Just been on a course about new benefit system

[buggyRunner]

Christ it's a big shake up.

I say this as someone who won't be personally affected- it is harsh.

Basically if you claim any benefits other than child benefit you're probably going to have a loss.

lol some comments are just plain stupid. I was mearly pointing out there is not much point fretting about it. Whats going to happen will happen sitting on the internet and moaning is not going to change it.

If you want to know what is changing look it up :)

"Whats going to happen will happen sitting on the internet and moaning is not going to change it."

Yeah, I mean, phone hacking. No one moaning on the internet could change that, could they?

And after all, rules are made by god, aren't they? No connection to that big building in London and all those MP people - what are they for, anyway?

But I agree, one doesn't have to limit one's activism to the internet. And I don't.

Moaning on the internet does change things, sunshine!
You can petition, tweet, lobby your MP and other representatives, contact the media.

They work for us.

^^ I don't think sunshine wants the proles to realise that, garlic. I have a feeling she likes us docile...

I'm relieved that teh question of unlimited CB and TC for unlimitesd number sof children is finally being addressed.

Up to three children sounds fair to me.

It is NOT fair to expect tax payers, many of whom limit their family size according to income, to bankroll those who pay littl eor no tax at all to have as many children as they fancy.

As for everything else, I agree 100% with Niceguy!

I do agree on that Jupiter and the idea of one benefit instead of loads. Just wish it was more thought out and not being used to shaft people.

What about those who have more than three children who were working when they had those children but later fall on hard times?

And is it ever right to punish children for the 'sins' of their parents? Because who do you think will suffer most in households where benefits are reduced?

Easy -you pay for all children already in existance but not for any born more than a year, say after you implement the changes.

What a lovely idea Jupiter.

How much extra funding will the Social services, adoption departments, foster carers etc get then?

Because those services will get even more stretched aw a result won't they?

Not to mention the NHS who will be dealing with more sick children due to bad diets as parents won't be able to afford decent food.

But then I guess the gov. Can pump more money into healthy eating schemes and parenting classes thus laying the blame completely at the parents feet...

Kipper. I'll just get me sackcloth coat ...

than the current system. But given the majority automatically assume anything the Tories do must be bad, i accept I am possibly in the minority

Why dont you ask the families of the 32 people who have died after being found fit for work, whether they think the Tories are bad.
You could ask these recipients themselves IF THEY WERNT DEAD!

charlie what part of my post did you not read?

Children already here will continue to receive benefit, only unborn children will not.

Every child is a choice. No one, NO ONE has to go ahead with having a child if they don't want to or can't afford to.

The left always get so hysterical in these discussions with talk of starving and workhouses and orphanages. Beacsue, of course, actually limiting your family to the number of mouths you can actually feed ( even at the taxpayers expense) is such a radical and rightwing idea, isn't it? .

Jupiter - its very easy to say "stop having children at three"

Do you honestly think that will stop accidents or children born from assault or whatever? Do you honestly think its fair to say " nope, we won't support that fourth child. We warned you!"

And suppose I have two children and decide to have a third. But whoops, my DH has been made redundant. And Oh Dear, it's triplets! Then what? I know it's not a very likely scenario but it will happen.

And once that year is up, when people are supposed to be used to the new rules, are you saying its ok then to stop supporting fourth and subsequent children regardless of when they were born?

I don't think it's a case of lefts being hysterical.

I honestly think this policy would impact on the services I mentioned. And I'm genuinely interested in how they would be supported.

The fact is, some families will go onto have more children. Those families will then be plunged further into poverty won't they? You can't say it won't happen because it shouldn't.

but most people already limit their family size already to fit what they can afford. isnt this just levelling the playing field?

I agree that people need to start living within their means.

I just don't think it's going to happen like this. And children will suffer as a result.

I don't know how to fix it or break the cycle but putting more children into poverty will make it worse. It will put more strain on allready stretched services. And it's not in any way going to be fair us it?

CharlieUniformNovemberTango

I agree that people need to start living within their means.

I just don't think it's going to happen like this. And children will suffer as a result.

There is no 'nice' solution here. There's no magic spell that can stop bad things happening, and no amount of money either.

I don't know how to fix it or break the cycle but putting more children into poverty will make it worse. It will put more strain on allready stretched services. And it's not in any way going to be fair us it?

What's fair? That people who live within their means have to pay for people who don't? OH and I are in our mid/late 30s, with a single baby on the way. That's all we can afford and we've scrimped and saved. Could've had six, seven kids, free housing, free education, free healthcare, and be on grandkids by now if we'd played the system, and never worked a day.

And the Left sit around and tell me it's "unfair" to limit benefits. I spit on their "fairness".

The people who slam DLA as being too easy to claim have (99.99% of the time) never had to claim it themselves.

They are also normally mixing it up with IB/ESA

"I'm sure we all know people who have questionable claims. There simply is a MASSIVE amount of people who receive a lot of benefits and as a result have little incentive to better themselves or work. In fact often they find themselves trapped."
niceguy
terrible isn't it that the state has to help people who are disabled. often unable to work due to being disabled.
terrible that when you are too disabled to work you are trapped. yes trapped by your disability.
I assume you know nothing about what you are talking about.

Agree Vagaceratops.

...And Metallima!

Dahlen - "And is it ever right to punish children for the 'sins' of their parents? Because who do you think will suffer most in households where benefits are reduced?"

Funny, nobody seems to have a problem with child benefits being removed from the children of middle class or wealthy families. Why should they be punished because their parents have worked hard and got a good job?

Ha ha ha ha ha! Good one Orwellian!

Hang on...you weren't serious were you?

flatpack those things aren't free - we already paid for them. Orwellian I don't support taking universal benefits from middle classes - means test what we pay in, tax, not what we take out.

Bob Diamond didn't take his £20 million, poor sod only got £2 million

What's fair? That people who live within their means have to pay for people who don't?

I imagine you think it quite fair that you received your education, your mother got CB, you got your medical & dental treatment, the nice policeman brought you home and so on while I was paying for it? While you were at school I was paying around £20,000 a year in tax + NI, using virtually no public services at all. I never resented it; thought I was contributing to a kitty system that pays up according to need.

Funny how you don't see it the same way now you're paying and I'm claiming.