If you're an unemployed waster then you should have a vasectomy!!!

[sirlee66]

Ben Bradley, an MP, wrote in a blogpost, 6 years ago, that the country would be soon “drowning in a vast sea of unemployed wasters” if workless families had four or five children while others limited themselves to one or two.
This is what he said:

''It’s horrendous that there are families out there that can make vastly more than the average wage, (or in some cases more than a bloody good wage) just because they have 10 kids. Sorry but how many children you have is a choice; if you can’t afford them, stop having them! Vasectomies are free.

There are hundreds of families in the UK who earn over £60,000 in benefits without lifting a finger because they have so many kids (and for the rest of us that’s a wage of over £90,000 before tax!).

People have to take responsibility for their own lives, and if they are struggling but working hard to help themselves then they should get help. But if they choose to have 10 kids they should take responsibility for that choice and look after them, not expect everyone else to foot the bill!

Families who have never worked a day in their lives having 4 or 5 kids and the rest of us having 1 or 2 means it’s not long before we’re drowning in a vast sea of unemployed wasters that we pay to keep!''

So What to do you think? Do you agree with Ben Bradley or do you think he is being unreasonable?

But I’m being punished for my choices aren’t I?

Boo fucking hoo. Seriously.

I could sit back and not work and rely on the state and get to actually see my children but that would be irresponsible so I don’t.

I don't work. I rely on the state. I'm not irresponsible.

What you seem to be saying is that everyone should be able to have children (without limit it seems), paid for by the state.

I did not say that, and I most certainly did not say "without limit."

Having a child is not a right. It is a privilege.

Apparently one that some feel is only to be afforded the well off, and not anyone that is poor.

Wow. I'm aghast at the level of animosity some people have for the poor. Like they choose to be poor or something.

Wellington you have a mortgage. You will have assets to leave to your children. You will have a pension.

People on benefits won't have any of that. I don't really get how you can feel bitter towards people who will have absolutely jack shit when they're old?

Ivymaud I’d rather not say but I’m not sure why you would doubt it? It’s a job in the City. We do actually have private healthcare but we use an NHS GP. And we choose to use a state school because I think they have better special needs provision and I want my children to socialise with people from all walks of life. I went to a state school and I am a firm believer in them.

My husband is planning to see the Doctor about having the snip, I have PTSD after a road accident so I find medical procedures very traumatic. But even with Birth control I still find it hard to be 'close' with my husband in case it happens again, luckily he is very understanding. Plus the very noisy 8mth old bouncing round the Cot next to us is great for birth control too lol. Still on the positive side my older two are learning how hard it is to have a baby as I get them involved in all aspects of baby care including the unpleasant bits so that they are put off having babies till they are older. My little one will grow up know people look down on us for having him, he needs to know so he can stand up for himself and prove himself worthy of all those who judge us. My hope is that all my children will have better opportunities we did.
My husband has mild dyslexia, yet has so much untapped potential if given the chance. I have always been considered clever yet had an upbringing that denied me a good education, but I am determined and ambitious. I am always drumming into my children to study hard and be the best because they will not get an equal chance at opportunities if they dont. I hope to build enough of a reputation doing supply work that when I finally get into teacher training I will have plenty of schools to choose from. Personally I'd rather work in a challenging school with the struggling families to help them achieve their dreams. But of course I'm poor so I dont deserve my children.

GingerIvy It would be irresponsible for me to rely on the state because I am able to work. I completely accept some are not and it therefore is not irresponsible for them not to work, of course. But in my view it would be irresponsible for them to have children.

BitchQueen90 Where did I say I feel bitter towards people who are struggling? I am happy to support people who have lost their job or are disabled or have to look after disabled children. I am not happy to support them to have children they can’t provide for and have no realistic chance of being able to provide for.

I’m going to drop off now because I don’t think this is getting anywhere.

I am not happy to support them to have children they can’t provide for and have no realistic chance of being able to provide for.

But you don't really know if someone has a "realistic chance" of being able to provide for their children. Someone might be poor when they have their child and having that child gives them the drive to improve their situation. Or they may be in a temporary situation that then improves.

I'm happy to see those people given the opportunity to be parents, even if it means a bit of support from the public purse.

Wellington, I don't know where to start.

Everything we have in life is down to an element of luck. If you can't see that then you are the entitled one.

I'm not after your wealth. I am uncomfortable with the degree of inequality in this country. The trickle down effect just isn't working and the very rich are skilled at hiding their money.

I am realistic. Of course there are people who play the system-sadly there will always be a few scoundrels. Should we ban driving because some people drink and drive?

You seem very angry and appear to have have taken this all quite personally.

We both work and have a mortgage. I feel exceptionally lucky to have a job and mortgage.

If you think that having such things is simply due to your own choices and nothing else then I think you lack insight into how the world actually works.

As an aside living on benefits isn't the easy pleasant life you portray it to be.

I don't know what you work as but as a GP working in deprived areas I've seen the result of austerity and it's not pretty .

I'm not angry and I don't pretend to have all of the answers but I think it's really important to have these conversations.

Bishop, you sound like fun .

Ivymaud So you’re saying I don’t sound from my posts like the kind of person who could be earning what I do? Just ridiculous. I am a Cambridge graduate working in the City. My salary is not all that stellar for Oxbridge grads who have been doing what I do for the last 20 years. I mean, honestly. Think what you like but you’re embarrassing yourself. I would be offended if you weren’t quite so far off the mark.

Bertiesgal You may work in deprived areas but I lived in them. No, it’s not pretty, which is why I think it’s bloody selfish to knowingly bring children into that sort of life.

Everything I have is from sheer hard work. I believe in equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. We are bloody lucky in this country that everyone has access to free education and healthcare. People need to take responsibility for themselves and make the most of the opportunities they have and stop expecting others to fund their lifestyle choices.

I lived in a deprived area and my parents relied on benefits for a lot of my childhood. I've never wished I wasn't born.

Anyway, I really am off now. I’m not going to get reeled back into having to defend my position, which is entirely reasonable. It’s so frustrating the way people who work incredibly hard and pay a hell of a lot into the system are made out to be selfish and lacking in compassion because they dare to hold up their hand and say, “hold on, enough is enough”.

Arghhh, I want to have a conversation but your outlook makes it so difficult!

Why does one of the richest countries in the world have areas so deprived that you think it's unacceptable to bring a child into them?

You keep referring to how hard you worked. You show a complete disregard for the complexity of life.

Hard work alone is not the key to success. Natural intelligence? Good health? Access to education and healthcare due to the contributions of your fellow country men and women? Opportunities that have worked out due to factors outwith our control such as making money on a property or your company doing well due to a buoyant economy?

We thought we were sensible to make the choice to buy a flat in 2007. Had we made money in that flat I'd probably be boasting about our clever choice and sacrifice. In reality we lost a lot of money on it. It is what it is but it certainly wasn't part of the plan!

But you are quite unique Wellington and it's all down to you. Just make sure you pull the ladder up from under you and sterilise the poor while you're there.

By the way, most of us feel like we are working very hard!

No man or woman is an island-except Wellington, she did it all herself!

Believe it or not 'The right to a family life' is part of the human rights act so even the poorest families have that right even if its not ideal. What I find very interesting is that its the families that are being blamed and judged for being poor and having to claim tax credits. Why are you not blaming the employers who deliberately keep wages low or force people onto Zero hour contracts. Those companies costing you money so why not challenge them on it? Take for example Supermarkets if you go onto their websites you will find that 99% of contracts offered are for about 16-19 hours, Aldi and Lidl are slightly better with 25hr max. How can that support a family? many of the hours are not family friendly which then adds extra expense for childcare. These big supermarkets can afford to provide better quality jobs but are choosing not to, so why are you not giving them a hard time? When you look in the local papers or online most job are part-time unless its jobs out of reach of the ordinary person. This needs to be addressed, more needs to be done to encourage employers to provide permeant contracts and jobs with a future so that at least one parent can provide for their family. Some of the people my husband works with have been on Zero hours for ten years and not by choice but because of lack of opportunities. Yes Jobs are there but not with an opportunity for progression which is what is needed.
For those work in London, you get to get out more. London is funded very differently to the rest of the country and is an exception not the rule. What ordinary person could possibly live there anyway.

Bertiesgal Don’t you dare suggest I think we should sterilise the poor. Don’t you dare.

Ivymaud Well you were clearly wrong weren’t you? I’ll accept your apology shall I?

reenactormum The right to a family life does not necessarily mean the right to have the state fund it for you. That section of the Human Rights Act - and indeed the whole of the Human Rights Act - has been pretty controversial in its meaning and application. I imagine when we leave the EU that legislation will look very different.

Argh why am I being dragged back into this?

It's the title if the thread.

You appear to be sympathetic to the message of the thread. If you don't think people on low incomes should have children then surely sterilisation is the best way to deal with it?

Anyway,focusing on that allows you to ignore everything else I've said so I'll retract it. You don't want poor people to have children but don't want them sterilised either.

Ivymaud Well my Cambridge tutors and examiners and my employer clearly think differently don’t they? But you obviously know better than them. Jesus Christ you’re arrogant.

Wellington, it is about a well-functioning society.

We all contribute.

I hate Trident with a blue fury. But I pay for it.

Bertiesgal I believe in individual responsibility and as a corollary of that I believe in absolute personal freedom. I don’t believe it is morally right to have children if you can’t support them but it’s their choice absolutely. The idea that the state should dictate how many children you have is abhorrent to me. That doesn’t mean I think the state should pick up the bill for your choices.

But enforced sterilisation? Really? You think I would support that? FFS. You say you just want to have a conversation but you don’t - you just want to make people who don’t share your socialist views feel like they are bad human beings. And they’re not.