Capping benefits at 4 kids?

moomoomama27

Person_one wrote: »

Right, because its that easy, those 2.6 million unemployed people are all just lazy.

Where's the roll eyes smiley gone...

Who said anythign about lazy? Some people make a living from benefits, rather than a safety net, it's used as a lifestyle.

Back to the point, It depends what work you are willing to do! When my youngest was small, in order to stay off benefits I took on 3 jobs, and trained. It can be done. I'm also in an area where jobs are tough to find. But It's not all that difficult to find unskilled work if you persevere.

Oh and I couldn't find the roll eyes smiley, maybe this will do :wall:

moomoomama27

peachyprice wrote: »

Nobody is suggesting that peple do not have the right to found a family, but it's ridiculous that people keep breeding and breeding for financial gain at the expense of the nation.

Totally agree. Something needs to be put in place to avert this. If it's a cap, so be it, if it's a locked claim, so be it. But I don't see why people claiming full benefits think it's a right to reproduce while on benefit. I wonder would they do that if they lived in a country that didn't support them finacially?

catkins

Plans_all_plans wrote: »

I think this may get moved to DT, but I have to agree with cleggie. It wouldn't be fair for someone who had worked hard to support 6 kids then fell on hard times (having to claim benefits) but only got support for 2 or 4 of the kids.

It's a difficult moral issue really though, as it is not the fault of the children that their parents are !!!!less and accidents can happen. I suppose you could say that in theory I agree with capping benefits, but in practice I would find the effect on the children distasteful. However, I don't believe that anyone should get continually bigger houses just for having more children. Maybe the overcrowding would be an incentive to stop.

There is no reason to have more than 2 children (unless of course the second is twins or triplets). The planet and this country are overcrowded. If people care about their childrens' future then we need to stop having so many children.

FATBALLZ

The only way to both prevent people breeding kids they don't love for a living and prevent kids growing up in poverty is compulsary sterilisation for the !!!!wits who keep breeding kids they can't support. It's still a taboo but in a world with a serious overpopulation problem I fully expect it will hit the agenda in my lifetime.

Person_one

moomoomama27 wrote: »

It depends what work you are willing to do! When my youngest was small, in order to stay off benefits I took on 3 jobs, and trained. It can be done. It's not all that difficult to find unskilled work if you persevere.

Oh and I couldn't find the roll eyes smiley, maybe this will do :wall:

Unemployment is the highest its been in 17 years. Go to the employment board and see how many motivated people are struggling to find anything.

300 people applied for my minimum wage low status care job. 300.

clearingout

Slinky wrote: »

Why is it the state's responsibility more than your ex's?

well, if this is a situation anything like mine, the 'state' is failing to get maintenance payments from the ex. whilst it's not the state's responsibility to step in and pay up where the NRP doesn't (and it doesn't work like that anyway), we live in a welfare state where we believe that there is a minimum a parent with children (or a single person, or a disabled person, or an older person...) need to live on and the state gives them that, regardless of whether the parents are facing their responsibilities or not.

Person_one

FATBALLZ wrote: »

The only way to both prevent people breeding kids they don't love for a living and prevent kids growing up in poverty is compulsary sterilisation for the !!!!wits who keep breeding kids they can't support. It's still a taboo but in a world with a serious overpopulation problem I fully expect it will hit the agenda in my lifetime.

Will you volunteer to get the ball rolling (so to speak )

Person_one

moomoomama27 wrote: »

Who said anythign about lazy? Some people make a living from benefits, rather than a safety net, it's used as a lifestyle.

This is true, there are people in my family who have never worked a day and I don't suspect they ever intend to, its not nearly as prevalent as some on here seem to think though.

However, their children deserve better and if society just gives up on them what's to stop them going down the same path? We need to get the next generation feeling invested and involved in society, they need to have a stake and matter, not be abandoned.

They already drew the short straw in the parent lottery.

Lotus-eater

moomoomama27 wrote: »

I think what 'we' should be aiming for (and achieving), is preventing people on benefit reproducing and getting more benefits. It should be a locked claim once you make it, whether that be with 1 child or 10!

How are you going to do it then? Forced abortions? Or kids in poverty, with an even more underclass than what we have now?

moomoomama27

Person_one wrote: »

This is true, there are people in my family who have never worked a day and I don't suspect they ever intend to, its not nearly as prevalent as some on here seem to think though.

However, their children deserve better and if society just gives up on them what's to stop them going down the same path? We need to get the next generation feeling invested and involved in society, they need to have a stake and matter, not be abandoned.

They already drew the short straw in the parent lottery.

I agree with you, but unfortunatley with parent role models who believe in something for nothing, what hope have they got anyway?

I'm not sure what the solution is tbh, because the ones who always miss out will be the children, not their selfish parents, and before anyone jumps n me, I don't mean all parents on benefits, just the JK type

But something does need to be put in place, because currently, people are suing their children as cash cows, and breeding more and more, and getting paid to do so.