Government says problem families 'have too many children'

[pottedplant]

There is no rational reason why this shouldn't be introduced.

 

Only that it would cost a huge amount to administer.

 

It would actually create more poverty - as vouchers would be sold at a lesser value to enable people to actually be able to shop at the local shop for instance.

[pottedplant]

Tough love. its the future...

 

Until maybe it happens to you?

[tinfoilhat]

And where could these food and clothing vouchers be "spent"? in just the fat cat companies?

 

That's going to get the economy moving isn't it.

 

Not strictly true. You can/could exchange milk tokens for milk at anywhere that sold milk if memory serves. But are you wanting the unemployed to kick start local economies (which they can do now) or are you wanting them to have the tools to look after themselves and family and stop the problem ones blowing it on fags and White lightning ? Now you might get the odd one who searches out the organic farm shop but most people will pick a supermarket and shop there. As long as they don't fleece us what's the problem ?

[MrSmith]

But when the families split they would then be the first two children for each one parent family.

 

Even if you don't pay any child benefit that is two lots of housing beneft you have just created.

 

If I had four children with my partner and we split up, we would only get support for the oldest two children and would never get support for the youngest two children under a two child rule. Because there would be no way of getting extra money for the two youngest children there would be little point in splitting in an attempt to get extra money.

[pottedplant]

If I had four children with my partner and we split up, we would only get support for the oldest two children and would never get support for the youngest two children under a two child rule. Because there would be no way of getting extra money for the two youngest children there would be little point in splitting in an attempt to get extra money.

 

But even if that were the case there would still be two sets of rent to pay for - which will cost more than the benefit you are saving .

 

Plus - if the couple are over 25 their benefit will be calculated as single - so adding £30 per week on:

 

Over 25 £71.00

Couples, civil partnerships £111.45

[MrSmith]

But even if that were the case there would still be two sets of rent to pay for - which will cost more than the benefit you are saving .

 

Plus - if the couple are over 25 their benefit will be calculated as single - so adding £30 per week on:

 

Over 25 £71.00

Couples, civil partnerships £111.45

 

Why would there be two sets of rent to pay?

Your original scenario was for them to split up and get paid for two kids each, as they won’t get money for two kids each and will only get money for the oldest two kids there would now be no reason to split up. They will be better off financially staying together.

[missflirtuk]

I have one DD who has just turned 4 and I cannot afford another as I work part time and I know that if I was still on benefits I would get paid time and time again for each child I had. The whole breeding for benefits really gets me angry especially when they are so open about it and show no shame.

[Digsy]

Why would there be two sets of rent to pay?

Your original scenario was for them to split up and get paid for two kids each, as they won’t get money for two kids each and will only get money for the oldest two kids there would now be no reason to split up. They will be better off financially staying together.

 

Because the poverty created would force them into claiming JSA separately which also comes with, HB, CTC separately.

 

The food stamp suggestion could work, but it would not pay for such things as t.v. license, phone/broadband, gas, electric, rent.

 

These have been tried and tested, there is already a milk token economy now where people trade them for fags/booze/drugs.

[tinfoilhat]

Because the poverty created would force them into claiming JSA separately which also comes with, HB, CTC separately.

 

The food stamp suggestion could work, but it would not pay for such things as t.v. license, phone/broadband, gas, electric, rent.

 

These have been tried and tested, there is already a milk token economy now where people trade them for fags/booze/drugs.

 

Any system is open to abuse, if they don't trade drugs/alcohol for milk/food tokens they'll trade drugs/alcohol for stolen property or sex. But it would be a start and I think improve the lives of alot of kids.

[MrSmith]

Because the poverty created would force them into claiming JSA separately which also comes with, HB, CTC separately.

 

The food stamp suggestion could work, but it would not pay for such things as t.v. license, phone/broadband, gas, electric, rent.

 

These have been tried and tested, there is already a milk token economy now where people trade them for fags/booze/drugs.

 

HB doesn't pay the full cost of running a house; CTC can only be given to the first two children under the two child rule, that leaves JSA which they would get by even staying together. So staying together would give them more money, having more than two kids would make them poorer unless they do more work to pay for them.