Still feel like voting?

[GordonBennet 10]

and forcibly removing children from their parents and dumping them elsewhere isn't?

 

And it wouldn't solve the problem as the parents who adopt the children will be able to claim exactly the same benefits as the natural parents. I don't think Paul2412 has really thought this one through.

[Paul2412 10]

And it wouldn't solve the problem as the parents who adopt the children will be able to claim exactly the same benefits as the natural parents. I don't think Paul2412 has really thought this one through.

 

They would be vetted to ensure that they can provide for the child... Common sense?

 

I guess your option is do nothing, let it keep happening and brush it under the carpet? Then when the parents of 23 children demand another car, larger house and huge food bill I'll direct them to you who will only be too happy to pay for it.

[Zaytsev 10]

It's the scrounging off the state that I don't like. Benefits should be there for people who can't work for health reasons or who need assistance whilst looking for another job.

 

Like I said, if I was born into a rich family (I wish...) and didn't have to work a day in my life it wouldn't be because my parents decided to have 34 kids and claim benefits, it would be because my parents (or grand parents) worked very hard to accumulate the fortune.

 

 

And then you would be sponging off their hard work.

 

Oh and I'm sure the beneficiaries of the slave trade out of Liverpool are very grateful for the fortunes their ancestors amassed.

Edited April 13, 2010 by Zaytsev

[Zaytsev 10]

I'd like you to quote where I said that I agree with giving bankers millions in bonuses.

 

Bringing up kids the right way? So, in your world a good example is:

 

"Hey kids, see what happens? This country gives me and your dad £42,000 in benefits because we have so many children. See that man over there? He works 60 hours a week and only earns £18,000 a year. What an idiot eh?"

 

Yeah, fine example to set.

 

Yes he would be as that is below the minimum wage.

[Tony 10]

I'll need popcorn for this one.

 

Mm, yes please a large one this time. I'll have a medium Coke too please but hurry up I want to get back to my seat.

[Zaytsev 10]

And your solution is to tear these poor kids away from their loving parents and give them to someone else to adopt, who will probably treat them a lot worse than their natural parents would?

 

Did you know that parents who adopt kids are also entitled to claim benefits?

 

With you all the way on your arguments until that point.

[Zaytsev 10]

Indeed. Using children as cash cows is bordering on abuse.

 

So is taking them to Hillsborough but hey.

[SimpyTimpy 10]

Great, we'll get 14 more of the blood sucking cretins at this rate if she gets what she wants.

 

Disgusting, deplorable, I just don't know the words that sums them up.

 

No child benefits after you've had 2 children, any additional children would be taken on my the parents own expense and if they don't have the funds to support their children then Social Security should be called to look at alternative living arrangements for the children.

 

There is absolutely no place in politics for emotions to severely influence policies. We're in debt, my NI contribution will be rising, I pay a fortune in tax and struggle to pay bills.

 

It's clear that socialism doesn't work in a capitalist society. Benefits should be paid based on contributions. I'd much rather we then created social jobs for all those unemployed who couldn't find work, and only paid them for time spent doing community work.

 

Just common sense policies that need to be taken up, enforced and maintained by a strong goverment.

 

The big question is.. who?!

[GordonBennet 10]

They would be vetted to ensure that they can provide for the child... Common sense?

 

I guess your option is do nothing, let it keep happening and brush it under the carpet? Then when the parents of 23 children demand another car, larger house and huge food bill I'll direct them to you who will only be too happy to pay for it.

 

So in your perfect world no-one will be allowed to have kids unless they work full time, yet if they work full time they won't have the time to devote to actually bringing up their kids properly. Like I say, you haven't really thought this through.

 

Would you like a cloth to wipe that foam from your mouth?

[Zaytsev 10]

Great, we'll get 14 more of the blood sucking cretins at this rate if she gets what she wants.

 

Disgusting, deplorable, I just don't know the words that sums them up.

 

No child benefits after you've had 2 children, any additional children would be taken on my the parents own expense and if they don't have the funds to support their children then Social Security should be called to look at alternative living arrangements for the children.

 

There is absolutely no place in politics for emotions to severely influence policies. We're in debt, my NI contribution will be rising, I pay a fortune in tax and struggle to pay bills.

 

It's clear that socialism doesn't work in a capitalist society. Benefits should be paid based on contributions. I'd much rather we then created social jobs for all those unemployed who couldn't find work, and only paid them for time spent doing community work.

 

Just common sense policies that need to be taken up, enforced and maintained by a strong goverment.

 

The big question is.. who?!

 

I take it you only do plumbing jobs for people with 2 kids.

 

Oh and I hope you put all the cash jobs through your books.

 

Good luck.

Edited April 13, 2010 by Zaytsev

[Aries22 10]

It's not a new idea, my grandparents came from families of 10 to 12 kids, that was the norm, and lots of the kids where brought up in poverty. Surely you would not want to go back to those days. Lots of kids had to share a bedroom with their siberlings somtimes all in the same bed. Shame on you for wanting to go back to the olden days.

[Paul2412 10]

So in your perfect world no-one will be allowed to have kids unless they work full time, yet if they work full time they won't have the time to devote to actually bringing up their kids properly. Like I say, you haven't really thought this through.

 

Would you like a cloth to wipe that foam from your mouth?

 

Why bring a child into the world if you can't look after it?

 

So you're saying that people who work full time are incapable of bringing up children? Children should be brought up by 2 loving parents, one of which works full time and the other can work part time or stay at home to look after the child.

 

Having 2 lazy parents who think everyone owes them a living is hardly a great example to set is it?