Labour are lifting the 2 child benefit cap

[PuppyKeep]

AIBU that this is a terrible decision?

agree.
and ban gambling

Wait, what?
My benefits means I can eat, pay bills and be housed.

Affordable childcare flexible working...

No its economics. Children born in poverty have worse outcomes. It is simple personal responsibility not gene testing.

Which comment?

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

With falling birth rates immigration is the prop hence why all the govs have relied on it.

So no child is born in poverty... just born to well off people who would not want their kids to be cleaners, carers etc..

Exactly this! In the days before the benefit cap it lead to far too many girls coming out of school and into pregnancy and council accommodation, those women have kid after kid because the system pays more money, they can't be pushed into work because the childcare bill alone makes it impractical and by the time all the kids are old enough not to need childcare, these women have had decades unemployed, no skills or work experience and pretty much unemployable.
This is a truth that people hate to hear though.

Another reason not to vote Labour. I'm not subsidising other folks decision to expand their families.

Second post nails it.

It was a disgraceful idea and caused no end of hardship.

People talk about workers for tax. If they’re not working then that drops. Perhaps people should be concerned about how to ensure we get tax from AI related activity.

I can't see an advantage in keeping children in poverty as a punishment to their parents.

@Viviennemary

apart from pleasing you, what is the advantage?

This. There's this odd idea many people have that parents should bear the entire cost of having kids and should never expect other people to pay for their kids because children are a 'choice'.

True, having kids is a choice, but it's one we need a certain proportion of the population to make otherwise we're on the edge of a rather bleak precipice.

Society needs children. Therefore, society needs to bear a sufficient proportion of the costs associated with children that large numbers of people don't give up having them. At the moment, parenting is an increasingly unattractive proposition and more and more people are choosing to give it a miss.

This is not to say that everyone should have children or that we should judge people who choose not to have them. Parenthood is not for everyone. But we need some people to have kids. It's a bit like doctors. I've never wanted to be a doctor and would make a terrible one, but even so, it's pretty self-evident that any society needs doctors and financially supporting their education and training makes sense.

It touches on something relevant.

To get ahead in your career (and financially) having multiple children is just about the worst thing you can do.

Having ~2 children is a societal good, but it comes at a significant economic cost.

As a society, we're basically demonizing having kids.

Perhaps people should be concerned about how to ensure we get tax from AI related activity.

I've never seen this detailed have you @EasternStandard?

Tech entrepreneurs aren't really known for their generous nature.

Leaning left will only encourage an even greater swing to the right. What the country actually needs is a centrist party right now.

And if (a big if) we solve the tax burden issue - great, we've saved the state pension.

But we're still heading towards societal collapse.

Their parents are keeping them in poverty by having more children they can't afford. That m I need should be spent directly on the children- breakfast clubs, holiday clubs, surestart centres etc. Not giving people money to have more children when they can't adequately provide for the ones they have.

Most of us know that and understand working low income families having a top up but those families will maybe have one or two kids, the bigger burden is the mother sat on benefits for life with 8 kids and an invisible dad!

As a society, we're basically demonizing having kids.

For years the message has been don't have dc if you can't afford them, it got through.

How rude. Are you honestly saying that only children born in poverty can be cleaners and carers? That's depressing. People on low income need to be encouraged to have 1 or 2 children, those on higher income 2-3. That will reshape the need for the state to constantly trying to dig children out of the poverty that their parent put them into. Having children is a responsibility not a right.

Please tell me what the advantage is, in keeping children in poverty.

And many of us realise how competitive the world is so invest more into our dc which is why we have fewer of them. And of course some can't be bothered with it at all.

Anyone who decides to have another baby whilst being unable to actually support them isn't exactly a stellar parent 🤷‍♀️
Nor is someone so irresponsible the role model a child deserves to have.

This isn't 'lifting' anyone out of poverty, it just further solidifies the entitlement of someone who doesn't have to actually DO anything to be 'taken care of' and ensures the sense of entitlement continues through to their children.

I completely disagree

Appearing to do something about the cost of a food shop for example would really grab reform voters