Does anybody need more than one child? Let's slash child benefit!

[Lucy-Lastic 10]

My bugbear is lies with those who are reliant on child benefit and have neither means or intent to further their or their childrens lives but conversely have no compunction in popping out another illiterate, unwanted child. These are the people who I would like to prevent pebbledashing society with their idle seed and generally draining the collective coffers but adding to the social ills.

 

 

Maybe I just dont mix in the right circles but I ( a mum with 2 small boys - 1 at school the other nursery (fully paid for by me and my wages)) dont actually know anyone who has kids and lives off the state. All the people I know actually work for a living - even those with kids - shock!!! I know people who have kids and live off the state do exist but maybe they are a smaller proportion of the population that you actually think. It probably matters where you live in the city but the Langsett estate/ Hillsborough isnt well known for being affluent;)

 

V interesting debate:D

 

LisaH xxx

[Mathom 10]

Interesting thread!

 

Hmm, isn't the idea of a welfare state that everyone pays in according to their earnings -that's if the tax is progressive, like income tax, and not regressive, like VAT of course, which you pay more of proportionately the lesser you earn! Then you are able to access services and benefits when you need them regardless of whether you have paid in? A small minority of people may take more than they give and vice versa, but on the whole, over a lifetime, most people will achieve some kind of balance.

 

Consider what we get from our taxes, not only benefits but education, health care, police, culture, environment, roads, fire services, sporting facilities, promotion of trade, etc etc. The list could be very long indeed. And any of us could pinpoint services that we think (and sometimes know) we will never use.

 

For example, child benefit may be paid to those who have never worked, but it is also paid for those who have lost their work, either through redundancy or sickness. Those kinds of circumstances are not predictable.

 

I used to feel quite annoyed about all the money which goes to children, but then I consider the dole I've claimed myself and the times I've had to go to the doctors, being somewhat mishap prone, circumstances out of my control. And what about the expensive and lengthy education, four years of University, all those free museums I regularly visit, subsidised theatre and art and the countryside I love. None of that comes for free, and I also doubt that the hypothetical media vision of the benefits mum with her five kids will partake of any of that, even though she's perfectly entitled.

[Lucretia_73 10]

What happens if a couple have twins or triplicats under the Tony law?

 

I think number of cats is unlimited as they're not state funded;)

 

So how would surrogacy work? If a family has one child and someone has another child which they then give to the family, is this a loophole? Is this child considered fundable under it's birth parent, or non-fundable under it's adopted parents?

 

As for the next generation keeping us in our old age and contributing to pensions, I for one don't believe there will be much in the state pension fund for me when I reach retirement age anyway and they probably won't exist at all in a few generation's time. As people are advised now to start paying into a pension scheme when they start their working lives, I can see it becoming compulsory in a few years time, the way things are going. Which kind of makes sense - people being responsible for providing for their own retirement. And if they keep raising the age of that retirement people will have plenty of years to save up and having worked themselves to death by the time they do get to retire they probably won't need the pension for very long!

[redrobbo 10]

Hmmm, some interesting ideas from Tony - who seems to be expounding a principle that parents should be financially responsible for the upkeep of their children, rather than the state.

 

A few questions for Tony.....

 

1. Why are you suggesting that child benefit should only be paid for the first child? Why any child? Why not do away with all child benefits, and make parents responsible for the upkeep of their children, irrespective of how many they may have?

 

2. By extending this same principle, why should parents escape the financial responsibility for paying for their children's medical treatment? For example, my disabled daughter had over 20 operations during her childhood. Shouldn't I, as her father, have been made to pay for her life-saving operations after we'd used up our one medical credit on minor surgery? I now realise how irrresponsible I have been as a parent by using NHS facilities for my daughter. May Tony and like-minded forum members forgive me for using their hard paid taxes and national insurance contributions. After all, there is such a thing as medical insurance. I really have been very selfish.

 

3. Can I throw myself on the mercy of Tony and fellow travellers as I further confess that, as a parent of two children, I took everyone's hard-earned taxes to actually have my children educated in state schools at your expense. I now realise that this was utterly selfish, and I should have sent my kids to a private school, and paid for their education out of my own income.

 

4. The list of my offences to society grow, as I've even had the temerity to spend many a happy time when my kids were young by taking them to public parks, where they played on swings and roundabouts and suchlike - all provided for from the common public purse. I now realise that I had no right to expect such generosity from taxpayers, and should have clubbed together with other parents to purchase recreational facilities and installed them in our back gardens. I'm very sorry.

 

I'm now recognising that I have truly been an awful member of society by so selfishly claiming child benefit payments and using so many facilities that the taxpayer provided for my children.

 

But maybe I can make reparations? Maybe if Tony's suggestions are enacted, I could join in a Chinese-style witch-hunt for those feckless people who dare to have more than one child. And if some of them who can't afford to have more than one kid don't take up the kind offer of sterilisation, maybe we should go one step further and insist on compulsory abortion.

 

Lastly, can Tony please advise me if I should now be putting some money aside for when I am in my doteage? I really don't want to add to the burden of my fellow tax-paying citizens, by expecting them to fund any residential care and medical attention that I might need. I must cure myself of being so selfish all the time, and stop expecting the state to make provisions for me and my kids.

[Tony 10]

Oh redrobbo, no need to be so melodramatic, the politician in you is showing

 

I'll just point you back to the incredibly simple 3 Point Plan

 

1. In the spirit of the Chinese One Child Law, child benefits are limited to one child only. If you want any more children then you pay for them from your own means. That also goes for tax credits, housing and all the other state handouts. The cut off is one child.

 

2. The upside is that the state can offer optional but free sterilisation for those who have their one child and have no need of any more.

 

3. Those couples who don't have any children, and therefore have less need of state funds can then have a tax rebate and increased pension provision in return for having no child to care for them in old age.

 

You can still have more than one child, health care, education, and swings in the park. No need for sterilisation or abortion if you don't want them. The state will even support you with your first child, and let you choose where and how you recieve medical treatment while providing you with the financial assitance if you choose outside the NHS.

 

The 3 point plan only requires one thing of people. Responsibility!

 

Blimey red, I'd be no good as a politician. I'm far too consistent

[redrobbo 10]

 

 

The state will even support you with your first child, and let you choose where and how you recieve medical treatment while providing you with the financial assitance if you choose outside the NHS.

 

 

You are indeed being far too consistent to be a politician Tony. Not even the Tories under Mr Cameron are now advocating "financial assistance if you choose {to go} outside the NHS". Nope, you must constantly change your opinion according to the mood of the electorate if you aspire to be a politician. Clearly this thread is just research for your manifesto, and given the hostile reception to your plans, I now expect to see you advocating free dummies for all 2nd, 3rd and 4th., babies!

 

You'll never garner votes for your maverick proposals when out on the election stump though Tony, unless.....well.....just maybe.....you're seen to be kissing babies of course!

[Cyclone 10]

You are still basing this on the flawed presumption that the current system allows parents to take NO responsibility for their children (or 2nd or 3rd if you wish).

Can you prove that this is the case, or is there a straw man in need of a good kicking around here?

 

Oh redrobbo, no need to be so melodramatic, the politician in you is showing

 

I'll just point you back to the incredibly simple 3 Point Plan

 

 

 

You can still have more than one child, health care, education, and swings in the park. No need for sterilisation or abortion if you don't want them. The state will even support you with your first child, and let you choose where and how you recieve medical treatment while providing you with the financial assitance if you choose outside the NHS.

 

The 3 point plan only requires one thing of people. Responsibility!

 

Blimey red, I'd be no good as a politician. I'm far too consistent

[Mo 10]

Tony , an alternative slant to your argument might be to withdraw state support to those parents who do not bring their children up to be decent,law abiding members of society. That should save an enormous proportion of the family allowance budget and also with a bit of luck reduce the numbers of such individuals walking our streets.

 

PS State sterilisation is already free for both male and females

[Tony 10]

You are indeed being far too consistent to be a politician Tony. Not even the Tories under Mr Cameron are now advocating "financial assistance if you choose {to go} outside the NHS". Nope, you must constantly change your opinion according to the mood of the electorate if you aspire to be a politician. Clearly this thread is just research for your manifesto, and given the hostile reception to your plans, I now expect to see you advocating free dummies for all 2nd, 3rd and 4th., babies!

Ah, you're so right, but I have the advantage of not having to bow to the whims of daily fortune and Paxman. I can test the water to whatever depth I require for my evil purpose

 

unless.....well.....just maybe.....you're seen to be kissing babies of course!

 

Babies? Is that all you have to kiss as a politician these days ?

 

 

You are still basing this on the flawed presumption that the current system allows parents to take NO responsibility for their children (or 2nd or 3rd if you wish).

Can you prove that this is the case, or is there a straw man in need of a good kicking around here?

 

Ah, that would involve the later (and somewhat confusing) expansion with Point 4 of the 3 Point Plan. From post #25...

Point 4 would allow people to opt out of the NHS providing they made private provision. In return they would receive further tax breaks.

Looks, sounds and is "financial assistance" to me

 

 

 

 

Mo, I like that idea as an addition, but I think we would fall foul of the courts... and thanks for confirmation that we've already had a result on sterilisation!!! Whoohoo!

[Alex C. 10]

Tony , an alternative slant to your argument might be to withdraw state support to those parents who do not bring their children up to be decent,law abiding members of society. That should save an enormous proportion of the family allowance budget and also with a bit of luck reduce the numbers of such individuals walking our streets.

 

PS State sterilisation is already free for both male and females

By starving them to death?

 

Also, wouldn't it be better to allow for two 'state-funded' children, research has shown that only children have less social skills and reasoning ability (in general) than children from a large family. We'd end up with a society of people with no clue how to interact with one another... Also, unless you allowed for this, chances are the population would dive dramatically...

[Cyclone 10]

I don't understand how the 4th point of the 3 point system addresses the fact that you are trying to solve a problem that does not exist.

[depoix 11]

it appears that you are searching for a solution Tony to a problem which doesn't exist.

And the idea that people 'pop out' children simply to claim the massive government handout of £15/week simply doesn't make sense. A child costs more to raise than that.

 

If you have an issue with 'the benefits culture' which I think could stand a little reorganising then you'd be better off saying that that was the problem rather than couching it behind other less suportable arguments.

can i just say that child benefit isnt based on the size of income,every one is allowed to claim it,whether earning a bisic wage or a few thousand pounds a week, years ago when my first son was born, i was awarded child benefit, i forget how much,but when i worked it out later i was paying more tax for excepting the payment than the payment was worth,i tried to explain this to the tax office and say i didnt want the benefit,but they insisted i had to have it by law,even the queen gets it,i was told,so what im trying to say is that the benefit payment is worthless if you are paying tax,so tony could be right, if you can afford kids then maybe you dont need the payment, now how about mortgage tax relief ? should that be payable ? and off shore tax havens ? why shouldnt those earning money in britain pay their full dues and demands like the rest of us ?