Help? Are benefits being capped at 3 children?

Welshwoofs

gregbythesea wrote: »

We all have a responsibility towards the welfare of children, no matter how many a woman has.

I have no responsibility towards anyone else's children. You breed 'em, you deal with 'em.

Mojisola

john539 wrote: »

Do you want the government checking up on every child every week or month to check if they are ok ?

Why would they do that?

Metranil_Vavin

Dunroamin wrote: »

Don't be silly, Andy, that's the way most people have always decided whether or not to have children. Having children in the expectation that the government would support them is a comparatively recent development.

Is Andy back again?

How is Pauline? :rotfl:

john539

Mojisola wrote: »

Why would they do that?

What do you think the money is for ?

System

john539 wrote: »

Should children pay price of choices & mistakes made by their parents ? :think: :whistle:

Should the taxpayer pay that price though?

Mojisola

john539 wrote: »

Do you want the government checking up on every child every week or month to check if they are ok ?

Mojisola wrote: »

Why would they do that?

john539 wrote: »

What do you think the money is for ?

Still don't understand. People fill in the forms when they claim a benefit - they don't get checked up all the time.

Welshwoofs

The answer is to take financial incentives away from breeding and instead give financial incentives NOT to breed. It's not just a benefits and economic issue; the birth rate is a global issue....we (our species) cannot keep increasing at the rate we are.

Even on a national economics level, it benefits nobody for the bottom of the socio-economic pyramid to breed the most. In days of yore society could get away with the peasant class breeding a lot because child mortality was through the roof and there was an awful lot of unskilled manual work for those that made it to adulthood. Now there isn't a lot of unskilled manual labour and modern medicine ensures that almost everyone makes it to adulthood. So what happens when a trend continues indefinately whereby the most educated/prosperous have the least children whilst the least educated/least prosperous have the most? To me the answer is obvious; an ever-shrinking number of tax-payers fund an ever-increasing number of 'economically inactive' and something, somewhere then has to give.

mikey_bach

mumcoll wrote: »

I'm aware of someone who has 6 children by several fathers. She pays £5 a week for her 4 bed property. She also has a partner who works. She openly boasts about 'loving her free time' and 'happy days'. It makes me sick.:mad:

Yes I have reported her (twice) but seems nothing has been done (yet?)

My son and his wife can't afford to have children yet as neither of them have permanent jobs. They are on temporary contracts. Grrrrrrrrrr!:(

If he his not livng with her fulltime, then it will be hard to prove.
But am sure number seven will be on the way soon to keep the I.S claim open for at least the next five years....

I feel sorry for the children, they know no different and will go on to do the same.......
Just wish there was some hope for them to break the cycle..