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

Lifting the cap would improve living standards.

Poverty is largely caused by how people spend their money rather than how much they have.
If you want to help families with more child benefit, give food and clothing vouchers. This will be a great help
to people struggling and makes sure that those with addictions or other issues spend the money on their childrens welfare.

Personal responsibility only takes you so far. Do you rely on the NHS? Rather than an American style private system? Do you use state services? Do you feel ok with being left on your own when chronic illness hits because 'personal responsibility'? An over reliance on personal responsibility leads to a breakdown of society. We should all be looking out for each other to an extent. I'm not in UK but you seem to do that well enough. It would be an awful thing to see people just turn their backs on everyone.

All going to what you expected? They've not even been in government a week.

What happens to the total benefits cap of whatever it is now if a family has more than two children and the rules on number of kids changes?

In some parts of the country where housing benefit makes up a large part of the UC entitlement and you can claim for as many DC as you have won’t the total amount be capped anyway if no one in the family has a disability which exempts them?

I’ve phrased that very poorly but I wonder if anyone can explain. Eg if the total cap is £26k a year but you can now claim for extra DC bringing it up to £30k won’t the maximum in benefits you can get still be £26k?

That is why I was asking that poster for a link, or source of their information. Where did you find yours?

So the government website says UC per child is £286 per month. £333 for the first child. The government need to focus on policies that promote economic growth and work ethic so fewer people need to claim state support.

Capping the UC element to 2 children may deter some (and we need people to consider affordability when planning children - that is basic responsible citizenship and parenting). However, once the child is here, they have to be taken care of, so I would favour policies that promote economic productivity and deter planning for children one can't afford but ensure children are properly supported once here. How to do that is what the government need to work out

Refusing financial support for kids already here is not humane.

Sorry but I think this is BS too. All the povo's are spending their money on fags and drink? Wtf like? This is crazy.

To quote one Boris Johnson, this is an inverted pyramid of piffle.

Poverty is about how much money you have. The previous government knowingly pushed hundreds of thousands more children into poverty, by cutting benefits at a time of rising costs.

I haven't read the full thread.

There isn't a 2 child limit on child benefit.
There is on universal credit.

If anyone reading this is expecting their 3rd (or more) child, you can add them to your existing child benefit claim.

This sounds made up - do you have some reliable data on this?

There has been research. The policy did not stop people having more than 2 children

Firstly u don’t see this as a fuck up. No decision has been made it’s just a discussion.

There’s not much point in scrapping the 2 child rule while the Benefit Cap is in place. Otherwise, for a large number of people, you’re giving with one hand and taking with the other.

It’s just the beginning of what will end up happening….

Bore off

Of course not everyone is spending their money on drink and fags, but you can’t deny some people do not spend their money on the kids - I have seen this first hand - families with large disposable incomes and chronic addictions , so the kids get nothing. I am all for supporting families, but I honestly don’t know why this has to be done in cash. You can easily give families vouchers for food and clothing and this would help.
I don’t know why any help not given in cash is so frowned apon.

@G123456789 Mumsnet needs a better class of bot, discuss?😊

Give them vouchers then. But no, they are 'demeaning' or the like, only cash will do.

I pay a lot of tax. I want it to go to help people who have made good decisions but bad things have happened to through no fault of their own, not those who have made stupid decisions, think that having as many children as they want is some kind of human right, or worse, not even thought about it at all.

It's quite simple.

Don't have enough money to support three children? Don't have three children.
Can't cope if you have three children and one of you loses your job? Don't have three children.
Can't cope if you have three children and one of you gets ill? Don't have three children.
Can't cope if you have three children with a shit partner who walks out on you? Don't have three children (or pick a shit partner).

And no, we don't need more children to prop up the failing ponzi scheme that is capitalism and which will inevitably crumble regardless, as all pyramid schemes eventually do.

Plus it's relative poverty.

⬆

OP this is not a limit of child benefit. It’s a limit on universal credit. The vast majority of people affected by this are working full time (most of them in 2 parent families). This is shameful. Not because people are having too many children but because two parents can work full time but not be able to support their family.

The shame is attached to employers and a society in which two adults working full time cannot support their children.

Seems we've got a young to aged deficit so it's a good thing to form policies to encorage the native/indigenous population to procreate.

Will only work if there's a parallel skilling up, education and opportunity for these pensioner-proppers to get jobs that earn enough to follow through. Otherwise it's just another 'pyramid scheme' that will inevitably tumble.

The current bunch in Govt appear to mean 'business' so I'm giving them a year or so to see what stuff they actually do.

And also the fact that there's no plan for the 30,000 (and rising) failed asylum seekers...

What will end up happening?

Less children will be in poverty?
More children will have breakfast in the morning because there is food in the cupboard?
Maybe those kids will get better grades..
Have better life long health outcomes
Have better futures..
Earn more as adults and therefore pay more tax..

See where I'm going with this?
Best case scenario, it's an investment
Worst case scenario, less kids in poverty

Where is the problem with this?

Less children will be in poverty if the money is actually spent on food…. There is no guarantee on this, and this is why no matter how much money you give people there will always be some children in poverty.