Here's hoping this finally comes into play

[moggy]

I'm thinking they would apply it from a certain year so say 2014/2015 any family having more than two children after this date would only receive benefits for the first two children and no more.

I would say that would be too soon, especially for those that already have three children, and rely on that support, it would only be the children that suffer.

If this was to be implemented, then you would have to start at the next generation and ensure all are aware of what you will get before they get pregnant.

[The Spartan]

I was trying to say the that hopefully it would come into force after that date meaning that it wouldn't affect those that already had more than 2 children, just those that did after that date.

[speling bee]

I was trying to say the that hopefully it would come into force after that date meaning that it wouldn't affect those that already had more than 2 children, just those that did after that date.

So, does that mean we can expect people to get as many kids in as possible before that date?

Increased birthrate now, then a drop in birthrate and increase in abortion rate after the date?

[escapeUK]

I would say that would be too soon, especially for those that already have three children, and rely on that support, it would only be the children that suffer.

So? And that's the fault of the tax payer because? Im quite frankly not interested in paying for other peoples children not to suffer, as their parents had them with no consideration of ability to afford them.

[Ignis Fatuus]

It will never happen, you saw the uproar over limiting child benefit to those earning more than £45,000, this would never get passed into law

But that threatened the sharp-elbowed middle classes.

[vetran]

there are a number of claimants that see the production of children as a way of enhancing their benefits.

To quote the unemployed mother of five that hasn't worked apart from a few menial jobs at University. Living in a council funded & maintained flat.
Her boyfriend and the unemployed father of most of her kids over 10 years who also has a council funded flat he lives apart from her but that hasn't stopped him getting her up the duff every 2 years.

'I deserve a bigger house, I have waited long enough and I have so many kids'.

This was delivered while we were at a party for a friend's baby they are living in a housing association and he is working every hour <Deity> sends for near minimum wage to support his 3 girls. His family & other friends are in similar situations. The grass was watered by people spitting out their tea. I thought I was about to see a lynching.

It is time going forward to reward effort and close the door on benefits as a career. saying sorry if you have more than 2 kids then the state is unable to release additional funds to keep them.

not sure other than child benefit how much more you need? Its possible to bring up 4 children almost as cheaply as 2 if you don't buy them iphones.

Council houses should be limited to 3 bedrooms. Uncomfortable but do able.

Debit card I agree with having suggested it before, yes some of the goods will change hands afterwards at a loss to buy drink / fags but it may give others more buying power (supermarkets & participating shops can be encouraged to subtly give benefit shoppers better deals on certain goods. Boots benefit Nappy discount, Tesco fresh lettuce benefit bonanza)

[speling bee]

So? And that's the fault of the tax payer because? Im quite frankly not interested in paying for other peoples children not to suffer, as their parents had them with no consideration of ability to afford them.

Is that true of parents who had their children in good times and then fell on hard times? I think not. I suspect you're quite frankly not interested in paying for other people's children not to suffer not matter what the reason, so why don't you drop the sanctimonious bulltulip about whether the parents had them with any consideration of ability to afford them?

[escapeUK]

It is time going forward to reward effort and close the door on benefits as a career. saying sorry if you have more than 2 kids then the state is unable to release additional funds to keep them.

Why should the state fund anyone to have children? Are we short of people? No, in fact we have far far too many. Equally id put a stop to state funded IVF.

[vetran]

But that threatened the sharp-elbowed middle classes.

no that involved a sharp cliff drop that would hurt single earner families disproportionally.

one earner £45k=no child benefit
two earners £42K (£84K total) = child benefit.

sensible thing was to drop it by up to 50% for each earner over higher rate which is what has happened

[vetran]

Is that true of parents who had their children in good times and then fell on hard times? I think not. I suspect you're quite frankly not interested in paying for other people's children not to suffer not matter what the reason, so why don't you drop the sanctimonious bulltulip about whether the parents had them with any consideration of ability to afford them?

no but you know what, most of those make do without the extra in my experience. They are used to doing so.

There are people who do consciously make that decision to not have children because they can't afford them while working, just as there are people who decide to have more children to enhance benefits.

Poor means unable to feed, clothe & heat, most people manage that on pretty bad wages.

Friend of ours has 3 kids, she has worked continuously since school, partner died (unfortunately not insured), lost her job and there was no help because she was the wrong type of claimant(not entirely true she got a free burglar alarm being an inadvertent single mum). They managed on £20K and are quite healthy. Another couple with 3 kids dad lost his job, eventually got back to work and survive on a similar wage in a tiddly house.

Another has five kids and lives in a nice 4 bedroom house with a better standard of living having not worked.

I'm all for the long term unemployed being forced to work.