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.
📨 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!
MSE News: MPs vote to limit benefit rises to 1%
Comments
-
Having children you know you cannot support is irresponsible in my view.
How much should one be earning to be able to support one child, two children, three children etc?
The state realise that wages have stagnated so much whilst prices have risen that, even where two parents are working full time, income is not enough to support a family, and therefore offer financial support.0 -
How much should one be earning to be able to support one child, two children, three children etc?
The state realise that wages have stagnated so much whilst prices have risen that, even where two parents are working full time, income is not enough to support a family, and therefore offer financial support.
If you cannot work that out, you should not be having children.0 -
Exactly the same can be said for those who are, or become at some time disabled could it not?The choices are very limited around getting old, in most cases it cannot be avoided. Having children you know you cannot support is irresponsible in my view.
The only difference is, you have a good idea of when you are going to 'get old', you have absolutely no idea of when you will become disabled.[SIZE=-1]To equate judgement and wisdom with occupation is at best . . . insulting.
[/SIZE]0 -
The choices are very limited around getting old, in most cases it cannot be avoided. Having children you know you cannot support is irresponsible in my view.
I have provided for my retirement, by the time I retire in 2037 the state pension may well not exist, quite possibly neither will the NHS, therefore I have medical insurance. Using your argument regarding in work benefits - that people should pay for themselves with zero support, why should we pay pensions, for health care etc, just the basics in order to exist, no more. Pretty picture isn't it?
Getting old without making provision for your retirement years is irresponsible, why should my taxes fund people who were too idle/spending on fripperies during their working lives? See how stupid that sounds? That's how stupid you sound when you spout off about the welfare state.Love many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
The choices are very limited around getting old, in most cases it cannot be avoided.
The same could be said for single motherhood, unless you are ignorant and arrogant enough to assume that the majority of single mothers make the choice to be single......most single mothers chose to have children they are incapable of supporting.
Oh...0 -
The same could be said for single motherhood, unless you are ignorant and arrogant enough to assume that the majority of single mothers make the choice to be single...
What about all the ones who keep popping out children while claiming to be single..........there are a lot. Either they are lying about being single in order to maximise their benefits, or continue to have children......to maximise their benefits.0 -
What about all the ones who keep popping out children while claiming to be single..........there are a lot. Either they are lying about being single in order to maximise their benefits, or continue to have children......to maximise their benefits.
It's ok, we all understand, women must pay. The blokes that shag and run must be left to live their lives in peace, the women are the reason the UK is broke, they should have all benefits removed and be publicly flogged, their children must go to the workhouse.
Dear god, the reason benefits are paid is so that the children do not go without, and we need the young to keep on popping out babies, to support the older generation, of whom there are too many to support! Who pays for their pensions?Love many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
I heard that anyone averaging over £27k for their working life would tend to break even if they only have one child between two adults. If that is true it would suggest around 40% of the population.
I read that that the average person pays around £286,311 in income and council taxes per lifetime. State pension and housing benefit alone exceeds that figure over the average retirement of around 25 years.0 -
I haven't mentioned them, we were discussing your bigotted views on the disabled.
So I'm a bigot because you believe that every claim for DLA is genuine and everyone has additional costs that are the same or more that what the DLA and possibly Tax Credits pays extra. Do you also believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy?
If you had bothered to look at my past posts you would see I have no problem limiting benefits to those who have more children than they can afford.
Something we agree on then.
What I do have a problem with is that EVERY benefit claimant is tarnished by Biggots such as yourself who claim they shouldn't be allowed this that or the other.
Not at all - I have said in previous posts that I don't believe single people who receive JSA receive too much.......it is the huge Child Tax and disability payments that I believe are far too high.
I worked for 16 years before I was forced to claim DLA as without it I would have had to finish work altogether.
I was made redundant from a job which paid around £30k inc overtime and took the first job I could get which had a salary of £12k. I still had bills from when I had the other job and tax credits was the only way we could continue to live in OUR house and not move to a rented house where not only would we have got the tax credits we were getting but would also have been eligible for LHA and CTB.
Biggots like you assume everyone is on the take, when in fact they are not. A small MINORITY are, and even with UC and PIP that will never be stopped.
I certainly don't believe everyone is "on the take", but with billions lost to fraud, there is certainly a lot. Yes the majority are probably claiming what they are entitled to, but the problem is that in a lot of cases, what they are entitled to is far too much.
But to hit those who are entitled, who follow the rules, who have paid and continue to pay their dues is wrong, especially when for every 1 person you remove from benefit who is playing the system, you also remove 20 more who should be getting it.
In regards to paying their dues......the vast majority of benefit claimants will receive more in benefits than they ever pay into the system through direct taxation.
Please take off your rose tinted glasses and realise I'm not being a bigot, I'm simply living in the real world.
I don't vote Tory, or read the Daily Mail........I administer benefits and see on a day to day basis what actually goes on.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards