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.

Is that you Theresa

This sounds like an episode of Sex and the city where Carries whines talks about how she gets nothing, NOTHING for being single whereas her married friend has received an engagement gift, a wedding gift and gifts for 3 children!

How about if someone dies at age 60 who has 2 children gives you their pension to make up for you (being childless) but living until you're 90? 😜

Back to reddit you go, OP.

😂 Too funny. I'm sure OP will fit in nicely over there.

You do realise these are future tax payers, raised at great personal expense to their parents? I think you have it slightly arse about face.

Information, for anyone unaware, this is #NationalDrinkWineDay.
I believe the OP started to acknowledge this this morning - and has forgotten to stop

Here, have my first ever

OP won't be back. It beggars belief, why anyone would even rise to this bait.

The OP has not been back. If s/he was playing GF it's been a complete success, hasn't it?

my mum died young so never got a chance to get her pension that she paid years into, so yeah can I have some of that :)

Information, for anyone unaware, this is #NationalDrinkWineDay.I believe the OP started to acknowledge this this morning - and has forgotten to stop

National Drink Wine Day - I'll drink to that

@Awwlookatmybabyspider

Why would the state want to encourage people to have fewer children when we have an aging population?

I can’t really imagine many people thinking shall I have a child? No need, there are children in other countries who, when they grow up, can come over here and live the life my child would have had.

Even if what you describe came into practice I would have still had my child and would do so again, having children isn’t about what you can get from the state but the fulfilment and love you get from being a parent and if that’s selfish then so be it.

Hahaha well on that idea I'd like all the money back on cigarettes I didn't smoke...therefore not burdening the NHS with treatment for a smoking related illness...
What a funny way to look at the world!

Your economics game is strong, OP.

No, really.

Ha ha ha!! Assuming as you age or become unwell you don't need to take any pension / benefits from the government or NHS coffers being paid into by other people's children .....

We’ve never been eligible for CB. We have private healthcare and will be educating privately. Do I get something back?

1/10.

No you are being totally unreasonable - the next generation will pay taxes to contribute to your old age, OP. And you may be a more 'needy' OAP than you can ever imagine now (more so than many MNetters with children).

Ah so you want to give them the money equivalent to the money that's spent on a child. So exactly the same? So where's the saving 🤦‍♀️TWAT

Well, let's hope the OP doesn't need any help in the future.
What a depressing view of the world.

Not read but you do get a “lump sum” you get your state pension and every doctor and nurse and care worker who will take care of you in your final years, the binmen and delivery people who will help you live in your own home before then but as you become less able and the funeral director who will bury you.

I have no kids and after reading another "I started a business/wrote a book/travelled the world on my mat leave" story, I'd love six months paid off work, but otherwise nah. I need young people around to pay my pension so parents, keep doing what you're doing and I'll happily pay my taxes so you can!