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.

You didn't respond to my comment saying im sick of seeing these high income fathers spend their entire income in casinos and then the kids are walking around in rags. It's not just poor people who can't manage their money and prioritise their kids. So making benefit claimants pay for every shop isn't going to solve the issue.

It's social services job to investigate negligent parents not assume that every poor parent is wasting their money and make them pay for everything with vouchers

You know how many non benefit claiming parents waste their income on cocaine gambling and alcohol and are actually in debt?

You really need to have a think about that. Look at average rents, childcare costs, average wage, lack of political will to get absent parents to pay maintenance….

some People are very hard of understanding.

Logically, how to vouchers work? Some for food, utilities, transport, clothes, toys, books….? What happens when the washing machine breaks down nd you need cash to buy a new one? Usually, you juggle your budget but as much of your budget is vouchers you’re going to have to juggle them. So you give them to a friend and get them to give you the cash. Only, you will be friend gives you £30 for a £50 voucher. What happens when a loved one is in hospital and you have additional busto find but your transport that just won’t cover that cost. What then? How are you going to manage that or are we suggesting that people benefits shouldn’t have the “luxury”of being able to spend time with loved ones in hospital will be able to replace the washing machine when it breaks down?

People on benefits do not need to be infantilised. Too many people saying being on benefits equals a bit stupid unable to manage a budget or anything else. simple fact of the matter is and some majority of people are able to manage the money that they have whether that be from wages benefits or a mix of the two. And it’s cheap for those pack taxpayers if cash is paid. And let’s face it all posters care about on here is the feelings are the poor taxpayers you apparently get nothing for their money.

if you work in a school, you surely have an understanding of the complexity of all this?

But nobody forced the parents to have children in the first place. And they knew about the costs before making that choice.

Circumstances change. It’s perfectly possible to be in a strong financial position when you decide to have children, then redundancy, illness or death come along and it all goes tits up. That’s why we have a safety net.

So stick to having 1 or maybe 2 children and then more likely to be able to cope if the unforeseen happens. Also, if possible, have insurance or at least some savings in place.

So many couples have 3, 4 or more children and then start bleating when illness, job loss, divorce or whatever happens

So many couples have 3 or 4 children when they can't even afford to have 1 without relying on benefits. I'm sorry but that is just wrong and it needs to be stopped.

I was one of 5.
Dad had 3 businesses whilst mum devoted herself to being mum.
We weren't well off but never went without.
That all changed when mum died aged 31. Overnight dad could no longer work let alone run his 3 businesses and they all collapsed.
Without benefits we would have starved. Nice to know you would have approved of that.

We need people to have children. As a society we’re not having enough.

Yes we really need more people in this overcrowded country. Hospitals can't cope, schools can't cope, GP surgeries can't cope, roads overcrowded etc etc.

Yes I know we have an ageing population but the solution can never ever be to keep adding more and more humans. That is ridiculous

I don't disagree with benefits but I do disagree with 3, 4, 5 or more children. Just why would you have that many unless you are a complete selfish moron?

The birth rate is falling. 🤷‍♀️

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnvj3j27nmro

We need fewer people, not more. What we need is a population where everyone is productive and we have fewer people reliant on state support.

What jobs do you propose the pensioners do?

Pensions are the biggest welfare expense by far.

If we don’t start increasing the birth rate there won’t be any taxpayers at all.

No idea. Can't ask them as they're both dead.
I do know my older sister was an accident and my younger brother the result of a contraception failure.
Because you know, no method of contraception is 100% safe.
But you go on living in your ideal world.

I do think, though, that we keep people alive for far too long, with little to no quality of life. You'd be prosecuted for keeping an animal in the state some humans are forced to live in, and yet, not only do we allow their suffering to continue, we extend it by medicating and operating on them, to keep them alive as long as possible, as opposed to managing their pain and allowing them a peaceful and dignified death.

Yes but there would be more money for pensions if there weren't so many working-age people on benefits.

Good. Far too many on the planet and in the UK.

As another poster said, get the benefit scroungers working. Far too many people not working because they don't want to.

As I said, we cannot keep adding, adding, adding, adding to the population. It just is not going to work.

I just thank God that I am not going to be around for much longer to see the mess this country/the planet are going to be in

Plus look at the AI replacing jobs thread. The dc born today will be entering a different workforce, likely reduced anyway.

I wasn't too concerned about AI until a few weeks ago when I had to start studying it for a course. It is far more advanced than I think most people realise.

A few models have already passed the Turning test. Google experimented with allowing two AI models to communicate with each other. The experiment had to be scrapped when they developed a secret language so the humans couldn't understand them. Someone forecast what would happen if you built an AI whose sole purpose was to buy and collect stamps. After a few years, the AI practically ran the world. It got so good at collecting stamps it bought land to grow trees for the paper, bought factories and delivery firms, etc, because normal production could not keep up with the rate it was buying and selling them.

I don't think AI is going to take over the world a la Terminator (although I do think it is more possible than I did a few weeks ago), but I honestly believe it will be doing 90% of traditional job roles within the next decade.

True, but at some point we do have to look at SOME parents taking a bit more responsibility.

This article says that about a quarter of children in Brighton are eligible for free school meals. That’s a lot of families in no or minimal employment. (And there are jobs in the area) it isn’t sustainable. But I don’t know what the answer is, as it’s not the kids’ fault.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-68082138

I’m not sure of the percentage but we need to be careful about children born today just having so few jobs to do when they get older.

It’s likely starting to impact some graduates on a small basis already. But that’s not much compared with 18 or so years’ time.

90% was a guess, but I cannot think of any job that, when combined with advanced robotics, which is also coming along in leaps and bounds, could not be replaced by AI and machines.

I'm sure there are such jobs, but I can't think of any.