To think it's a bit harsh to say people who've never worked shouldn't get benefits?

[DonaldBiden]

Was reading another thread where many were saying if someone has never worked they shouldn't get any benefits but couldn't comment because it had reached 1000 comments.

I know this might be an unpopular opinion but I don't agree because that would include young mums who can't work because they have a baby to look after. Most of them will get a job when their child is a little older. Why are they any different from older mums who've fallen on hard times and need help?

And I know people will say it's because they've never worked and haven't proven themselves unlazy etc and could be on the dole forever but why should they have their lives ruined just because of something people think MIGHT happen.

When was this?

How do you "punish" the parent for being irresponsible and not punish the innocent child?

Take the child away into care and only allow moderate contact? Idk.

it?

I’m 26. I’ve worked in some capacity since 12.

No, they absolutely shouldn’t, but not should they benefit from state support. That’s for the family to take care of - a 16 year old is a child. Parents step up or the child goes into care.

????

If you don't have the means and desire to provide for a child, don't impregnate a 16 year old. Or indeed any other woman. Even more simple.

Here in the UK we have safety nets in the form of benefits and social work, to ensure that babies will always be fed. Or do you think that shouldn’t happen either?

Im a couple years younger than you I tried getting a job when I was 14 everywhere said you have to be 16. Exception being a paper girl but my father wouldn't let me do it because it involved being up at 5am when it was still dark

Of course I think that should happen. When parents fail the state sets in, when they can't feed them, the state gives them benefits, when they phyically abuse them the state steps in. I would never stop this - it isn't the parents failing are the babies fault. But I certainly think not being able to feed your baby is a failing as a parent.

Why? Do you also see poverty as a personal failing?

No but choosing to have a baby you can't afford is.

So therefore poor people should never have children?

If you're already in poverty and you're already struggling, why add to it?

Nice deflection.

But that's answer isn't it? If you don't have resources to look after yourself, bringing a child into that environment is a bad idea. Children raised in poverty often have bad outcomes.

Having a child is a massive responsibility, not a right because their cute for a bit.

Why ? That would cost even more in taxes. And is not good for the child
Is this just spite now?

We should be looking towards UBI rather than cancelling benefits.. there are so many of these threads, there really is an agenda running 🤔

Probably on benefits. Then realised they could claim more cash.

So your solution to this is to force women to put their babies into care, if they cannot afford them, rather than allow them access to benefits?

Children raised in the care system often have poor outcomes.

But I admit that the child should be supported once born. We as a society should do our best to support the child.

Exactly and how do working mums survive

Or at school and decided they fancied a "career" on the benefits gravy train.

Traumatic for the child to be separated from their mother and defeats the arguement of not wanting their taxes wasted seeing as it would cost a lot more.

They're showing their true colours now just spite