First Labour f up

[G123456789]

The BBC are reporting that there are Labour mps calling for the new government to scrap the limit of 2 children on child benefit

I'm working class and have family members who have had, 7, 5 and several 4 kids. Neither parent worked and the fact that each child got benefit encouraged them to have more, even though they really could not afford it.

so Labour mps want to encourage people who struggle, and those who don't actually, to have more kids...with the impact on the state, housing in the future and the environment..discuss

Some Labour MPs call for children to be helped out of poverty. Shock horror. Seriously cannot get worked up about this. If you like the idea of children having poorer outcomes, you should seriously check yourself.

What you say in perfectly reasonable (although I’d disagree with the tone and much of the content). However, for me it always comes back to the fact that saying all of those things doesn’t make the hungry kids and less hungry, and it certainly isn’t their fault.

Cash / vouchers wouldn’t make any difference to the cost.

And ‘relative poverty’ is true in many cases (though not all, there are some people who are genuinely destitute). But again it doesn’t matter to the actual hungry child. If child is hungry, and plenty are, it is our moral duty to help them even if their parents are feckless.

O look, we're back in the 6th form debating society. Let's have 1,000 words from each of you on the subject. No late submissions and bot will mark accordingly. Bloody hell! Do better Tory bots.

This is just silly to say. It's not to please the rich it's about conservative values conservatism is about reducing state reliance, it believes in a smaller civil service and thay people should be more responsible for bettering their lives, hence why they are traditonally the party of low taxes ( these past few yrs being the exception due to havin to pay back debt from the pandemic although they had started to bring down NI tax) So if you want 3 children u work to afford that.

People really focus on the wrong parts of society. Any cash going into the pockets of the poorest is immediately circulated in the economy, even if it goes on booze and fags (clutches pearls in horror). The much worse offenders are the wealthiest who offshore their wealth, or overseas property owners who leave British property empty. That takes cash out of the economy and resources out of the hands of / In reach of ordinary people.

the bill for benefits for non-retired people is a pretty small proportion of government spending, but it’s made out to be the reason we’re in a financial hole.

I speak as someone whose cousin got pregnant at 16, went into a mother and baby home, and then went on to have 4 kids. She’s a carer to one of her twins who has significant learning difficulties and she spent a long time on benefits - but now she also has a decent job and can even afford a nice holiday once a year.

I got a PhD (didn’t pay tax on my stipend) and am a lecturer at university, but I also had an accident doing my sport that involved an airlift and treatment in hospital for a broken back. Didn’t pay a penny thanks to the NHS and now I’m fully recovered. Or that I had an elective section because I’m autistic and was scared of birth after previous hospitalisation?

Who is “worse” for the economy? Me or my cousin?

Or how about neither my cousin or me - and instead we focus on the fact that unde the tories we went from 25 to 176 billionaires and their wealth is mostly offshored and untaxed. Or Dyson supporting brexit then moving his work to Singapore and now cutting 1000 jobs in the U.K.? Or that our utilities make massive profits from the energy crisis and fuel poverty, and don’t pay windfall taxes but line their investors’ pockets?

Agree

When Bre it was being discussed, it was made clear that it would mean that we could look to the commonwealth rather than the EU. That is were we are now recruiting from for lower skilled jobs. A quick Google will tell you this. Hepatitis is one health condition that is often present, which causes inflammation in the body. Malnutrition growing up causes health issues. Thus isn't me being racist, I've partially grown up in SA, with my father being from there. I have friends from across Africa, none are perfectly healthy. In people whose ruce forms a large part of their diet, diabetes is common, it isn't just connected to weight. So the solution to a workforce that takes nothing, isn't just immigration. We need to support UK citizens and those with the right to remain to have children.

You are correct, I have never met a racist South African.

I am surprised you could even understand that ramble, tbh.

Vouchers would be sold for less than face value.
No children should be going hungry in UK.
Hopefully the government bring back Sure Start centres .

They want to get rid of the cap because 1. It isn't working in preventing families having more children and 2. It's been proven it would be quick, affordable and effective as a method of reducing child poverty. It's a very divisive policy and its only effect has been negative and primarily affects babies and children who have no part in their circumstances. I will be happy to see the policy go.

I suspect that the Labour leadership would also like the policy to go, but need to be careful as whilst it would save money in the long run, is it affordable in the short term?

Sure starts were cost effective. They showed good results.
Of schemes in the holiday with free food and help available. Food for children and adults alike.
Our local community centre still does drop twice a week morning (free tea/ coffee and biscuits) to keep warm and company. Has play area for children. Plus cheap community meal.

Some Labour MPs support this. It doesn't mean it will happen.

So how's this the first Labour F UP?

It is very similar to having MPs watching tractor porn in parliament or appointing to a government position someone you know is a sex pest.

There is no limit on child benefit. Only on adding them for the child element of universal credit.
Child benefit is the same as always, higher rate for oldest child then the same lower rate for each subsequent child.

At one time you didn’t get child benefit for your first born

😮😮😮😮

You didn’t. Mine was two when child benefit for the first child started so it would have been in 1977.

Yes, it was £1 for the first and £1.50 for subsequent children

You are very naive.
You have to go back into history to when One Nation Tories had some sway in the party for "Conservative values" to be anything other than a cynical front for pure wealth and power increasing policies. That was, after all, the primary motivation for Conservatives supporting and campaigning for Brexit.

Not forgetting it will cost two billion pounds, I’m sure there are better ways that money could be spent on easing child poverty, free school meals for all for a start. By increasing the rate for all families there are thousands that don’t need it. It has to be a targeted approach.

Yes - I think it came into effect at some point during 2017.

Its all a bit confusing, because just last year there was a government minister who was encouraging women to get less education to stay at home and make babies, but the same government was simultaneously making it financial hard for larger families.

I think the 2 child benefit cap is horrible and sexist way to punish poorer families. A man can have 6 children with 3 women but if a woman has more than 2 and has the misfortune of of needing benefits she is punished. Also the "bedroom tax" punishes young families eg lose your Job and have 9 year boy and 8 year old girl in a 3 bed house, then government believes they should share so the family will be bedroom taxed if they have 3rd box room but a pensioner alone in 4 bedrooms will not