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.

In England free meals are only up to year 2 (age 7) after that you pay unless you earn 7.4k a year which is insanely low it used to be under 16k but they quietly changed it

I've spent my life telling my family's story to ever fucker who spouts "I dOnT agReE wiV gIviN BeNiFitS to sInGle MuMs"

No Sorry. That's not right. The SNP have the largest number of seats ( 62 out of 129) - but they don't hold an overall majority. That would be 65 seats. We are talking the Scottish Parliament here, not Westminster

I had three children when our household income was very low. My children are adults now and higher rate tax payers, which is going towards paying for today’s state pensions and other benefits. Throughout our lives we may need support at times and then provide support. Circumstances in life change all the time.

I am so angry I’m paying towards people breeding children they can’t afford.

I’m not unsympathetic to your argument, but I think your choice of the word “breeding” and its animalistic connotations indicates that you see these people as little better than animals. If we can’t have a political discourse that acknowledges shared humanity then it’s a race to the bottom.

Yes, throw them in the workhouse. That’ll learn em

That seems very harsh. I would think teaching a class of well-nourished children, ready to learn, would be infinitely preferable to trying to teach children whose hunger prevents them concentrating.

I’m absolutely all for it, and I can’t believe that we’re actually getting a kind of lefty policy put through. When I say we, I mean those in Scotland.

After this long of Tory rule and the right wing economic way of thinking that rules the UK, this is a pleasant surprise

I’m sure that food bank use has increased and there’s definitely a need for this to be put in place so that children won’t suffer. Given how much money has been sent abroad to Ukraine (more than a billion maybe) and is being spent on things that don’t benefit the everyday person, I think this is a good thing.

edited for typo

I think benefits are great, and the minority of people given any degree of tax payer's money fraudently doesn't put me off supporting the benefits system.

My issue is people who choose not to work, and choose to have babies while not working. I don't think for a minute they're doing it to live luxurious lives with thousands of pounds given to them. I think those babies will live in poor conditions, with parent(s) barely being paid a living 'wage'. I'm fine with my tax money going to real people, not lining the pockets of politicians. I don't want it going to people who choose to bring up children without stable income and provisions.

I doubt people would resent financial support for poor children quite as much if it didn’t have to be given to parents who often haven’t made their choices in the best interests of their children.

Give children free food, clothes, more early years education and childcare, even bedding if needed because of a third child in the family, but there’s no need for it to be given as free cash to parents.

The strategies to break the mold include child in need and two year funding to get children into childcare and give experiences that are shown to improve prospects as adults....but many object to these thinking it benefits the parent and not caring that it improves the child's prospects.

Well, my mother was left high and dry by our stepfather. She was manipulated into giving her life savings to go into a house that she was supposedly also in joint ownership. This didn’t happen. The man (who is a multi millionaire) berated and manipulated my mum so much she had no choice to leave. She was thin, sick and exhausted from the stress. She left, put us on the council list and worked 3 (yes, 3) jobs to support us. She got child benefit. She is a working professional and still couldn’t make ends meet. I’m now a working professional in the nhs, my brother is an inspector in the police. Not everyone who comes from poverty are our spending their measly £20 a week or whatever on Monster energy drinks. By the grace of god go you that you were never in that position of need.

@SwordToFlamethrower

For you as the child that's a tough thing to read that it happened to you but can't you see that she made the choice to have the additional children, yes she chose badly to put it politely when it came to men but she didn't have to agree to have more children.

Like so many people I chose to only have 2 children because I knew i couldn't offer a decent quality of life to any more, it was a conscious decision.

I do think free school meals and vouchers for the holidays should be given to all children on incomes up to decent amount but cash benefits per child is tricky because some people do abuse them and remember, we don't get extra pay from jobs because we've had a kid, we have to budget

Not always true about going through hell to be on a pittance.

I am someone who could be better of on benefits as I am disabled, I'd be entitled to PIP and disabled element of universal credit, adapted housing provided by the council etc. but I don't because I want to earn my money and own my house. So not everyone will choose to be on benefits even if it is "easier".

It's not always "hell" to get benefits and tbh lots of people who know how to, will. I know someone who has a disabled child, claims carers allowance for them, but then has also got her own invisible disability and then her partner claims carers allowance for caring for her. To me, if you need someone to care for you that they can claim carer allowance, then you can't be a carer for someone else surely? This is where the system isn't linked up and a.whole family is claiming benefits that when they miraculously are able to go away on holiday every month it seems the care needs are suddenly not that difficult and no reason why they can't work (child also has a place in special needs school so even part time work).

It's not to bash people who genuinely need it though and I am all for people who unexpectedly need help or those with needs who cannot work.

But something needs to change as it isn't fair that some people are paying more and more in tax in all different ways (in salary, in savings interest inheritance tax etc), and others are not contributing at all.

But if the studies are showing that children are in poverty because the few parents don't prioritise their children, then I don't know how changing the cap will help - those parents probably still won't prioritise their child even with more money.

I don't understand people who get all high horse about "their" taxes. We live in a democracy where the government decides what your taxes get spent on. It's not like you specifically would have more money if the two child benefit cap remained. It doesn't materially affect you in any way. I don't particularly want my taxes to go towards Nigel Farage's salary, but they do.

You mean relative poverty, surely? Absolute poverty doesn't really exist in this country. For a start, define 'inadequate housing.' In this country we think housing is 'inadequate' if children of the opposite sex have to share a bedroom, or there is no central heating. In many developing countries whole families live in one room in a home that is little more than a temporary shack, and that's considered perfectly normal.

We don't have small children living on the streets sleeping under bits of cardboard and scavenging for food like they do in India or parts of Asia and Africa. We don't have children who literally do not have a pair of shoes to their name, or children who are expected to walk several miles each day to collect buckets of water, or in order to access education.

You realise the money from the treasury spend in one place cannot be simultaneously spent in another?

It's up to the government to decide how taxes are spent. That's democracy. If you don't like it you can vote them out at the next election.

The phrase "hard working taxpayers" irritates me, because it implies that lazy people don't have to pay tax, or should have less of say in where the tax they do pay is spent.

And yes, it's utterly bizarre that people carry on like the government sends them a breakdown of where their personal tax and NI contribution was spent, and that they receive a rebate on policy spends they don't agree with.

The more money you pay to poor people to have children, the more children they have. It's absolute lunacy to scrap the 2 child limit. It should be reduced to 1 child if anything.

People really shouldn’t pontificate on Scottish politics when they don’t even know what devolved means.

@Babyname2025, huge congratulations to you. 🎉🍼

This entire thread perfectly encapsulates mumsnet.

Full of people getting a froth on about a matter they demonstrably do not understand.

It does say in the article they have to work with the UK government regarding this actually. I understand what devolved means.

Yeah I worked it out 7.4k is insanely low you'd have to be working less than 15 hours on minimum wage, I mean think about all the people struggling on 10k, 11k etc. I think 16k was a much fairer limit it's intriguing how they snuck the change in without many people noticing