To think WTAF at ‘Bonk for Britain?’

[Upthebracket22]

Anyone seen this? It’s apparently based on a policy from (far right) Hungary where the media were saying that too many women were going to university and thus wouldn’t be having kids!

www.thesun.co.uk/news/20048496/women-tax-cuts-have-children/amp/

We all know who this is aimed at - they want the rich elite Tory voters to pro create.

If they wanted EVERYONE to pro create they would offer subsidised or free childcare for all.

The problem with encouraging more people to have children to care for the large ageing generation is that it creates a never ending problem. Those children will also need caring for when they’re old, so more babies are encouraged, and the population just gets bigger and bigger. We need a different solution to care for the current ageing population and then ultimately having fewer children just won’t be the same problem.

The last thing we need globally is more effing humans! We need fewer people, stat.

Hahahahahaha!! Ahhh bless those who’d take the quick buck to lick the Tory boot. They’ve really done a job on you, haven’t they.

Oooh, a middle class breeding programme. How forward thinking.

Now, what ethnicity are the majority of middle class women and their children? And how easy is it to maintain fulltime employment with more than two kids - best switch to part time or SAHM. It'll go well with those Christian values the Tories are so keen on. It'll need a better soundbite, though, Bonk is just such an uncouth word. Breed for Britain? Nah, those darn middleclass women probably won't take to being likened to Pitbull crosses or a dairy herd. Maybe they'll like it more if their husbands they are reminded they'll able to enjoy making more economical, nourishing meals for their larger families with their extra time freed from the constraints of fulltime employment?

Hmmm, Children, Church, Cooking - kinda snappy, but not quite there yet...perhaps in the interests of diversity, they could use a direct translation into another language?

Well the ageing population is a huge issue & I like the idea of zero income tax!

The Australian government tried something lime this about 15 years ago - “One for Mum, one for Dad and one for Australia”.

We need to reduce the population, not increase it. Ridiculous idea.

It's an ageing one, more over 65s than under 15s so how do you suggest we do that?

How would this even work? Okay, so a tax cut…when surely the government would need to be pulling more tax money to pay for the necessary infrastructure to support this. The NHS is basically terminal as is.

Childcare would be in high demand, so still prohibitively expensive with more women forced out of work, which isn’t particularly wonderful for the economy either.

My grandad has an idea. He wants them to stop filling him full of pills for this and pills for that and let nature run it’s course so he can join my gran wherever she is now. Unfortunately that’s not allowed and everytime he refuses to be medicated they bang him in hospital and forcibly medicate him.

The issue for me is that we don't have adequate public services eg. Health and social care, schools, to support a population boom. It would dilute the quality of existing services. All because the gov has over borrowed for years and people have been stripping back their families as they can't afford to have as many children as previous generations. We are heading for an upside down population pyramid, but trying to turn that the other way will not be an enjoyable experience for the next 30-40 years, it will be shit.

Now this is a very good point. So the long and short of it is women who go along with it end up chained to the kitchen sink anyway. How very modern.

I love how in these campaigns its all up to women to breed, seemingly asexually, where men are to just carry on as normal apparently.

I suggest a campaign for men to become slightly less fucking shit at being human beings.

This thread is very anti-child, anti-mother, repeatedly refers to women as "breeders" and insists we have a far right government. Some of you sound a bit nuts.

You're on MUMSnet. But you don't think people should have children, or be supported to have children? Weird.

beastlyslumber it has been like that for some time now and it is very weird.

We have a libertarian Prime Minister. Libertarianism isn’t a centre ground or even centre right political philosophy.

There’s a vast difference between supporting women to have children and incentivising them to do so.

I can't believe the frothing on this thread, towards a mere "suggestion" by an unnamed (and probably fictional) minister, as reported in the gutter press. This is not actual government policy, nor has there been reliable evidence that it's even been discussed.

And I die a little inside every time someone barks "Handmaid's Tale" or "Gilead" as they are wont to do as soon as the subject of women having babies arises. So tedious.

This is some Joy Division shit. In most cases the only people who produce 4+ kids are those who’s kids will more likely be a 2/3 generations deep underemployed net taker rather than contributor. This won’t help the country at all.

Western Europe has an ageing population issue. The pyramid scheme of birthing more children people can’t afford won’t work. The only way it can be fixed is to permit more immigration from countries with younger populations in the form of limited term work visas. Those young people will send money home making their own countries wealthier. Wealthier countries have lower birth rates so birth rates will slow in those countries. This is good for the West, developing countries and the planet.

The controversial alternative is to relax rules around assisted dying for the elderly. If elderly vote to reduce immigration and won’t support measures such as subsidised childcare to produce carers and tax payers to finance pensions, then they need to be more willing to take one for the team when the time comes.

I think it was the plot of a Carry On film

I thought is was the slogan Boris had chosen for his come-back gig. 😂🤦‍♀️

There’s a vast difference between supporting women to have children and incentivising them to do so

This with bells on

This is some Joy Division shit. In most cases the only people who produce 4+ kids are those who’s kids will more likely be a 2/3 generations deep underemployed net taker rather than contributor. This won’t help the country at all.

Really? I though 4 dc was for the preserve of the wealthy these days, I think the trope of unemployed woman with lots of dc is outdated tbh

The issue for me is that we don't have adequate public services eg. Health and social care, schools, to support a population boom.

We can't reverse the changing demographic, even with this scheme not enough woman would do it, the only boom is going to be in older people. Financially we are fucked if you look at the state of social care & NHS now.

More babies now won't help with the elderly care crisis, as today's babies can't help care for anyone until they're adults.
In fact, adding more dependents to the mix will only exacerbate the situation as they will need more care for at least a decade.

If only there were a way to get trained, educated adults in this country. Perhaps we could use some of the workforce-ready people from other countries to help care for the ageing population, under some kind of work visa...

Let's be honest though, loads of the west are facing the same demographic issues. Why would an trained, educated immigrant want to come to the U.K. to help care for the ageing population? the excellent salary? the cheap cost of living?