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?

'Bertiesgal Why can’t you see that hardworking people struggling to provide for their family and having to have fewer children than they want would be angered by reading what Gluteus wrote above?'

Nope, I can't see why because what they should really be angry about is government after government majorly fucking them over.

They'd have to have serious issues to find gluteus' post putting things into perspective a source of anger.

Genuinely thought I was just offering some perspective and not wanting to anger anyone. I don't feel angry at all.

There's a family who live quite close to us, and DS went to school with their children. They were a family of 5, and until the Dad had an accident, all was well.

Now they are one of the 40,000 families with 5 children claiming benefits whilst their mum looks after them all, and is her husband's carer.

I can't get angry about that, and I can't get angry about 39,999 other families who's stories I don't even know.

That in no way put things into perspective.

I have no “issues” by the way - no need to psycho-analyse me over Mumsnet, thanks.

Why anyone is having a family of 5 is beyond me. It seems hugely irresponsible.

I am very hard working. Our surprise 3rd baby was twins so we have 4 children.

I can assure you that I work incredibly hard to keep a roof over our head and food in their bellies.

I want to live in a country where my children have access to education, healthcare and a safety net if life goes wrong.

I am happy to pay my taxes.

People leading worse lives than me doesn't make me angry, it makes me sad and I want to help.

How you could read Gluteus's fabulous well researched post and feel anger towards benefit claimants is beyond me.

Please don't try to imply that you are unique because you work hard, pay taxes and have a family,

Gluteus, I know a similar family. Of 5. All had been well, until Dad went blind, and mum had to become his carer and still looks after the children. How can I look down of them, or be outraged that they don't work and live on benefits? I am much happier that my tax money go to people like them than to Trident.

(that is, if I could choose. At the moment, I seem to finance Trident as well, unfortunately)

I am a bit mad at Gary Barlow and his ilk though. The rich becoming richer at the expense of decent folk and using extreme examples of inadequate souls claiming benefits to distract us-now that makes me cross.

Bertiesgal I am also angry at the rich who use tax avoidance schemes.

But I am more angry at those who take the piss with the welfare state.

Finally, we have some common ground Wellington.

It's taken 24 hours (and my husband thinking I might be having an affair with someone on mumsnet ) but we have common ground.

I'm really quite chuffed about rhat.

Why is everyone calling it child benefit it's tax credits that have been taxed not child benefit

Aw you've ruined it again.

Why on earth do you feel more anger towards people who have had rotten luck than the people who are literally taking the piss out of all of us?

It's taken 24 hours (and my husband thinking I might be having an affair with someone on mumsnet)

All this not wanting to be the kind of society that cares for its children makes me sick. Yes, of course parents should try their best to provide financially and otherwise for their kids but for a million reasons this isn’t always possible.
I want to live in a society that cares for the most vulnerable. It also pisses me off that all this quibbling about taking away benefits for these children doesn’t mean that people won’t want the tax from those children who grow up to do paid work or to care for our ageing population. No, then, we’re quite pleased that there’s lots of young people in the workforce ready to do low paid jobs.
In addition I wonder if these benefit badgers ever get quite so worked up about the rich avoiding tax?

Ha Bertiesgal I knew you’d say that! I guess because I see it as a worse thing to actually steal from others (if you are committing benefit fraud, say) rather than not put into the pot (as long as you are covering yourself). But I know the counter- argument to that and I can see why many would disagree with it. In fact, I could probably be persuaded on that one, depending on the circumstances.

Anyway, I think my DH is probably thinking the same thing as yours!

I respect your views on this - but I think mine are more heavily influenced by my background and having a disabled child that I worry about providing for. You are obviously a very kind-hearted person but my circumstances perhaps make me more cynical.

Therein lies the problem. Not putting into the pot is far worse than claiming what you're entitled to out of it.

Ivymaud You’re not sorry to be harsh at all, you actively enjoy it.

BishopsBrennansArse Hold on, I agree with you. I mean people who are taking the piss as in claiming benefits illegally.

Wellington I really appreciate your good grace in all of this.

Benefit fraud is rubbish but not the crux of what we have been debating as far as I'm aware.

I'm just so tired of the media and government focusing on benefit claimants when there is much more dishonesty among the super rich.

I'm sad that there has been a move towards demonising the poor. The "undeserving" poor have become the enemy while the super rich pillage under our noses.

I think that we probably agree on more than either of us realise but your cynicism sometimes comes across as prejudice.

I like to think I have a good heart you patronising buggar-flattery will get you everywhere .

I hope both of us have learned something from this marathon-stay safe, I'm off to reacquaint myself with my husband .

Ha! Yes, I have - I can see where you’re coming from on a lot of points. Phew that really was a marathon - I’m now going to officially leave the thread for the third time 😬. All the best.

I'm disabled, I was battered by my ex husband who broke my back. I can't move very well and I'm in an awful lot of pain. I also have osteoporosis and fibromyalgia.
After my divorce I took care of my two children alone. I have now met someone else.
My question is, as dole scum, can I have another child? We'd love one of our own.
My partner works. Does this make a difference? Who should decide who can and who can't? Do certain circumstances allow additional children. Or should ever one only have the maximum of 2, regardless of circumstances and situations?