Tories consider limiting child benefit to three children

[eatcustard]

In fact, the most common number of Children is 1.

I stand corrected

 

[elmarko]

As long as the policy isn't isn't replied retrospectively it is a good idea.

Don't have children if you can't afford them.

Do you think it's a good idea even if it doesn't achieve any of it's intended goals & costs the taxpayer more/fails to reduce population growth?.

The statement 'Don't have children if you can't afford them' while it sounds good in theory, is just a statement - it's not binding to wider society & doesn't factor in the reality as to how people actually behave or the long term consequences.

Great Unwashed are usually idealist idiots who live in a fantasy land probably due to brain rot via overuse of LSD

Here you see ladies & gentlemen, is a textbook example of irony.

 

[Richdog]

For people who work, having twins to make a total of three kids should not be a huge hardship over two kids??!!

Do you have kids? Any idea how much childcare costs? Another child would cost a full-time working family about £1,000+ per month just for nursery fees.

That's a big ****ing difference to considering the costs of just one more child.

"Parents across the UK spend on average £311 a month on childcare, compared to £77 on food and nearly £60 on holidays, according to the latest study from Halifax.

The total cost of bringing up a child averages at £600 a month per child or £7,500 a year, it found."

Source (October 2014): http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...1-hits-85-000-nearly-half-goes-childcare.html

 

[Dolph]

Seems a token gesture if it is just child benefit. If we were talking about stopping benefit claims from escalating beyond three children for tax credits or housing benefit, then it would be a more interesting Proposal.

 

[lemonade]

What about children born to immigrants? Are only indigenous children valid?

Not sure how that is related to what I wrote. Those who are already here are part of the society.

 

[cheesyboy]

"Parents across the UK spend on average £311 a month on childcare, compared to £77 on food and nearly £60 on holidays, according to the latest study from Halifax.

The total cost of bringing up a child averages at £600 a month per child or £7,500 a year, it found."

Source: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...1-hits-85-000-nearly-half-goes-childcare.html

What the hell has national averages got to do with it?
One of the reasons that's so low on childcare is, ironically, due to those not in work who have children - they have no requirement for childcare.

The actual cost of a nursery place is £40-£60 per day (£40 being extremely cheap).

A family could quite conceivable be comfortably able to afford a second, or one more, child, but be totally ****ed by the news of an extra twin - because how many people are able to give themselves a £1,000/month buffer when deciding to have a child?

You said;

For people who work, having twins to make a total of three kids should not be a huge hardship over two kids. If having three kids has tipped you over the poverty line, then having a second probably wasn't a good idea in the first place.

And that's patently complete bull.

 

[LordSplodge]

Not sure how that is related to what I wrote. Those who are already here are part of the society.

Your post said we need more children born to sustain the population (because right now it is swinging towards an ageing populace) but then said immigration is an issues.

It was worded in a way that implied that indigenous children are somehow better? I may have read that wrong though.

 

[The Geezer]

Yet more pandering from the Tories. Chasing the grey vote who lap up the single mothers and benefits headlines. What is the net gain about £200m really !

What our friendly masters are forgetting is the population is getting older and we are not reproducing enough to sustain the balance of old vs young.

The reality of every benefit reform the government has brought in has hit the poor and vulnerable but hey if their motive is to ensure the 'have nots' keep kicking the 'really have nots' they have delivered on that promise during this term.

"Let them eat cake" .........

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I think if something actually meaningful was ever done it should be aimed specifically at people having children who simply can't afford them (or can't afford them without claiming every benefit available). This would likely include a lot of women who have children as a result of a one night stand/brief fling. Medical practices have moved on and just like everything else we're preached, if you can't afford something you don't get to have it.

I have no children and know my viewpoint is harsh but its what I think needs to be done. I know it never will be and we will likely be paying for other peoples children in various ways for the forseeable future.

What if, as a couple, you were both earning good amounts (say £50k each) and decided you could afford 4 or 5 children.

Then 10 years down the line, the husband is killed in a car accident and the wife is made redundant because her employer moved all it's jobs to india.

Now, is this single mother with 5 kids, not deserving of some state support?

 

[Danthus]

What if, as a couple, you were both earning good amounts (say £50k each) and decided you could afford 4 or 5 children.

Then 10 years down the line, the husband is killed in a car accident and the wife is made redundant because her employer moved all it's jobs to india.

Now, is this single mother with 5 kids, not deserving of some state support?

You have just highlighted how the welfare state should be a safety net, not a choice.

 

[LordSplodge]

What if, as a couple, you were both earning good amounts (say £50k each) and decided you could afford 4 or 5 children.

Then 10 years down the line, the husband is killed in a car accident and the wife is made redundant because her employer moved all it's jobs to india.

Now, is this single mother with 5 kids, not deserving of some state support?

Exactly.

 

[chanjy]

What if, as a couple, you were both earning good amounts (say £50k each) and decided you could afford 4 or 5 children.

Then 10 years down the line, the husband is killed in a car accident and the wife is made redundant because her employer moved all it's jobs to india.

Now, is this single mother with 5 kids, not deserving of some state support?

But you could still claim for 3, just not for the full 5

 

[grumpysculler]

Do what most people do stop at 2

Bit difficult when your second child brings a friend.

We had two pregnancies, we have three children.

 

[Richdog]

What the hell has national averages got to do with it?
One of the reasons that's so low on childcare is, ironically, due to those not in work who have children - they have no requirement for childcare.

The actual cost of a nursery place is £40-£60 per day (£40 being extremely cheap).

National averages are official statistics, they generally have to be used in lieu of hard evidence from anonymous forumites like yourself.

A family could quite conceivable be comfortably able to afford a second, or one more, child, but be totally ****ed by the news of an extra twin - because how many people are able to give themselves a £1,000/month buffer when deciding to have a child?

You said;

And that's patently complete bull.

I would disagree, having two cousins with three kids. They said specifically the third child wasn't such a financial increase.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

If I was to have a kid in my current situation, I would probably be £400-500+ better off each month, without changing anything.

How would you be better off by £400 to £500? Please explain, especially when the child benefit would only be £89 a month.

 

[antijoke]

I also agree with this but my major gripe with the current policy is the fact it is withdrawn on a sliding scale if one parent earns over £50k and withdrawn completely when hitting £60k.

This has affected my family, where I am the sole earner and I now get nothing for my 3 children. I would be more than happy to accept this 2013 rule if it was fair across the board. The fact that I have friends who collectively (as a married couple) earn nearly £100k and get all their child benefit seems wrong.

The argument put forward by the government was that it was 'too hard' to work out joint earnings and yet the Tax Credits system did exactly that.....even if they did then make numerous errors in peoples payments!!

Wait, what are you exactly saying here?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

But you could still claim for 3, just not for the full 5

But his argument was "if you can't afford them". In my example, the couple could afford them - at least at the point of conception.

Wait, what are you exactly saying here?

He's saying that the withdrawal isn't applied fairly, not that the withdrawal itself isn't fair - which I agree with.

You have just highlighted how the welfare state should be a safety net, not a choice.

Which I agree with. However, I see nothing wrong with a couple factoring in items such as child benefit when deciding to start a family. Our child benefit used to be nearly £200 a month before we breached the cap with salary growth - £200 is not an insignificant amount of money.

 

[grumpysculler]

For people who work, having twins to make a total of three kids should not be a huge hardship over two kids.

WTF are you on? Have you ever had kids, let alone twins?

Kids are expensive. Twins even more so because they aren't staggered (nursery fees etc) and you can't hand things down.

A child costs about £250k to raise.

So you think that (over their childhood) it is pretty easy for any working person to find an extra quarter mil?

 

[dowie]

Why just child benefit? Why not tax credits (or universal credit) too? How about social housing and housing benefit?

How would you deal with a family like ours where our planned last child came as a pair? Financially penalise someone because of a biological quirk?

I think there are other areas to look at too yes. Personally I'd want to put the cap at two kids and introduce some exceptions/exemptions for twins/triplets putting people above the cap. Would perhaps be worth putting in exemptions for people who have chosen to adopt a child who would otherwise be in care etc... too.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I think there are other areas to look at too yes. Personally I'd want to put the cap at two kids and introduce some exceptions/exemptions for twins/triplets putting people above the cap. Would perhaps be worth putting in exemptions for people who have chosen to adopt a child who would otherwise be in care etc... too.

People who are well educated and in good jobs should get a bonus when having children. Say £20 per child if your're educated to degree level and an extra £10 per £10k of income upto £100k. Get the clever people to outbreed the dossers