Guess I'm stupid then My DH and I are solely surviving on benefits at present. Guess that makes us leeches too.
Thing is, I was working prior to my getting pregnant. I was sacked when I notified my employer I was pregnant some months later. I was told it was for my own safety, and then that the customers would be put off by it. A subsequent payout in settlement for unlawful dismissal meant that I received no benefits while we lived on this payout. That's something the OP and some PPs did not consider when posing the question or responding with their views: that each situation has a story behind it. There are PLENTY of people having children on welfare in BubHub and I'm sure some would be mortified reading this thread because they would feel they somehow have to justify their decisions. Well they don't. And neither do I. And may I just point out that I've met a lot of people who have jobs and money and don't provide their kids the basics. What do you say to them?
Despite our current situation, our little family lives well. We have a lovely (rented - and it's not housing commission) home with all the basics, it's tidy and well kept, we eat well and stick to our budget which sees us with a little bit left over every fortnight. We manage to keep our car insured, registered and on the road as well as pay on time for our utilities etc. In short, we manage and we do it all on welfare. On top of this, we banked our baby bonus. It's still there in account we opened for our son.
I wonder how many people throwing sh*t on welfare families have actually been in their shoes? Understand or bothered to find out the background to people's circumstances before they judged them? I doubt it. But hey, don't let the facts stand in the way of a good whinge
It doesn't bother me if people receive some sort of benefits and have more children.
If that's their ONLY income when having a PLANNED baby though... I think that's evidence of really poor decision-making and a pretty stupid thing to do.
If you're so poor that you're not able to even buy a loaf of bread to give your kids lunch for the week... don't go plan to get impregnated. It's freaking stupid.
So yeah, I guess it depends on the level of welfare dependency for me. If they're fully relying on it, then no, it's not a good move. If they're getting a bit, but one or both of the parents is making money elsewhere and can afford to pay their bills and survive without TOO much of an issue... then meh.
I automatically think how is that fair to the child rather than fair on society. I can't possibly make a judgement based on family circumstances I'm not aware of. I think the baby bonus has a lot to answer for though. Where I presently volunteer I see a lot of young women who are under pressure to become pregnant so that they can obtain and then hand over that bonus. Thing is, with the level of benefits available to families, if someone is not able to afford the basics then I have to wonder where the money is actually going.
You're right. It is very different. One is an unemployment benefit, the other is a parenting benefit (eg. you have young children and can't work) and FTB is a taxation entitlement that is dependent on what you earn (or don't). You don't have to be seeking work to obtain the last two.Patience wrote: I think the main question was basically if you are struggling to put food in your child's mouth, keep a roof over their heads and keep them clothed should you then go and add another child to the family, another mouth to feed? It annoys me to no end hearing about people that rely on food vouchers every week, have no money to buy formula for their baby yet start actively ttc another baby. How is that fair?