Do you think we should life the two child benefit cap?

[Marshmallow4545]

I believe that the majority of people think that the cap should remain and child poverty should be tackled in different ways.

Personally I would like to see children on FSMs allowed free access to after school extracurricular clubs and activities. I would also provide more poor families with access to food banks and would look to stock these with a range of healthy and nutritious options either through donation or state funding if required. I would also look to recruit volunteers to offer advice on health and diet in these places. I would provide clothing and school uniform banks with high quality, second hand clothing that kids would actually want to wear. I have some branded 'fashionable' stuff my kids have grown out of that's still in great condition that I would happily donate.

All of the above in my view is preferable to lifting the cap and would be more effective in tackling the impact that child poverty has on the child.

So AIBU that the two child cap should remain and we should look at other more direct ways to tackle child poverty?

The argument for the cap is ideological and not practical. Yes, people should responsibly plan their families in line with their means. But many don't, and keeping the cap just serves to punish the children involved.

Child benefit immediately will be spent and will re-enter the economy, so I don't see the argument that this is bad for growth.

Sorry no you don't get to "not this again" when your resenting feeding children in poverty and you aren't frothing at people literally accruing more and more wealth per annum and paying ZERO tax on it. Why on earth should we cut a benefit bill to those who need it before we adequately and fairly tax those who's wealth is doubling?

So you want to control what they are eating and what they are wearing because they are poor?
You dont think that's a bit stigmatizing?
Should we tattoo them with "unworthy" as well .?

It's important to remember only one poster posted about parents having more than one disabled child. I wouldn't condemn a whole thread on this basis.

Well it also serves to give those who are also being let down by our government someone to punch down on and blame for their situation rather than looking upwards. I'd day it's serving it's purpose exactly sadly.

Private pensions also rely on the current workforce to fund them. So anybody wanting to rely on their private pension in, say, 20 years' time will need plenty of younger people paying into private pensions then to ensure there is money in the pot.

I don't resent feeding children. I'm literally talking about introducing specific measures to feed children healthily.

We need to get the welfare bill down. Pretending we can tax the billionaires and millionaires how you suggest hasn't worked anywhere. No country has cracked this properly. Those with a wealth tax are seeing tax revenues decrease as billionaires flee. Countries like Ireland on the other hand are welcoming them and seeing the tax receipts to prove it. You need to stick in the real world where rich people have global mobility.

Perhaps also mandatory classes where middle class people can line up to tell them how terrible they are? We could even hand out the vouchers at these classes, once the poor have admitted their moral failings of course.

I'm not the only person who uses the pantry. Far from it. Of course some don't use it but many do, at least in my area which is deprived and many people are on UC.

So instead of lifting the two child UC cap, you'd have food vouchers for those on UC with more than 2 children but those with 1-2 children would still receive UC how it is now? Is that correct?

No one is resenting feeding children in poverty. You can still claim child benefit for any number of children you have.

What people resent is that fact that they are living hand to mouth, working to put food on the table, having to decide not to have children or limit their family size, and on top of that to have to fund other people to have as many children as they choose.

Working people do not get a pay rise after every child they have. They should not have to fund other people's children on top.

Where did it say I wanted to control what they're eating or wearing? No laws will be in place to govern this.

Did you grow up on a household with lots of money? I didn't and guess what, our family budget dictated what I wore and ate. I wore literal hand me downs and was desperate for fashionable clothes like my friends. Initiatives like I suggested in my OP would have helped me a great deal. I would have had access to healthy food and trendy clothes. I would have felt normal not stigmatised.

The pantry wouldn't necessarily stop if there were food vouchers.

I think this is a great option for all children living in poverty.

I doubt labour will ever be voted in again, declaring this the same week as tax rises will piss a lot of people off, especially with the current public opinion on immigration when most big families are from other countries.
I think a two child cap is reasonable and I say that as someone who was on benefits for years and had a child at 16 (so a complete scrounger 🤣) once or twice fair enough but how did you not learn your lesson the third time??

You can’t expect working taxes payers to fund your platoon of children and not feel resentment yes maybe there should be classes where they line up and get contraception explained to them. I mean you can talk about it being the right thing to do all you want but that won’t matter when labour never get voted in again

I think you might be a bit confused there. Private pensions need companies to do well, regardless of how many people work for them or whether those people are based in the UK.

If your main source of income is benefits it makes sense to have more children as your benefits will increase. As has been said if your main income is from work your wage won't suddenly go up because your family has increased.

I know a family who have seven children. There seemingly has been no real concern on how they will pay for them as the benefits keep increasing. They live in a 5 bedroom townhouse because the council has to house them. We live in a 2 bedroom home we own (not fully paid off though!) so only had one child as we don't have the funds for a bigger house. We both work but in low paid jobs but only get child benefit. Now taxes may rise for us but the seven children family will get an increase.

Plus the oldest child is pregnant despite not being an adult yet. Sadly it seems the cycle will continue. If you never see your mum working it doesn't inspire you to either and the poverty cycle continues.

Reeves should tread very very carefully here. What you'll notice is that the poll has remained around 70-73% in favour of not lifting the cap and yet if you just read the comments you could believe it was more 50:50. Relatively few vocal proponents can skew the picture and misrepresent public sentiment.

The squeaky wheel may get the oil but this will be at a great political cost. We are supposed to live in a democracy. Majority should rule. If we start abandoning this principle then we start to threaten democracy itself and will be entering very dangerous times.

🤐

They absolutely are! Again, if you are living hand to mouth putting food on the table while working your problem is upwards - why is your employer not paying you a liveable wage? Why are you being taxed on your earnings while wealthy people aren't being taxed at all on their wealth and they don't work or ever sell their assets so are never contributing? By your logic, perhaps you are living hand to mouth cos you couldn't afford any children yet you've chosen to have them,.they're a lifestyle choice according to this thread...or do the societal reasons your money doesn't stretch suddenly come into play?

You are not funding people to have any many children as they choose. You are paying tax which goes towards benefits for those who qualify. If CB is so luxurious, and your job doesn't pay, quit right?

I get that this feels unfair and agree to an extent, but how will the benefit cap help? Do you believe this family would have planned their family in advance with it in place? I think we all know they wouldn't have.

£17 a week covers a baby's nappies and formula tbh. It's not going to reflect a meaningful increase in income.

There should be a push to get longterm out of work adults off welfare and back in work, but pushing for this via child benefit isn't going to be effect while all the time actively causing harm to some of the most vulnerable children.

This is going to sound like an attack and I don't mean it to be. Just a question. Do you have children?

I only discovered on LBC the rate. Hadn’t realised it was so high, tbh.

(Around £3.5k, had assumed far less).

MC people also claim UC. I know 2 women whose husbands left. They're now claiming UC and are in work.

How will the benefit cap help?
It saves the country money. You don’t reward bad behaviour. Having multiple kids you can’t afford is bad behaviour.

I would rather the alternative. I’m an elder Millennial, there will be no state pension when I retire, and if there is it’ll be means tested. Hopefully assisted dying will have made great strides forward. I don’t want to wreck the country so somebody can wipe my arse in a dementia nursing home. I would rather not exist.