Labour increase benefits bill. AIBU To think what’s the point in working?

[topicalaffair]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15520831/Labours-push-lift-two-child-benefits-cap-hand-25-000-windfalls-thousands-Britains-biggest-jobless-families.html#

‘Official estimates suggest the cost of scrapping the cap will total £13.6 billion over the next five years.

The Tories said families currently affected by the cap are in line to receive windfalls worth an average £25,000 each over that period.

But the biggest families will gain far more. Thousands of families with five children will receive around £10,900 a year while those with six children will get an extra £16,600 a year.
Almost half of the families involved have no one in work.‘

I’m not “making shit up”?

Im trying to understand your point?

Do you think that reason (that isn’t even true) is a reason for a government to keep kids in poverty?

Please take a step back here.

The "poverty" numbers trotted about here are relative poverty measures (60% of median) which mean absolutely bupkis in terms of actual poverty.

The absolute poverty figures (the ones that are actually relevant) tell a very different story.

And for those puzzled over the economics - poverty has a very negative return on investment. It costs A LOT of money for states to have impoverished families in their populations, on so many planes. Health, education, opportunities, and poverty very often lasts for generations.

So whilst the Tories appeased the half wits of the world with “Ooh look how much we are saving” did you ever think k of the financial (and emotional) burden that being poor costs to the economy?

In the recent Scottish budget the benefits bill got bigger, NHS spending also rose not by enough to cover the pay rises and everything else was cut. That’s every single public service cut to fund benefits. People want better public services, and yet public services are getting worse because the behemoth that is the benefits bill is getting ever bigger and consuming the budget of ever more public services.

Is anybody able to give a succinct answer to this vital question above?

Are you sure that handing cash to those in poverty is really helping the lives of these kids in the most efficient way? Because I’m very unconvinced that it’s the answer.

im talking about the NEW poverty the cap created.

Take a guess at how many children were newly impoverished as a direct result of the cap?

And do you think children should be punished for their parent‘s choices?

What about people who became jobless or disabled AFTER the cap? Is their children’s poverty their own fault?

No. It’s not sustainable.

You're getting confused about absolute poverty and relative poverty there.

Below 60% of the median is absolute poverty.
Below 40% of the median is relative poverty.

Does cash help people in poverty?

Yes of course it does. Why wouldn’t it?

What would the answer be then to get kids out of poverty without giving increasing their household income?

I expect there will be a lot more children living in shit situations as people reliant on benefits are incentivised to keep having more kids. Tragic.

You really have no idea of the "economics of poverty"

If you did, you would not have used relative poverty measures. You would have used absolute.

So again, please tell us how you intend to invest in childcare, education, and sure start centers for those kids when that money is being eaten up by extra welfare to the parents (this is an important distinction).

Wow! I didn’t realise that they were torturing the migrants in France. Jeez, that’s bad. I get it now.

It helps lift them out of statistical poverty, but until someone teaches these kids how to avoid the mistakes their parents made then inter generational poverty isn’t going to change. Put money into education and social workers instead. Much better way to spend the money.

Most parents on universal credit are working actually.

And yes these big families are positively rolling in it. Can’t see them for all the piles of money 🙄 you can “expect” that but actual data and experts state otherwise.

Incorrect. And you couldnt even get that right.

Relative is 60% of the median

See here:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07096/

I haven’t used relative poverty measures?

I haven’t even given sources or data. I was told it wasn’t wanted.

Do you think the only people that the government can take from for these things is children? Where the extra money is coming from has already been announced.

Welfare is there help tackle the effects of poverty, it doesn't create it. Parental choice and their financial situation creates poverty. If I have no job or income other than benefits and have a child, I have willing brought my child into poverty, every child I add whilst I am in this situation I am choosing poverty for and also negatively impacting my other children.

It's not rocket science.

And here:

https://www.jrf.org.uk/what-is-poverty

What is “statistical poverty”?

Mistakes their parents made - like in many cases losing their jobs and becoming disabled?

Most parents on UC are working

Education and social work needs a hell of a lot more than money to make changes.

I don't see why it should be more admin than the current system just a different focus. You would be filling in your claim form describing and evidencing the extra costs of your disability.

There are plenty of ways to help lift kids out of poverty rather than putting hundreds of extra pounds into their parents hands for years on end. Labour are making a huge mistake here.

Welfare DOES create poverty when is is taken away and limited. This is a fact, and has been very well researched and documented. As have the statistics for how many children have been pushed into poverty BECAUSE of their cap

So again - are you saying the government shouldn’t help children in poverty because of their parent’s choices?

Such as?

Again, the money is not going to the children.

You seem unable to understand this. It goes to the parents.

When you invest in childcare, free school meals, education and the like, the benefit goes directly to the children.