George Osborne....Limit amount of children for benefits

BobQ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

George Osborne has stated he is looking at limiting the number of children that will attract benefits, as they announce they are determined to wipe £10bn off the benefits bill.

.

Wonderful ! Gideon moralises and preaches and then decides a policy of punishing the children for the deeds of the parents. How jolly Christian of him. I am not a believer but anyone who visits poverty on children is capable of anything.

PaulF81

Who is going to pay for it then? If thee is no money for this 10 billion, what is the alternative?

mazza111

PaulF81 wrote: »

Who is going to pay for it then? If thee is no money for this 10 billion, what is the alternative?

How about means testing pensioners for their heating allowance so it's only the worse off that get it? Don't know how much it would save but why should the well off pensioners still get their heating allowance/tv license/bus pass. I don't have all the answers, but I find it hard to swallow that the well off are getting freebies and the poorest in society are made to suffer.

Don't get me wrong, I know pensioners have paid tax all their lives and should be comfortable. But some pensioners are more than comfortable. Do they really need heating allowance and such?

I don't have all the answers, and yes I agree that there should be some sort of cap on families to stop the ones playing the system to get more money. But I don't think forcing the under 25s into homelessness is a smart move.

PaulF81

Means testing would cost more in administration fees than it would save. Pointless.

mazza111

PaulF81 wrote: »

Means testing would cost more in administration fees than it would save. Pointless.

You have proof of that? Why not give it to all pensioners who get pension credit. Simples. The means tested part has already been done then.

Percy1983

mazza111 wrote: »

You have proof of that? Why not give it to all pensioners who get pension credit. Simples. The means tested part has already been done then.

How about means testing child benefit, how much of it gets spent on fags, cider, sky tv and iphones rather than children.

ukcarper

BobQ wrote: »

Wonderful ! Gideon moralises and preaches and then decides a policy of punishing the children for the deeds of the parents. How jolly Christian of him. I am not a believer but anyone who visits poverty on children is capable of anything.

Do you think that every additional child after the first needs £66 to feed etc.

PaulF81

Originally Posted by BobQ
Wonderful ! Gideon moralises and preaches and then decides a policy of punishing the children for the deeds of the parents. How jolly Christian of him. I am not a believer but anyone who visits poverty on children is capable of anything.

Those children are a lost cause anyway.

Percy1983

ukcarper wrote: »

Do you think that every additional child after the first needs £66 to feed etc.

I do remember as a second child many clothes being passed down as well as playing with many already existing toys etc.

I would imagine a second child can cost less but will admit I don't have children so can't be 100% sure on this.

RJP33

angrypirate wrote: »

If you want lots of kids, you should fund them yourself - not the taxpayer.

Agree with this, it's not the government's job to pay for your kids if you choose to have them while not working, it's yours.

adding more kids into low income families just adds to the number of kids in poverty!

Spot on.