because they will pay my pension, pay for the NHS when I'm old and possibly one of them will grow up to be the person who cures cancer or finds safe renewable energy or be the next Shakespeare.

If these rules had been in place years ago many of us including me would not have been born or been flushed down the toilet........actually judging by some of the comments on here that might have been a good thing.

The to earners are already paying over 1/4 of the country's income tax. No, they do not need to be taxed even more.
Yes they do. Because poorer people pay more on their income than richer people. Poorer people are paying around 43% of their income whilst those in the top ten percent are paying around 35% of their income.

Dawn You are just taking taxes paid. You need to add back the benefits received and then work out %ages to have a proper comparison. Also, top 1% pay a lot less as a % than someone in the 9th percentile.

I also agree the if punishment for not supporting your biological children included community orders there would be a huge backlash. Pity that it's the women expected to figure it all out.

Capricorn if you're still about I'm interested in this point that you made:

I actually said I was happy to pay tax for most things but not unlimited children. I'm also aware that my taxes pay for the basics like roads ffs! everyone benefits from these and I'm grateful to live in a country where the basics are met but I'm not happy to cover 3+ kids.

This sounds a bit like comments made to me at a dinner party I was at last week.
I replied that I was very glad for benefits that covered 3 children because during the year that my husband got cancer (and subsequently died) I managed to work so little that my finances went from healthy to scary. If I hadn't been able to claim benefits according to the size of my family then it would have been even worse for the period before I could work FT again.

The woman hummed and hawed and said that situations like that, where both parents had been contributors to the tax system until shit happened and they no longer could, there should be support based on the real size of their family. "But that's not the majority of claimants," she said. "The majority of those supported on the £44 billion are choosing benefits as a life style choice and having more babies gives them more money."

The thing is, that's not true. The majority of families in receipt of tax credits are in work. Many (including higher rate tax payers, like me!) need them for a short period and then are off them again. I don't even get child benefit now - I earn just over the threshold, and I'm happy about that - the money should go to the people who are in the position I was in 3 years ago.

And yes, a small amount of women (with low educational attainment who were poorly parented themselves and haven't had the life chances that I have) get extra money every time they have another baby and have no intention of working. That was the downside of the current system, but every system has a downside - it's never going to be perfect for every scenario. And I would choose the downside we have now (with a minority of 'spongers', over the one we're about to have - where when the worst happens people are not given benefits that reflect the real size of their families. It's too late for an abortion when you already have the children!

Why should we support other people's children....because they will pay my pension, pay for the NHS when I'm old and possibly one of them will grow up to be the person who cures cancer or finds safe renewable energy or be the next Shakespeare.

How do you know they won't become benefit dependent and have more benefit dependent kids and put more pressure on housing, the NHS, schools, the welfare state etc? Just as likely as them becoming a brain surgeon and paying lots of tax...