Should the tax and benefits system prioritise families? poll discussion

Former_MSE_Lawrence

Poll between 8-15 September 2008:

Should the tax and benefits system prioritise families?

The benefits and tax credits systems provide more support and finances for families or single parents with children rather than singles or couples without

• The arguments for include: Bringing up children is costly and can be difficult. This helps provide better welfare for the nation’s children, to ensure all can start on a stronger footing.

• The arguments against include: People shouldn’t have children unless they can afford them. In an overpopulated planet why should those who choose to not have kids be financially disadvantaged? We all contribute via taxation we should all gain equally.

Excluding the specific child benefit, and looking more at family tax credits and benefits, which of these is closest to your situation and view?

A. My kids live at home: Families should be prioritised - 38% (2508 votes)
B. My kids live at home. Families should NOT be prioritised - 8% (553 votes)
C. Kids have left home: Families should be prioritised - 4% (297 votes)
D. Kids have left home: Families should NOT be prioritised - 8% (551 votes)
E. No children but hope to have one day: Families should be prioritised - 7% (451 votes)
F. No children but hope to have one day: Families should NOT be prioritised - 13% (877 votes)
G. No children & don’t plan on any: Families should be prioritised - 3% (174 votes)
H. No children & don’t plan on any: Families should NOT be prioritised - 19% (1247 votes)

Voting has now closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below. Thanks

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

Mozette

If having children is your priority, then prioritise your spending.
Everyone contributes to, and has the ability to use, eduction, health services, local amenities; that, in my opinion, is enough. Pay for your own choices in life - I do!

[Lights blue touch paper and retreats from the "I have a right to have children" brigade...]

lucadobe

we had 2 kids and worked granted i only did part-time but my husband was the main breadwinner, we never got no help just the child benefit it amazes me how much these families do it

robpw2

i am upset by this poll/thread and the blatant discrimination that it shows.
not all straight couples can have children -no option for that
gay couples both male and female ..

we would end up with people having children for the sake of getting more money and this is not the right reason to have children


the benefits system should be their to support those who need it not because you have a family i didnt force you to have children

dpim

Why can't the main wage earner be paid a decent wage to keep his/her family and therefore cancel the need for tax/working credits and the other parent give the children their time, which is priceless

McSaver

H: What about the neuro-diverse that are very unlikely to actually date anyone during their lifetimes yet alone get a partner and produce offspring!

Not everybody is Neuro-Typical. Im 1 of the several thousand aspies around and would just like to show how I feel.

MSE_Martin

robpw2 wrote: »

i am upset by this poll/thread and the blatant discrimination that it shows.
not all straight couples can have children -no option for that
gay couples both male and female ..

we would end up with people having children for the sake of getting more money and this is not the right reason to have children


the benefits system should be their to support those who need it not because you have a family i didnt force you to have children

Im confused by your problem with the poll. The poll incoporates the option for people who dont and won't have children?

stogiebear

Mozette wrote: »

If having children is your priority, then prioritise your spending. Everyone contributes to, and has the ability to use, eduction, health services, local amenities; that, in my opinion, is enough. Pay for your own choices in life - I do!

:T Amen to that. Very smart post and spot on.

Martin wrote:

I'm confused by your problem with the poll.

Some miserable people are always gonna use their sour minds to use this busy forum for their childlike agendas.

robpw2

MSE_Martin wrote: »

Im confused by your problem with the poll. The poll incoporates the option for people who dont and won't have children?

actually martin i disagree the poll says
A. My kids live at home: Families should be prioritised
B. My kids live at home. Families should NOT be prioritised
C. Kids have left home: Families should be prioritised
D. Kids have left home: Families should NOT be prioritised
E. No children but hope to have one day: Families should be prioritised
F. No children but hope to have one day: Families should NOT be prioritised
G. No children & don’t plan on any: Families should be prioritised
H. No children & don’t plan on any: Families should NOT be prioritised

none of these offer the oppurtunities for cant have children

i personaly cannot have children just because you cant have doesnt mean that you dont plan on having

i can understand the point of the post and i can see why you may think i might be taking it a bit to personaly however being a discussion i am allowed to portray my opinion


no i do not think families should be prioritised and thats because in the modern world life is not all born, get married , have kids, die

robpw2

stogiebear wrote: »

Some miserable people are always gonna use their sour minds to use this busy forum for their childlike agendas.

im not miserable and i do not have childlike agendas i happen to be portraying my opinion .

KimYeovil

But the difficulty is that the attack on and the poverty of the childless poor is so very savage. And nothing is ever suggested to alleviate this.

We have insane inverted modest proposals where the poorest workers in society are being impoverished into malnutrition and ill-health and an early death whilst any family with children (including the wilfully unemployed) are granted an income that is an order of magnitude times greater than the childless.