Don't have kids you can't afford!

[user793847984375948]

Hi all, this is meant to be an interesting discussion.

I keep seeing people say, “Don’t have kids if you can’t afford them.”

But in the UK, if someone works full-time on minimum wage, the state ends up paying thousands for childcare so that parent can work.
If that same parent stayed home, they would receive less support overall, yet they would be raising their own child hands-on. A single mum can work part-time and get rent and living costs for kids, around 500 a month in support if she works.

Nursery is about 1K a month usually. Then there's the wraparound care before and after school that could also be funded by UC.

So why is one scenario seen as responsible and the other as “sponging”?

Further, do people who say “don’t have kids you can’t afford” actually think only those earning £60k or more should have children, since that is roughly what it takes to cover childcare or a single income? That eradicates the above two scenarios and it's just those with independent wealth

If so, what would that mean for society long-term, both economically and socially? There would be fewer poor people over all and I think this would have an impact on our monetary system and menial jobs getting done.

And if you believe that only the wealthy should reproduce, you are effectively asking rich, white, powerful men to police women’s reproduction.
That is exactly what is happening in parts of America right now.

Genuinely curious how people justify this way of thinking.

I was a teen in the 90s and can’t remember a single girl having a baby in the 7 years I was at secondary school (including 6th form).

DS(17) goes to the same secondary and there have been at least 3 in the last few years all age 15/16.

So what’s changed in the last 25+ years?

Which is why you plan accordingly as I said before. When you plan your family you take into consideration the "what ifs".....at least responsible parents do. To just say "oh we want 3 so will have 3 even though if something happens we can't afford it" is irresponsible. That's the attitude that jars with me. It's the assumption that someone will automatically pick up the bill for your DC.

@twistyizzy sorry mixed you up on some aspects - however the mentioning Labour aspect I can’t agree on and I’m a Lib Dem voter - I think the breakfast club thing is a good thing - it was used a lot when we lived in Copenhagen - we can’t on one hand say we want parents out working but then do nothing that helps facilitate working for many whose jobs are not flexible or work from home, same goes for after school clubs- I’m not sure why anyone would object to these, it’s not compulsory , if people have the time and inclination to be sat round the table all together at 7.45 at home before leaving then great - but I remember myself being on a train at 8.10 am day after day , luckily my H went self employed when my son was2 working from home, otherwise I would have found breakfast club pretty useful - the kids in Copenhagen I saw as we had a school close by seemed to really enjoy it and it all looked quite cosy and sharing with each other etc - the fact is not everyone’s jobs fit well with school hours and whilst I’m all for personal responsibility I would rather people were helped to make work a bit more possible with pretty small changes

Good for you but my question still stands 😁 How about the self-employed, are they allowed to procreate?

@Lucelady similar here, including the rent aspect and we lost our business but were luckily renting at the time - we were able to recover by doing things in a different way but by the time all was in good order again we were too old to get mortgages over a sufficient period - so we are relatively good earners, but rent - we won’t be able to buy till we hopefully inherit or sell off our business and maybe do shared ownership - insurance only covers so much if you have it and us often hugely below your actual costs - I do wish people were not so black and white in thinking - it certainly isn’t just feckless people who end up in situations that aren’t great through changes in markets, funding, societal changes etc - it can in many cases be pure luck that ‘shit hasn’t hit the fan’ in your family .

I don't understand why you're angry at those people when you obviously choose not to be them because you believe being them must be crap, right? So I guess I'm wondering why you're envious of them? Or why you're feeling like they're getting something you're not?
I personally don't have an issue with those who choose to put other values ahead of financial security. What does make me angry is that these are the same people who then come crying that their kids don't have the same opportunities than those whose parents works, can afford to take them to swimming lessons, can't afford for them to have extra tutoring lessons, can't send their kids to the best school because they can't afford to live in the catchment area etc...and then it's the fault of the government, the rich who only care about their kids, and it is sooooo unfair. Then they moan because they can't afford to buy a property, that the state pension is too low...

Well it isn't unfair. If one thinks their kids will benefit from a sahm until they are adults, to have 4 or 5 siblings, to never have to go to school clubs, then that's absolutely fine, but they shouldn't moan when they can't afford the same benefits that comes with money.

I was a teen in the 90s and knew ar least three girls who had babies before they were 16. One of the girls had three children by the time the rest of us left sixth form.

This was an area people would probably consider “nice”, as well.

I think statistically the number of teen pregnancies have actually dropped, haven’t they?

@Crikeyalmighty the Scandinavian countries usually work on 8-4 which suited me well with my first child and we got free breakfast too!

My mum always worked but she finished at 3/4 as married ladies did in the 1970s.
My dad picked us up and he worked nights. She never had any issue getting a job but now you have to be available 24/7 and that does stop a lot of people applying for jobs. My niece has been trying for a year for 'key time'. Employers have plenty of people in the queue. Flexibility from employees has been dropped. The employer is king and people are not being treated very well.

A little hope in schools for a better life would help. We had school trips and key speakers in my very ordinary comp. Most children are lucky to get one trip a year. Social mobility has stalled and it's no wonder young adults feel hopeless. They try to create a better family than they had. Having their own family may feel like a chance of a better life (I have a trainee psychologist DD so I hear/ read some of her text).

Absolutely hilarious, If you want to make God laugh, tell her your plans.
The point is I rebuilt. I’ve Given my children house deposits, I’ve put them through university, my dog lives better than most of your children do.
But if I’d planned for the worst according to your criteria, none of them would be here and the world would be missing a couple of teachers and medics which it can ill afford.

That is because they will lose their place otherwise. Many professionals claim the 30 hours too.

We had one of those, she’s just Celebrated her 25th wedding anniversary. She’s been mortgage free for years and we’re all watching jealously whilst she travels the world with the baby Dada that we all thought would amount to nothing. Funny old game isn’t it?

I do think it's a ridiculous thing to say...to a certain extent. One woman posted about having 3 kids a while ago and people were calling the 3rd child a luxury. Absolutely ridiculous! They didn't know her circumstances. Just being judgy. On the other hand, I know someone who is on baby number 7. Doesn't work. Bf does but is on MW and they get ridiculous amounts of money from UC. That is where I agree with the phrase in your OP.

If you planned for everything, you wouldn't be so preoccupied with 20% VAT, you would just fork it out and shrug your shoulders.

How do you plan for the next crash? I personally don't understand yet how bad it's going to be and what will be affected most so cannot really plan. I must be stupid, I guess, as everyone seems to be so well prepared already :)

I haven’t “bred” any children who needed the taxpayers to support them, no.

@Ubertomusic i was warned last week that the property market is going downhill.
We are in the process of selling and will take the first proceedable offer. I can't wait for things to improve. That's my plan.

Let’s be honest, it’s not just because of that. Also, if everyone took their older child out for the duration of maternity there would be more places overall.

It's been visible in London for quite a while... BTL landlords are exiting in droves too...

It's not just housing market this time though. They've been kicking the 2008 can down the road for far too long... And I don't see anyone able enough at the top atm (maybe they will come to the scene when needed but I wouldn't bet on this).

Why are you bothered about more places considering your stance on nurseries?

Having 3 children is not an unreasonably large family whether you can afford it or not and we actually need more people to be having this sort of size family for the human race to replace itself. Many people feel they can't afford to have more than 2 children and the population is declining as a result.

I'm not against supporting people financially to have a reasonable family size whether this is supporting them to care for their own children (preschool age) or through nursery. I think families should have choice.

Do I think we should be supporting people to have 5 or more children they "can't afford"? no, but having said that child benefits supported my mum to have 6 and we're all now adults contributing members to society and paying tax.

Oh I totally agree - the kids were sat round the table at 7.50 munching fruit and toast and cereal and yep it was a mass exodus in the co work centre I had a desk in at 4 to 4.30pm- it’s a very different mindset. I agree totally with you about schools - luckily my son finished his GCSEs in 2014 and was probably at the back end of when it was ok - this was mid level comp in Oxford and I paid for a bit of extra tuition from some lovely Oxford postgrads in his weaker subjects for 3 months . Ge then went on to do an apprenticeship in Tec and telecoms combined with BTEC and I think he made the right choice as at 27 now he’s way ahead professionally of many of his school friends who went to Uni .

My point is people wouldn’t be so worried about letting their place go if other people weren’t hoarding them when they don’t need them.

Who doesn't need them? People on benefits? Who is undeserving?

@Lucelady and i agree about many employers too-Many simply go for the cheapest staff they can get ,with less personal complications and hence often end up with unmotivated poor performers- the company my H works for you would think would be inundated with good new level 1 tech grads, pay ok, very good clients - my son tells me that most young grads they attract are appalling on the phone, lousy personal skills, can’t take any mild criticism or suggestion at all and have no problem solving skills and have zero resilience, always off sick if they’ve had a stressful day before etc - this isn’t me saying this - it’s a 27 year old who is amazed how much things have deteriorated - even at 17 he wasn’t like this at all - and his friends in other companies are saying similar -

Uc is a saftey net not a backup for those who cant even afford their existing kids the basics to have more kids.
Bloody hell