That didn’t take long

IT Minion said:
Some sort of NI contribution per year scheme? Perhaps.

But the problem with trying that sort of 'exception' approach is that there will be a million different edge cases where someone who has done everything right will get ignored. Plus making sure people actually get it and can navigate yet another form.

Separate to that is that you're still punishing children for their parents choices and actions.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, there are always winners and losers when it comes to those near the criteria threshold. You'll never change that, it's the nature of most policies and schemes.

However, I still don't agree with the principal of people producing more and more children that they can't financially support.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
I still don't agree with the principal of people producing more and more children that they can't financially support.
Click to expand...
Forced sterilisation on perhaps a ratio of income to number of children?
 
So Starmer has shown what he is dedicated and tough. Hard as nails if needed. This has been mentioned in the other function he has held even by the Tory.

Comments from an MP who didn't rebel. She knows that they will do something about the poverty aspect but not via child benefit caps. She's prepared to wait. It's interesting to look at the gov's child benefit page and then search for the cap separately. Note the income from it and salary ceilings.

LOL Dream up certain scenarios and don't look at the benefit aspect that then apply eg
If a parent or carer is disabled, or experiencing physical ill-health, they may feel they need some extra support to help care for their child. They may be entitled to help from the adult social care or children's services departments of their local council. Or even both.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
However, I still don't agree with the principal of people producing more and more children that they can't financially support.
Click to expand...
Me neither especially if people are desperate for the money that they gain from child benefits. I have also always thought some aspects are bunce for all when in some cases it should not be needed.

The main problem in many areas is inflation. Benefits and salaries. Only so much money is available. Best target down to actual need which I think you find they will do.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
Many families and single women don't 'plan', they simply keep on dropping kids. Then expect the tax payer to (financially) help raise them.
Click to expand...
The average birth rate in UK is 1.5 children per female.
Obviously any females having more than two only make up for those having fewer.
It's not a problem, so keep your prejudice in check.
Only for those under 20 years old has the birth rate been increasing. So only four children are possible for that age group.
It's not a problem as far as birth rate or population is concerned. It's purely a UK child benefit funding consideration.
 
algas said:
Ooooo the ethnics wont like that (y)(y)(y):giggle::giggle::giggle:
Click to expand...
Everybody has an ethnicity. :rolleyes:
Your comment is like saying 'everybody won't like that', which is obviously incorrect because at least one person in this forum is in favour of the child benefit cap. :rolleyes:

Other than that, do you have anything intelligent to add to the discussion. :rolleyes:
 
The CB cap does have a way of preventing women churning out kidz in order to supplement their benefits. Why should the taxpayer fund their promiscuous lifestyle?
 
Mrs Doubtfyre said:
The average birth rate in UK is 1.5 children per female.
Obviously any females having more than two only make up for those having fewer.
It's not a problem, so keep your prejudice in check.
Only for those under 20 years old has the birth rate been increasing. So only four children are possible for that age group.
It's not a problem as far as birth rate or population is concerned. It's purely a UK child benefit funding consideration.
Click to expand...
Don't attempt to tell me what to do or not do.
 
algas said:
Ooooo the ethnics wont like that
Click to expand...
Not much info other than none uk born women having a fertility of ~2 but Americans and all sorts included.

10% most deprived looks to be about 12% of all births. 10% at the other end ~8%. ;) However I found the wording confusing.

Fertility based on area varies ranging from ~1.4 to near 2 but the vast majority close to the average as 1.4 is.

So as often the case you are up a gum tree.
 
diy_fun_uk said:
Many families and single women don't 'plan', they simply keep on dropping kids. Then expect the tax payer to (financially) help raise them.
Click to expand...

I almost miss the days when we only had to worry about home grown 'ladies' who bred like alley cats and enjoyed everything free on the taxpayer. Risking over burdening the welfare state, NHS, etc in the process. Unfortunately others have drowned them out and we now have much larger parasitic fish to fry.
 
Odds said:
The CB cap does have a way of preventing women churning out kidz in order to supplement their benefits. Why should the taxpayer fund their promiscuous lifestyle?
Click to expand...
Like the threat of Rwanda was a deterrent?
How many women would you put into your 'CB supplementing' behaviour?
As anyone conducted any research, or collected any data of your selective 'sub group'.

I'm pretty sure that the average promiscuous young woman never gives CB a thought.
The argument is always about families being impacted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top