We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Counting the kids
Comments
-
There will always be cases of step-families. That's just life & many find themselves in this position despite best intentions.
The real problem starts with totally irresponsible people producing children with various partners & who expect others to pay. They know the tax-payer will pick up the tab for their children's upbringing even before the kids are conceived & don't give a damn.
If more absent mothers & fathers were really held to account & had to take responsibility for their children then they may not go on to produce more & more children with various other partners.0 -
I/C of someone on benefits with 2 kids disregarding council tax and LHA is £258 a week that increases to £323 for 3 kids then £388 for 4. Do those extra 2 kids need an extra £130 and that doesn’t include any extra LHA for a bigger house. 1 kid £193 so basically £65 a kid.
I would have though there was plenty of scope for reducing benefits without a blanket £500 cap..0 -
Itismehonest wrote: »If more absent mothers & fathers were really held to account & had to take responsibility for their children"It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0
-
How do you propose to do that?
Some can't be found but many can. If they can't pay for their children with money they could always repay the tax-payer in other ways (community work etc.).
It's the principle of taking responsibility that many refuse to accept & many of those use lack of funds as their excuse to do nothing at all.0 -
And if you cut benefits? More kids growing up in households where people work as "sex workers", and drug dealers, and career housebreakers. What else do you think they're going to do?
Nope, we end up with a higher proportion working and responsible, just as is the case in western nations with a common sense robust approach to welfare. Akin to Australias tough immigration rules which work so much better than our Liberal lilly livered system where the left have this idealistic 6th form liberal notion that we couldn't possibly adopt a grown - up Aussie style system.
Shame, because if we could be adult like the Aussies, things like immigraation and welfare would become respectable and dignified once more. Instead we go in for infantile sound bite politics.0 -
It's purely ideological. It's about votes, that's all.
No it's about social good on several fronts;
+ endemic welfare is not progressive, it snubs out ambition and a sense of be part of a good life
+ endemic lifestyle welfare teaches children that nothing really matters, something will turn up, it's not your problem, just do whatever you want even have as many kids as you want
+ it degrades the welfare system for the truly needy
+ it's the politics of the council of dispair
+ it furthers a mass chav underclass that other nations in general do not have
+ it creates tension and suspiscion as more of us come into contact with the !!!!less themselves buoyed on by the hand wringing do gooders that do not understand human nature/
I saw an example just this weekend - perfectly able sane local Government worker, one of the Dads at the local kids footie club, just taken early retirment at 45 for ill health. It sickens the rest of us, it degrades the whole system. It makes us feel why the heck we bother with all the stress and strain of work when this idle very obese guy just gives up so easily.
Now his kids may follow this lame example.
How the heck did people ever manage to get through the blitz. With wasters like this about we'd have trouble managing it next time round.0 -
Itismehonest wrote: »Some can't be found but many can. If they can't pay for their children with money they could always repay the tax-payer in other ways (community work etc.).
Keep getting your bluff called, and ultimately all you've got is criminalisation and prison. Which is expensive.
If you want to change social attitudes, you have to work at it bottom-up. You'll never do it by legislative fiat. You can't dictate to people how they've got to feel about their lives."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
it snubs out ambition
The main thing that snubs out ambition is a realistic appreciation of your prospects. Because the pyramid props itself up by making damn sure it's always widest at the bottom.
We haven't forgotten when the workers were public enemy number one, before Thatcher turned them into benefit claimants.
Show me a Tory over 50, I'll show you somebody who at one time didn't have a good word to say for binmen, bus drivers or assembly-line workers (let alone miners). Scumbags the lot of them. And now, everybody's supposed to want to be one and be proud of it!"It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
It sickens the rest of us, it degrades the whole system. It makes us feel why the heck we bother with all the stress and strain of work
Would you rather the bosses skipped that stage and went straight to compulsory redundancies?"It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
And if you cut benefits? More kids growing up in households where people work as "sex workers", and drug dealers, and career housebreakers. What else do you think they're going to do?
How about getting a job? Isn't that more likely on balance than starting a drug dealing business or setting up as a prostitute?
You never know; word may get around - working isn't that bad.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards