+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    29
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked
    3
    Reviews
    0

    Question UK government wanting to limit benefits for large families wdyt?

    So I was browsing the net today and bumped into the UK daily mail and found an article on the UK government wanting to limit benefits to large families with jobless parents.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...fare-bill.html


    They dont say how many kids is the limit, but they said they want to limit jobless parents in the way that working parents can't have any more kids coz they can't afford them. So jobless parents on a pension should be limited in some way to.

    I have been reading aolng (having no internet of my own right now as we living with my old folks while building) on the forum since joining last month and noticed opinions about working parents and parents on benefits are very devided.
    What if the Aussie government would set a similar limit on Aussie families? Would you agree?

    On 1 hand I see where the government is coming from, on the other hand I dont think its right to limit the amount of kids getting support in a "China" kinda way. So I guess Im a "fence sitter', leaning towards not being supportiv of this kind of measure if it was introduced in Australia.

    Though Im sure that the English wont be too happy neither.

    NOTE for moderator, I am not being a troll I think its called, Im interested in opinions. If this discusion does end up heated, please remove with my apologees. I dont think I can delete posts myself can I?
    Last edited by Shout It Out; 08-10-2012 at 17:16.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Shout It Out For This Useful Post:

    V8  (11-10-2012)

  3. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,110
    Thanks
    70
    Thanked
    652
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Although I agree that people shouldn't keep having kid after kid if they can't afford it.. people still would and the people that miss out on stuff are the children who had no choice in the matter. So based on that no I don't think it should be limited.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Renesme For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  5. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,708
    Thanks
    9,558
    Thanked
    12,691
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week
    I don't think welfare should be used to fund the unemployed/lower income to have really large families. If you chose a lifestyle (really large family) you should pay for it. Not sure what the solution is though.
    I was going to say making contraception free, but isn't it already nearly free with a healthcare card?

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to VicPark For This Useful Post:

    Maybelline  (09-10-2012),monnie24  (09-10-2012),Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  7. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5,276
    Thanks
    3,697
    Thanked
    3,090
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    In the UK contraception is free.

    And in answer to the question, if we're talking about limiting financial support once you reach a certain threshold... I'm not sure.

    I definitely get the point that if someone is being supported by the government for their existing family then it doesn't make sense to keep adding to the problem by having more and more kids.

    However, my concern is that if we reduced/ switched off support once you got to - say - 4 kids, then it's taking away support from the people who most need it, and we'll have a higher amount of children being abandoned/ in foster care, etc. As a societal problem I would suggest that is a worse scenario than funding them.

    Not sure what a good alternative solution would be!

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Guest654 For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  9. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,556
    Thanks
    1,602
    Thanked
    2,362
    Reviews
    6
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    I agree with it in principle but there would obviously be a lot of considerations. The main thing that it would do is remove an incentive to have more children if a person is on welfare - it would probably make many people more careful. But there will always be those who have more kids anyway.

    I'm a big believer in taking responsibility for your own decisions - and welfare/assistance should always be given with a view of helping the recipient get to a point where they can stand on their own two feet. Things like subsidized child care, job training, fair wages, employment incentives etc are better than just cash payments IMO.

    Minimum wage is so ridiculously low in the UK, many people will never get out of the poverty cycle until that improves.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Cue For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  11. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,860
    Thanks
    1,249
    Thanked
    1,444
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Hmm, the old should people on welfare have children. Children = future taxpayers. Governments know this and encourage it (baby bonus, anyone? FTB payments?). Australia still has an ageing population and procreation is still, clearly, encouraged. I don't know about the situation in the UK, it's much more populated than Aus. But here, I do not see the point in limiting family numbers, regardless of the parental situation - it's too complex to police, anyway. What about a family where both parents are studying? Or disabled parents - shall we sterilize disabled people - kids are only a privilege for the able-bodied?

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to BornToBe For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  13. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,037
    Thanks
    1,498
    Thanked
    730
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I think if its generations of family's with lots of kids no one ever working .. Well something needs to be done .. I don't understand the people who have loads of kids and both parents have never will never work. .. Some kids are very unlucky where they are born ...

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Maybelline For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  15. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    490
    Thanks
    90
    Thanked
    244
    Reviews
    0
    I think it will just make the situation worse. These families...generations of families with large amounts of children all on welfare know no other way of life and aren't well educated. They will continue in this cycle and the kids will suffer more.
    They're further disadvantaging a minority group instead of looking at ways to imrpove their education amd lifestlye to break the cycle.
    Personally I think it os a really bad idea.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Wastingtime For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  17. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,005
    Thanks
    1,052
    Thanked
    3,524
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    The UK has a MUCH denser population than Aus so it's not comparing apples with apples.

    In very broad terms I agree with it but in practice I think it would be difficult to implement and therefore probably should not be done.

    Unfortunately I don't agree with the theory that these kids are all future tax payers. Kids brought up on welfare are far more likely to live on welfare themselves when the time comes.

    I dot understand why people continue to have kids that they can't afford but I have lived a fairly privileged life so I try not to judge (or at least acknowledge that my judgements are not always right iykwim).

    We will only have two kids as that is all we can afford to have and maintain our lifestyle. And I want my kids to live in a nice area, go to uni if they want and have overseas holidays. These things are not important to everyone though.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to kw123 For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)

  19. #10
    headoverfeet's Avatar
    headoverfeet is offline The truth will set you free, but first it will **** you off. -Gloria Steinem
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    18,954
    Thanks
    3,142
    Thanked
    4,892
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    I don't think it's a good idea to reduce or stop welfare payments, these children didn't ask to be born so why should they suffer the consequences? I think we already have in place training and job placement services that could serve these people if they wanted it. I do think more resources need to be directed to those who aren't partnered or who are incapable of working (disability).

    I do think people who want more children could have more children if they re-assessed/re-jigged their finances.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to headoverfeet For This Useful Post:

    Shout It Out  (11-10-2012)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Should the government monitor how people spend their benefits?
    By Luna Lovegood in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 15-04-2012, 15:19
  2. Large families - where do you holiday?
    By Mrs Nietzsche in forum Parents with large families
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-04-2012, 09:47
  3. Completed large families!
    By Fiveforme in forum Parents with large families
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-02-2012, 09:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Riverton Leisureplex
An Extreme Family Pass at Riverton Leisureplex is the ultimate way to cool off during the summer school holidays. The $30 Pass allows pool and waterslide access for 2 adults and 2 children, as well as a drink, popcorn and an icy pole for each person.
sales & new stuffsee all
Bub Hub Sales Listing
HAVING A SALE? Let parents know about it with a Bub Hub Sales listing. Listings are featured on our well trafficked Sales Page + selected randomly to appear on EVERY page
featured supporter
Softmats
Softmats specialises in safe, non-toxic, and durable play mats. The international Premium Dwinguler™ Play Mats and Premium Bubba Mat™ range of floor spaces are the best quality in the world.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!