Labour are lifting the 2 child benefit cap

[PuppyKeep]

AIBU that this is a terrible decision?

South Korea and Japan are already on the precipice of societal collapse, and we're not that far behind.

Japan at least planned for it and tried to mitigate years ago. We have done nothing

Why on Earth are you overusing the @ sign?

I'm on the bloody thread.

"An ageing population is a demographic trend where the proportion of older people in a society increases relative to younger age groups, causing the average age of the population to rise. This happens due to two main factors: increased life expectancy, as people live longer thanks to better healthcare and living conditions, and declining fertility rates, which mean fewer children are born"

People get older, ie age, and the population ages. Fertility rates might be declining, but we have a net immigration in the hundreds of thousands. Who needs children, when we have ready made adults?

There, in your own Googled, copied and pasted quote.

I found each awful. Each to their own, though.
Exception being NZ. Would happily live there. Probably wouldn’t take us now though 😁

Well if they don’t want more, then the two child cap isn’t a problem.

The aging population didn't make Reeves have to indebt us to a further and unexpected £11 billion pounds in August. The number of old people was a known-known at the 2024 budget.

Businesses hobbled by government interference and individuals who have been taxed into apathy have swung the fortunes of the treasury and bond traders who see us as an increasingly risky bet putting up the interest on borrowing did that.

Lots of people on this thread seem to think only non working parents claim UC which is simply not the case.

I think the cap should be lifted from 2 to 3 children. 3 children is not an absurd amount of children to have. Someone could have made the choice to have 3 children whilst being able to afford it only for their circumstances to change some time later.

Hahahaha! This comment wins the thread!

I wish we could give out awards 😆

Well, the fact that I’m suggesting supporting families now with childcare costs and other family friendly policies, to me, makes it clear I know these children already exist. I’m not sure why you read that into my post. Not odd at all. Your interpretation is odd to me. I don’t like seeing children in poverty but I also believe it is a choice to have children and therefore we should at least consider whether we can support them and what kind of life we can provide for them.

A much better idea would be to bring back and expand early start centres

Many working people have limited how many kids they have to what they can afford, a family with 1 or 2 kids that work aren't the burden that the huge benefit families are. They have kid after kid and end up never joining the world of work.

@ChardonnaysBeastlyCat I tagged you before and after in case the post was too long for you and you were distracted by a bright light or something.

Who needs children, when we have ready made adults?

Christ it gets better 🤣🤣

I'm on the bloody thread.

I'm not convinced you are on the planet...

We don't know what the workplace will look like in 28 years, or what that will mean for economic productivity.

There's a good argument for having a birth rate marginally lower than the replacement rate for a few decades (a manged decline in total population) but we certainly don't want a cliff-edge drop we have no idea how to face.

And even if it were the case that, in the future, 1 child could support multiple retirees, a society where the majority are elderly and there are very few children does not sound an ideal one, to me.

Based on current birth rates, more than 50% of South Korea's population will be aged 60 or older by 2100, and only about 11% will be children, and the shift will continue to accelerate.

Yes, that's a potential economic disaster, but also a disaster for national defence, culture, and the basic social fabric.

Things arent quite so severe in the UK, yet, but it is well along that path (as is most of the West).

Sadly the truth of it is that very little of the extra money will reach it way to the children. There is a reason there are more betting shops, takeaways and off licenses in deprived areas of the country.

This is true - children are, of course, only born to people who want them.

I meant to post 18 years but it doesn’t matter. We should be thinking about what it’ll be like. You may well have a mass of young people without jobs.

we certainly don't want a cliff-edge drop we have no idea how to face.

This is the problem isn't it, the steep drop and years of ignoring the looming issue.

We need government policy that will reshape who has children. Too often those who can afford it aren't having enough and those who can't afford it are having too many.

Well, the choice to have children is one that we desperately need more people to make.

I agree with the things you propose (and more), FWIW, but it isn't an either-or.

Because you are ignoring the huge amount of immigrants coming to UK every year. They take up space and need accommodation too

Oh perfect.

Cheap attacks, nothing of substance.

Not that I expected anything else.

That sounds a bit like eugenics.

Do benefits really lift people out of poverty?

Of course we should be thinking about what technology will mean for jobs, in the future, but that does not mean that population collapse isn't an existential societal problem.

Cheap attacks, nothing of substance.

Well I tried explaining the difference to you between an ageing population & "people get older" and it still went over your head so I'm not really sure how else I can help. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Of course we should be thinking about what technology will mean for jobs, in the future, but that does not mean that population collapse isn't an existential societal problem.