Labour are lifting the 2 child benefit cap

[PuppyKeep]

AIBU that this is a terrible decision?

If you want improved services, then you need to accept paying for it.

people absolutely do not want to pay for better services though.

I don't disagree with you. I just don't think it will play well. Labour boxed themselves in with their manifesto pledges, that was an error. I vote labour and always have btw.

I think that’s actually a fallacy. Talking to lots of friends and we pretty much all agree we’d accept Scandi style taxation for Scandi style services and benefits.

Start by massively cutting public sector pensions and reducing public sector paid holidays and sickness pay to the same level as the average rate in the private sector

How does that help the NHS?

No, but it’s a lot of money to be receiving in benefits.

For context a worker on basic rate + a student loan and basic auto-enrolment pension would need to earn an extra £35,000 to take home £20,000.

Ok, in that case we keep the 2 child cap instead.

@TiredofLDN you think the majority of the electorate are happy with that? Reform are popular because they are saying we can have great services and lower taxes.

We do not. Many houses with an income and great deal more than us do, but we do not. It is galling. As is the fact that we have limited our family so that we can afford the things we deem to be basics. I expect everyone we are subsidising to do the same. I do not want children in poverty, but I think that people should not have children they cannot afford. I don't know what the answer is.

@MidnightPatrol I appreciate how tax works but the point remains 20k is not a lot of money to raise 5 dc on & plenty wouldn't chose it.

Thankyou! :-)

I'm poor and I neither smoke nor vape. Never been interested. No drugs either and I very rarely drink. My money goes towards rent and bills, food, etc and things for DS (and occasionally me.) Not everyone on UC is a chavvy nightmare, thank you very much. As soon as I can get him into a nursery I'm going back to work. I didn't want to give up work in the first place but couldn't find a nursery place and he was too young for a childminder. His dad isn't involved, but he does pay CM, so that's something.

How does it help libraries?

I actually have no issue with the cap. I understand the point you are trying to make but surely you must see that making those professions less attractive is a massive own goal?

It wasn't my suggestion but in general there would be more money to spend on libraries/schools/the NHS

I completely agree.
Quality of life would be so much better.

Agreed. Those working but eligible for absolutely nothing are beyond fed up at always having to pay out for others when there’s more month than pay for most families these days. Working and just about managing are the most disadvantaged as they are on a cliff edge and end up worse off overall. If we are meant to be skint as a Country where’s this magic money tree come from!? Hammock for many (certainly not all) but now again this group, many of whom don’t work and who don’t want to work are rewarded. Yet those working likely have taxes increased and pension age risen again at some stage.

@HorsesDuvets You've lost me, I asked you how does cutting pensions and benefits help recruitment & retention in the NHS?

Well they’ve obviously chosen to have 5 children at some point, and most likely in an environment where they weren’t getting far less in state support.

Upping that to £20,000 seems… incredibly generous, given the decision to have five kids is their and their alone.

The £20k is just the children’s UC component - no doubt there will be other benefits claimed alongside a house and so on too.

Mine were at childminders from 6 months. If anything they're better than a nursery as it's more homely (though I appreciate peoples' views differ on that).

Absolutely. But the money has to come from somewhere and I'd like to see Labour dare to punish their core support to pay for it.

But its not £12k a year. Its nearer to £24k just for the kids - stupid and unsustainable.
Makes me wonder if Labour want to be booted out leaving an even bigger mess than they did last time because the economy is a poison chalice for any party at the minute

Maybe they should only pay out for the 3 rd + from 2025

So we can’t afford to help those disabled people who need help getting washed, dressed and going to the toilet, yet all of a sudden they have shaken the magic money tree and have found enough money to pay for people to have as many children as they want? It’s an absolute joke. Having children is a choice, being disabled is not.

When we started our family our first was a contraception failure and our second was planned. We didn’t have a lot of money, but we owned our own home which was small, and we could not afford to move. We ddint have room for any more children, we couldn’t afford more. I was told I shouldn’t have more so DH booked himself in for a vasectomy to make sure there was no more.

Or not at all?

You’d have to tax lower and middle income more. Is that what you’re after?