No benefit for your third child if you're on the dole: Tories unveil controversial we

[super jumbe]

Capped off: Jobless families should only receive benefits for two children,Tory chairman Grant Shapps said

Child-related benefits for the jobless should be capped at two children, the Tory party chairman declared last night.

Unemployed parents who then choose to have more than two children ?will know that welfare is not going to fund that choice?.

As the Government?s ?26,000-a-year benefits cap for the out-of-work took effect yesterday, Mr Shapps insisted further radical reforms to welfare were back on the table.

The move would put them in the same position as working parents who cannot afford to have large families, Grant Shapps argued.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2364718/No-benefit-child-youre-dole-Tories-unveil-controversial-welfare-plan.html

[super jumbe]

Ah just realised if you are working will get child benefit for over 3 children’s isn’t this under human rights act 1998??

[GastonJ]

To be honest I don't think it should be given at all, you have children you should be able to afford it. Why only cap it for non working people? More punishment for those who find themselves unemployed if they have 3 children already? Not only do you lose your job, but lose child benefit for your 3rd child who you had when you were working. Just shows the lengths this government will go to to kick those less fortunate than themselves (which is probably the other 59,999,350 people in the UK. What next deny them housing assistance for the 3rd child, or face having to get them adopted, as well?

[super jumbe]

Fair enough but the way I look at the system has let us down, and I call theft, we pay nation insurance and taxes to govt when at work and when there is no work they intend to abounded the same people who have contributed to the system, well how about stopping us paying N/I and tax and we will able to manage without the con system

[paulinter]

I think they should be looking after people who work and on this minimum wage or a few coppers above it and get no help at all. . Single people get nothing at all if you work unless your part time then claim all the benefits going and do fiddle work like most do. . I know people who worked full time. Then went part time. Claimed benefits and fiddled the other 2 days a week.. . The dole always pick on people who have recently been paid off. They don't bother with the long term. Why should we as tax payers give money to people who won't work and keep throwing out kids for extra money. We shouldn't. . My opinion

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[GastonJ]

Perhaps it's about time to move to a different system. If you've paid in you can get some help. If you haven't worked then you get nothing, no benefits of any sort, not even hospital treatment for you and your family. Fairer system?

[rds60h]

Perhaps it's about time to move to a different system. If you've paid in you can get some help. If you haven't worked then you get nothing, no benefits of any sort, not even hospital treatment for you and your family. Fairer system?

I would put a small proviso to that and would allow benefits to youngsters of parents who have worked, but that benefit would be only paid for a limited timed period.

[Meat-Head]

So where does it affect memebers who have no kids, nor want kids?

Think it's a brilliant idea, if you can't feed, don't breed.

Must admit if your going to have brats then 2 would be a better idea, younger/older bro/sis to look up/down on.

[GastonJ]

It affects people who have no kids because the tax money they're paying goes to subsidise someone who wants kids.

I'm not exactly sure I agree with myself on anything that I've written in this thread - other than my comment about the government taking every opportunity to kick down the rest of the population who aren't MP's. We're in it together the other 650 MP's aren't.

Unsure that we'd have enough space to bury the 5 or 6 million dead from starvation of disease - but I'm sure they'd find a way. Would save in the long run I suppose.

TBH if they want to save on child benefit then they should means test child benefit for everyone, they've already done it for anyone who has kids and earns over ?50k. They should set a baseline of the average wage and if you have more than that coming in then decrease child benefit. Then there is an incentive to work for more money, or the alternative to have less kids. *shrug*

TBH I'm not sure of the point of child benefit since it's not paid to the child. The parents who have the children should be responsible for clothing, feeding, caring and educating that child without any assistance anyway - a child is for life, not just for Christmas. Anyone know what it's paid for, or more to the point why it exists really?

[Meat-Head]

It affects people who have no kids because the tax money they're paying goes to subsidise someone who wants kids.

I'm not exactly sure I agree with myself on anything that I've written in this thread -

Just remind me how old you are and how many kids you have?

REMEMBER:-

As a VIP member you are entitled to tell a MAXIMUM of TWO whopping lies per month.

[GastonJ]

I am 50, have 4 kids, and 4 grandkids. Still doesn't mean I agree with child benefit though, and yes without child benefit back then I would have had the choice, buy condoms or earn more money - though I think we would have got by without child benefit - I saved on heating I've never been on the dole either. Though as I wrote earlier I don't kick people when they're down either.

Pensions are still more than 50% of the cost to the welfare state, or that which is directly paid out by the DWP. I can see that being chopped or means tested as soon as they have enrolled everyone into the forced pension plan anyway. If people can't see that then they're blind. Those in their 20's are unlikely to ever see a state pension that's handed out without being means tested - though I won't be around to say "I told you so" if my plan doesn't continue the way it is

[bobwill]

. Anyone know what it's paid for, or more to the point why it exists really?

I suppose it was paid to help bring up the child to be healthy as fit men are always needed to fight wars


History of child allowances
Child Benefit and Guardian's Allowance: Where it all started

Child benefit was phased in from 1977 to 1979 by Labour, replacing family allowances and child tax allowances.
Child tax allowances
Child tax allowances were first introduced in 1798, though they were abolished again in 1805. They were reintroduced in 1909.

http://www.revenuebenefits.org.uk/child-benefit/policy/where_it_all_started/

[Meat-Head]

I am 50, have 4 kids, and 4 grandkids.

OK, so we use Gaston J as a case study, effectivly that's 8 rugrags that have been bred, they say it's 100,000 UKP (no pound sign on this computer) it costs to run per brat from date of manufacture till 18, so that's 800,000 UKP 'needed' for your brats/brats brats. So for all i care have as many as you like there NO WAY tax money of a working person ever create that much in the first place for ONE brat, not that child benefit equaquates to 100k

[hollow]

hasen't anyone realised yet .you cannot blame anyone but the government ,these are the ones that started the pensions system way way back around 1942 .they thought it was a good idea to have a pension for anyone over 70 because a mans life expectancy was only 50 years. That good they invented the welfare system for anyone unemployed or unable to work . its the bunch of wan***s running the country to blame for the pile of shite were all in . no one realises if they get support for the 2 kid max ,then it will just be a matter of time till the whole benefits system is abolished ,and lets admit it ,no job is safe anymore and 90% of this country will probably need help at 1 time or another . also how can you cut benefits for everyone unemployed , there isn't enough jobs available to support everyone .

[Meat-Head]

they thought it was a good idea to have a pension for anyone over 70 because a mans life expectancy was only 50 years.

Werid when was younger so much younger than today, was programmed at skool

"The averidge DK member will live to be 3 score and 10 = 70"