Angry at scrapping of 2 child limit

[BearBuggy]

I know there are a few families that find themselves in rotten circumstances and this isn’t aimed at them . However I live in an area where having children to continue to receive benefits was the norm and only now the cap is in place has that stopped.

The Scottish government has now announced it will be scrapped. I am so angry I’m paying towards people breeding children they can’t afford. I didn’t vote SNp this time because of this, as did many of my friends. They lost heavily in my area but still seem to not care what the tax payer is saying.

Are women really having children for £20 a week? That’s what it is isn’t it? £20? Or ‘breeding’ as you so disgustingly put it.

No they are not.

They were not having third and subsequent for £288/month UC either.

Next?

Next? 😂 ok there miss sassy pants, don’t be barking orders at me. So the issue isn’t actually child benefit then? It’s what it might entitle you to? How is that child benefits fault? My ex husband and his wife have 3 children and both have brilliant jobs and get child benefit for 2 children I would assume. If it was extended to three children they wouldn’t be entitled to any additional gateway benefits so it’s not really child benefits fault js it.

Child benefit is not capped at 2 children. This thread is about universal credit/child tax credit.
Why waste time typing up paragraphs on something you don't understand

If you really think the people at the bottom are the ones ruining your life & wasting all your taxes, you must be hard of thinking.

Tbh the benefit system is very confusing and I think people who make a mistake is fare enough. ( @Choosenandenough )
I am confused by it all but I just googled what the 2 child cap is and it said it affects
child benefit and
child element of UC or child tax credits.

I know what child benefit is but no idea what the other two are or how much £ they may constitute.

Child tax credit/universal credit are what people on low income get for their children. Child benefit everyone gets and it's only 25 pound a week for the first child and less maybe like 19 for subsequent children but child benefit is not capped at 2 you can have 10 kids and still get all those 19 pounds a week for each one.

Only child tax credit/universal credit is affected by the cap I believe the confusion comes because people just refer to all benefits as "benefits" so when it relates to children it becomes "child's benefits"

Thanks for that.
Your explanation is nice and clear and so much easier to understand than anything online.
I really did think child benefit was capped at 2 children so I’ve learnt something new today.

Part of the confusion is that although you can claim CB for third and subsequent child it counts towards the overall cap on benefits.

It should be reduced to 1 child. But the amount should be equivalent or greater to what you currently get for 2 children. So it is a clear incentive to only have one child, and parents have enough money to give that child what they need.

I don't think this would go down well in the uk at all. I feel so strongly about having an only child that my dh is going for a vasectomy after I give birth even though I suffered from fertility problems. But many people feel so strongly about children having siblings. Dh's sister was so upset about us not having a second child cos she believes kids should have siblings and tbh she is going to try for a second one even though she is struggling with one financially (though I guess she is lucky to be able to live rent free with inlaws). I think it would give people ccp china vibes.

But there wouldn't be any ban on having more than 1 child. And the money would still be enough to pay for 2 children.

I would support the capping of support at two children in order to stop the UK population increasing further.

By the same logic I would also support a significant reduction in both legal and illegal immigration and if anyone wants to retire abroad then happy to encourage them by continuing their UK state pensions etc.

The larger the UK population is the less resources to go round, the greater the strain on infrastructure, education, healthcare etc and the greater the environmental damage.

I strongly disagree with the notion that an ever increasing population of the UK is somehow a good or desirable thing.

The birth rate is falling and it needs to rise. We need more taxpayers.

Definately not in favour of increasing our population.
This is a planet issue not an individual country one.
Hoping we, as a country, can tackle pensions by personal and employer contributions to allow this to occur naturally in a generation.

When I started work there were 20 people of working age for every pensioner, now there are three. The only way to correct that imbalance is to reverse the fall in the birth rate. And it won’t be solved in a generation.

Sorry I should have been clearer- I agree that reducing the population on global basis is desirable and not just UK.

But got to start somewhere!

You can't just keep increasing the population- it's a fallacy that a bigger population is somehow a good thing.

Firstly you are assuming that the "increased proportion" of the population will be net tax contributors and not net beneficiaries.

Secondly a larger proportion places greater costs on infrastructure, healthcare, education- all this needs to be paid for.

Thirdly the most cost effective means of protecting the global environment from CO2 emissions to plastics in the oceans to deforestation is to stop the population increasing and hopefully then reduce it. And the most cost effective means of reducing birth rates is greater female education in developing countries.

Yes there will be a costly transition in order to pay for the pensioners but the alternative of increasing the UK population is way more expensive.

No doubt that in the UK with the baby boom years reaching ( reached ) retirement age things aren’t going to be as great as when they were all working.
The Govn should have ensured compulsory personal pensions and compulsory employer contributions much much earlier than they did.
Hoping new requirements make future retirees life more comfortable

Nevertheless
As a world / planet issue ( we do not live in isolation ) we cannot sustain the current population growth.
At some point Births and deaths have to at least be equal or we run out of resources et all

Its not just about us, the UK, it’s about the planet

Absolutely 👍
I got what you meant

Plenty of other threads to interest you if this one doesn’t or it’s making you sleepy.

I think same people should had no kids if they cannot afford them. I can't afford second child so I not have it

She does not need to look for work due to the age of the youngest child. She does have other things she must do to show she is considering work when youngest child is older.

The population (of the world, and the UK) needs to fall, not to rise.

What year was that? I would be interested in your source. Google says in 1948 there were five working people for every pensioner in the UK, and that it has been decreasing since then, to three currently.