AIBU to think those who never have kids should get a lump sum from the government because they haven't burdened the state?

[daytimelightning]

Starting at this from two viewpoints
a) having children is a lifestyle choice, not a necessity. In much the same way, my dog is a lifestyle choice, not a necessity. The government currently asks some taxpayers to subsidise the expensive lifestyle choices of others (but I don't see my dog getting 30 hours free daycare)
b) the world as a whole is overpopulated. Should the UK find itself short of labour in the future, immigration will provide a source of educated healthy adults in the required numbers.

AIBU to think that anyone who does not have children when they reach the menopause (or equivalent for men, to be clawed back if they subsequently have their first child unusually late in life) should be given a lump sum in recognition of the fact that they have not burdened the state. This could perhaps include

• child benefit, equivalent to 2 children for 18 years = £32198.40 at current rates
• two uncomplicated births on the NHS = £5580 (Guardian figures)
• putting two children through state education age 4-18 = £154,000 (IFS figures; add more for your free nursery hours and any higher education)

(Full sum to be paid to married couples, half each to single people)

I'd also pay those who have only adopted or foster children (as they not responsible for bringing the children into the world) or only children who have died before their 18th birthday (because otherwise it seems a bit harsh).

I'd oppose removing child benefit and the like from those who have children purely because of the impact on child poverty, which impacts those who did not choose to be in that situation and has all sorts of counterproductive effects on things like educational attainment and health outcomes.

However, in short, why are people who choose not to, or who are unable to, have children, asked to pay for those who do choose to have children? Why shouldn't they get something in recognition of how much money they've saved the state? It might also concentrate the minds of those considering having children on a whim / because that's what people do / just because. With the above, everyone ends up getting the same amount sooner or later, it's just that some have it spread out over time and others get it as a lump sum; it would be fairer than the current system.

This post absolutely floors me!
Sorry OP I hope you can read all these posts from way up there on your pedestal. Aren't you just full of superiority. How can you describe having a child as a burden to the rest of the world etc...?
I would counter your argument with the likes of if you have ever had to visit a doctor or hospital or had standard immunisations then you personally are a burden based on your ethos so lets start deducting money from what you reckon you're owed.
Do you drive OP? Do you produce waste? Do you buy clothes?
I have a 19 year old 'burden' who is in the forces and wanted to do so from a very young age to serve and protect burdens such as yourself OP.
The next time I'm feeling a bit down I can just remind myself that at least I don't have to live inside your head, that will make me feel a whole lot better about myself.

Anyone get the idea that the OP is not going to be Most Loved Poster of 2018?

andrew yeah I think you might be right....I;m not sure its as mental an idea as all that - I mean if you exclude the fact that the welfare state is designed to help those that need help and not so much those that don't need that help....

I mean all the OP is really saying is I don't use the welfare state, so I don't want to pay tax. Its the same argument most people deploy when they want to keep their inheritance instead of handing it over tot he government....but avoiding inheritance tax seems more socially acceptable.

Maybe it would help the OP to think of it as paying taxes to fund her own education as opposed to thinking she is paying tax to fund her children's education when she doesn't have any children?

@Morphene What if you are child free and had private schooling and healthcare?

stab if that was your course through life than begrudging a little income tax would indeed be very very selfish....

I still want some money to HEd my kid though...

People who use private education/health are just as reliant on the state - who do you think educated your teachers and doctors, researched the drugs and equipment used to treat you etc?

Jux, sorry for late reply. Neoliberalism is also known as laissez-faire economics. Thatcher was absolutely a neoliberalist. The word 'liberal' seems misleading in this context.

Promoters of neoliberalism argue for deregulation, privatisation and in America particularly, for the rights of corporations to be treated as persons under the law.

It has led to massive wealth inequality and as Chomsky explains in that doc it has a corrosive effect on democracy.

It forces societies into a position where individualism must rule and where the common good is sidelined.

The OP seemed to me to have elements of this kind of thinking.

Chomsky's documentary is brilliant (well, as are his many works). Worth a watch if you have Netflix.

Surely the OP is having a shit day/life and looking to ruffle a few mumsnet feathers to make themselves feel good. Why post this crap on MUMSnet. Hope it’s made OP feel better