IDS suggestion if capping child related benefits at two children.

[JakeBullet]

Way do other people think about this?

I am assuming it means that new claimants after a set date IF it ever comes to fruition.

I am broadly in favour of this...not because I don't agree with child related benefits, I am receipt of them myself but because we appear to have a dwindling pot.

On the other hand IDS makes the mistake of thinking that everyone who claims for more than two children has always been a welfare recipient which is not the case....many families have gone under with the current recession and have children they thought they had planned for financially.

Or is this more propaganda?

I know we have had a lot of these threads too so sorry for starting another one but was interested to see there was not a thread about it.

Well said Couthymow in both your posts. It is clear to see why her posts are making you angry, but to be honest I don't think it's much use wasting your emotional energy on this woman, who I suspect is enjoying causing a rumpus on this thread. I did suggest that we ignored her posts and carried on the debate, but it's difficult isn't it when she comes out with such inflammatory comments.

I ws very moved by your post about your 4 children and the plans that they have for themselves and will be supported by their brilliant mother. It is heart warming stuff. NNx

Nana Nina if that is directed at me then it's because you, not me are in the real world.

Sorry edited to add, not in the real world.

They haven't been looked for very hard if nobody can find them, my own grandmother had 14 children, my grandparents didn't work, 11 of their 14 children don't work ( they are my aunts and uncles) most of their children don't work ( my cousins), there you go 3 generations, some of my cousins now have working age children who also show no sign of getting a job.

BUT Not4Turning you haven't responded to any of the issues that I have raised in my post - would you like me to give them in a list to make it easier for you. Here's another question - "exactly which teenager are you talking about here as you use the term your teenager, so presumably not one of your wonderfully successful offspring, but the teenager of someone on benefit? Time to get tough with our kids you say - again which kids are you actually talking about here.

It is abundantly clear that you have no sympathy but I think after all the anger you have stirred up in this debate by your inflammatory comments that you should at least respond to issues that are put to you. Now I wonder why you don't - could it be that you don't have the answers - come on, don't hold back and have a go at responding to the serious issues that I have raised.

Have you no other response to Couthymow's long post about the aspirations that her 4 children have, other than to tell me I am not in the real world. Shame on you - all we get from you is sound bites. I have come to the conclusion that you do not have what is required to enter into a debate, which entails responding to the issues raised by people who disagree with you.

nancy75 Yes I am very aware that there is a hardcore of people who will not work (even when it is avilable) and this has always been the case, and passes down the generations as you describe. However these people are in the minority and it is frustrating for others working in low paid jobs to see others staying at home. OK so this govt will "route out" these people and that could be a good thing. However I doubt it will lead them to find work as there are so few jobs available. The other thing is that so many people like to point out this hardcore of society who are claiming benefits etc., when they have no notion of the millions of pounds paid to shareholders, huge bonuses for bankers, half of the cabinet are millionaires etc etc. They don't deserve this huge wealth, so why not start at the top end, rather than the bottom.

I agree with Nannanina. Couthy you are doing a fab job. its fab that your children are doing so well. Your DDS cakes sound mouthwatering [hsmile]

Oh, she is planning her menu for her first CA. For her savoury dish, she us making lamb shish, pepper and onion kebabs with a tzatziki dip. For her sweet she is making raspberry cream eclairs with white chocolate topping, drizzled with milk chocolate.

Can't wait to try them!

That all sounds like heaven on a plate. [henvy]

One thing that shocked me was the fact that for a class of Y10's, doing a Catering GCSE, making a roux based sauce like a Béchamel or a velouté was classed as a B-A* skill.

Does nobody teach their DC's to cook any more? My 10yo can make a Béchamel and a velouté sauce. And I failed Home Ec.

I don't mind debating with people but every day at the moment someone says I have said something which is not something I said!

I have never said the children of benefit claimants will never work. I have said that on average children of families like mine have children who make a bigger contribution in terms of tax and are more likely to work nad that on average the children of particularly 3rd generation benefits claimants are less likely to work. Therefore you want a system which favours the hard working successful women having a lot of children and not the poor on benefits. That is what I said. I never said the chidlren of those on benefits never get anywhere. Some do. As for what my mid 20s daughters pay in tax I don't have an exact figures they earn about £44k - £63k I think from memory. So they are paying quite a bit of tax and have no student debt. They are paying back into a system from which they will probably not take much out - they never had a state school place etc. We are a cheap family for the state to run and we are in the top 1% of contributors who pay a huge amount of benefits claimants' costs. Yet we are never lauded or praised or appreciated.

On the Not4 turning point about hard working immigrants it depends where you live in the country. Last time we advertised for help here we had masses of people replying. There are certainly not enough cleaning jobs around here for all the people who want work. We had over 200 people queuing outside a new store for a chance to give in CVs for work. It is hard time as it was in the 1930s. Markets go in cycles.

It is certainly important for all of us to ensure our children acquire a hard work ethic and are prepared to work even for nothing if that is necessary to get the start you need. Many parents of all classes do manage to achieve that. I suspect simple things like ensuring chidlren do more sport (and that can mean running round the block it doesn't need an iota of expense) helps. Many teenagers are excited by the thought of travel. The irish are travelling again to get work due to the recession there which is much worse than here and plenty of young English people are seeking jobs abroad. That is what happens in recessions.

on average the children of particularly 3rd generation benefits claimants are less likely to work.

I should imagine that imaginary children of non-existent families are extremely unlikely to work.

They are only non existent if there are no families in that category. There are some. There is a core number where the teenage chidlren don't work, the parents never did and their parents did not. Also even if you take the children of the working poor they tend to pay less tax than the children of the wealthy so we need to encourage the wealthy to have a lot of children but not the poor if we want perversely to have a lot of money from tax to pay benefits to the poor.

The vast majority of people on jobseeker's allowance are back working within a year and only 4% have more than two children. Targeting these "skivers", then, IDS would only claw back a few hundred million,

FROM HERE: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/28/barbara-ellen-iain-duncan-smith-benefits

I can't get worked up about the fact that such a small proportion of claimants have more than two kids. The extreme examples of scroungers with 10 kids, so beloved of certain papers, are seriously distorting public perceptions on this issue.

And making kid suffer for the sake of a few million is fucking evil.

We are a cheap family for the state to run and we are in the top 1% of contributors who pay a huge amount of benefits claimants' costs. Yet we are never lauded or praised or appreciated.

Oh thats right Xenia i remember now. I remember you saying on a previous thread how Cameron should invite you and high end earners like you to a big reception in Downing Street to thank you (lick your arse) for all the tax you pay.
What you after an OBE or some other award. Well maybe they will. After all Savile got plenty of awards and "appreciation" which already proves they have questionable and seriously skewed judgement.
Actually Xenia he should invite you.
Because from what ive heard about some of the people who walk through the doors of 10 Downing Street i think youd be right at home.

Oh let's just ignore her folks - nothing she says makes a lot of sense and yes Xenia we know your wonderful children were privately educated and so look at all that money you saved from the state! WOW you should have got a reward for that. How lovely that they are earning between £43 and £65K and again how wonderful that they are paying a lot in tax therfore helping the deficit immensely - coo another reward should be on it's way to you.

Yes I am being sarcastic and I only resort to this when I feel particularly annoyed with someone who posts insulting comments to people who are on benefits and makes assertions about their children - and then claims not to have done so.

I would hoever still like a response to my very simple question about which teenagers you were referring to (obviously not yours) so presumably those whose parents are on benefits? and who were you referring to when you talk of our children. It's quite simple. Go on give it a go and let's have a straightforward answer rather than some waffle...............

Some wonderful posts on here; especially from ReallyTired, FrothyOM, NanaNina and CouthyMow. But dreadful, insulting and ignorant ones from Xenia, as usual . Isn't it time she realised that "poor" doesn't mean "stupid" or "useless"? I'm sitting here with my incomparably clever, feisty, beautiful baby DD on my knee and I'm furious that Xenia seems to think she should never have been born. Well tough - she's here and I think she's the best baby in the world. It's a pity Mumsnet doesn't have a "hide poster" button.

What was the question about which teenagers?

And yes I agree most on JSA are claiming it only for a year but there is a core lot of benefits claimants who have been on benefits for years and can be second generation claimants.
I think there are 400,000 long term unemployed

"The number of long-term unemployed has more than doubled since the financial crisis struck in 2008, leaving tens of thousands of people with little chance of ever working again, according to the Institute of Public Policy Research.

More than 400,000 people have been unemployed for over two years ? the highest number since 1997. Being out of work for two years or more severely curtails someone's chances of getting another job, according to a new report by the think tank to be published later this week. People lose their skills, fall behind in training and lose their confidence if they are out of work for too long, making them much less attractive to new employers."

Xenia takes it too far of course. However, it always surprised me how the tax credit system worked. If you earn below a certain level you got extra money per child but those above did not.
Surely it should be the same for everyone?
No axe to grin as we will come January not receive any child related benefits.

Xenia is a good example of the lack of compassion in society today. It is this lack of compassion that feeds into society giving out messages that people who arent paying loads of tax arent worth anything.
This poisons society greatly.
Its why there hasnt been a massive public outcry over the soft sentences handed out to the ex care workers of Winterbourne View.
Some of them have got community service some of which could be unpaid care work (head desk)
Workfare is also unpaid community service in some cases. So an unemployed person is getting the same punishment (simply for being unemployed) as an abusive care worker. You couldnt make it up.
And because of attitudes like Xenias which seep into society. That you are not worth anything if you are not earning. Is why society sees disabled adults living in a care home as not worth anything.
Its a disgusting uncaring attitude.

Agree with every word Darkesteyes don't want to hi jack the thread but I was appalled at the light sentences those truly cruel peopl got for abusing young people with learning disabilities. I don't like revenge usually but I hope they suffer in prison as I'm sure they will.

We are far too passive as a nation aren't we. We see the Greeks and Italians out on the streets with such passion in them and we "tut" and don't do anything, other than vote for the right person at the next General Election.

As for Xenia I think she is Theresa May!!

Xenia's figures clearly demonstrate that unemployment rises during Tory governments. I imagine that is not the argument she is attempting to make; I read her statistics as proof that the Labour government did an excellent job of getting people into work while the Tories still haven't got a clue about running the economy .

Nana my DM is Italian. Xenia wouldnt last 5 mins in an Italian family with her lack of compassion especially her lack of compassion towards children and young people.
My mum works a low paid job. She is still working at the age of 76.
Last year she gave a weeks wages to Children in Need.
I dont always get on with my mother due to her mysogynistic attitude towards certain things. But when it comes to compassion for children she knocks people like Xenia out of the park.

Have just read an interesting article on this topic by Tanya Gold (Guardian 27.10.12) She says:

" The Joseph Rowntree Foundation says the annual cost to the UK's GDP of Child poverty is £25bn, whilst limiting child benefit to 2 kids will save £200m. If this sounds like madness, it is.
This govt has always struggled to define the enemy as it holds hands with billionaires and tax exiles. Better to blame new born babies and the £13.40 a week. The DWP puts the number of children currently in poverty as 27% or 3.6 million children, two-third of them living in working families. BY 2020 it will be 4.2 million.

Fewer than 5% of people on JSA or Income Support have more than 3 children and 65% have no children at all but this will not be mentioned in the coming fight. Expect photos of families with 11 children in state funded mansions to grace the pages of the Daily Mail they will be told to grin for the cameras and addicts will be mentioned (4% of the poor) as though everyone havign a third child is sucking down crack all day. As for Osborne's cap of £26,000 per year in benefits is equally misleading - only 1% of claimants get this amount , but they will be found and photographed to further undermine the ideal of the welfare state. This is politics by tabloid."

Obviously can't relay the whole article but I think you will get the sense of it. I am particularly interested in the notion of "finding" the family with 11 children and splash it over the red tops and the DM. The trouble is it works and people believe it because it's in the paper. This sets up a reaction and sets "dog aganist dog" which of course is exactly what the govt want. I have tried hard to disabuse my nephew of his view of "scroungers" but to no avail. He tells me of "that family" 3 miles away and they have been given a big house, a TV and a car. These fantasies permeate through time and time again. Is there no hope of the truth coming out?