By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I've always considered myself a bit of a socialist, and the prospect of lifting hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty can surely only be a good thing? Especially if its in part funded by people living in multi million £ mansions paying a few grand a year each. Worlds smallest violin for them IMO.
As I've got older there is a part of me that questions the impact of it though, does it really incentivise people to not work and pop out loads of kids? I'm not sure that's likely in reality. Is it fair on the people funding the billions of £ it costs? Or people who don't have children?
I'm wondering if a compromise position might be something more nuanced, where folk can get qualifying years through tax / NI contributions. There's such a system in place for state pension, why can't it be the same for child benefit?
I'm a bit torn on it and interested in what other people think.
0
2 child benefit cap on 12:54 - Nov 27 with 618 views
2 child benefit cap on 12:00 - Nov 27 by PhilsAngels
If you could see the number and variety of conditions of those who receive the benefits for the mobility scheme it is bizarre. Constipation is one I remember, I wish I could find the list again.
I bring up my grandson. He has been diagnosed with autism. He was tested for 2 hours and in everything they did , puzzles, questions, observation etc, he was given a tick for autism. This was 2 years ago. He leads a normal life in every way. If you didn't know him the only giveaway is that he finds it hard to keep still. My partner takes him to school every morning in her car and I pick him up in mine. We've been told now that we can have a car if we want it . Why? That's where the system is wrong and you know there'll be people who take for the sake of taking. The system is broken.
2
2 child benefit cap on 13:07 - Nov 27 with 576 views
- Majority of those parents it helps are full time working parents who are on lower incomes.
- Will lift a number of children out of poverty, always a good thing.
- State Pension impact: The state pension is primarily funded by the current working population and NOT by what the retired population have put in before , therefore with an aging population and a reducing birth rate there is the risk of an increasing deficit on state pension funding. If we can stabilize the birth rate it can help reduce that risk.
I saw a very good keynote speech from a Dr Eliza Filby last week at an event which outlined the fact that Gen Z onwards now have a 50% probability to live to 100 and beyond, therefore retirement becomes close to a 1/3 of your life, compared to pre WW2.
If we just look at men, in the 1950s average life expectancy was ~66 so retirement was relatively short, even in the 1980s it was around 71, and now it is around 79/80, so retirement is now ~18% of a life and will increase as above.
Removing the 2 child cap has to be done not so much to help in the immediate, but protection for future benefit funding . . .
[Post edited 27 Nov 10:16]
I've got three surviving parents/in laws who between them have had 87 years of retirement pension.
0
2 child benefit cap on 13:25 - Nov 27 with 533 views
The headlines in the right wing media summed up in three words.
They often bang on about ours being a Christian country, but they never demonstrate Christian charity*, one of the key virtues.
*Christian charity refers to the principles of love, compassion, and generosity that guide believers in their actions towards others, especially those in need. It emphasizes the moral obligation to aid the less fortunate and reflects God's love, as seen in biblical teachings that command generosity and kindness. In Christian thought, charity is considered the highest form of love, manifesting in unselfish love for others. Moreover, it extends beyond mere donations, encompassing a profound commitment to love and serve others as a reflection of God's grace.
[Post edited 27 Nov 14:12]
0
2 child benefit cap on 13:53 - Nov 27 with 495 views
Do you agree that people should obey the laws and follow the rules?
If so, then all benefit claimants are doing just that. If the law says you get a benefit because of your circumstances then you're entitled to it even if you have to suffer the nonsense from the Daily Fail about 'scroungers'.
If a person chooses to live their life by exploiting the benefits system then is it any different from a rich person exploiting the tax laws.
Those who push the boundary of the laws, commonly known as taking the p**s, should know that these laws may change when the government changes. Personally, I wouldn't want my 'cosy little number' subject to the whim of a politician, who in most part is a much worse human being than me.
Don't believe a word I say. I'm only kidding. Or am I?
I think there has been a fair amount of look at us, do-good posturing on this from the government. I suspect there is just as much chance of being in poverty with 2 children as there is with three, yet the 2 child family will be seeing no increase and therefore no nearer to escaping poverty. And if you are a 4 child family in poverty, that extra £34.50 per week will improve the situation, but is it likely to make so much difference that it actually brings hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty as how it is currently defined? Or am I being cycical (yet again). For what it is worth I support the decision anyway.
0
2 child benefit cap on 14:01 - Nov 27 with 469 views
The correct term which is not often used is 'relative poverty' which is defined as having a household income of less than 60% of the average. If you increase average earnings then the threshold for 'poverty' raises.
1
2 child benefit cap on 14:42 - Nov 27 with 413 views
2 child benefit cap on 13:58 - Nov 27 by mellowblue
I think there has been a fair amount of look at us, do-good posturing on this from the government. I suspect there is just as much chance of being in poverty with 2 children as there is with three, yet the 2 child family will be seeing no increase and therefore no nearer to escaping poverty. And if you are a 4 child family in poverty, that extra £34.50 per week will improve the situation, but is it likely to make so much difference that it actually brings hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty as how it is currently defined? Or am I being cycical (yet again). For what it is worth I support the decision anyway.
That's a lot of extra food a week for a start.
I think the less you have the bigger difference a small amount can make. If are right on the line of being able to feed your kids an extra tenner a week would be a godsend. £34.50 is not exactly a massive amount but spent wisely (and i'm sure in most cases it will be, people are not stupid) it can make a big difference.
I think the less you have the bigger difference a small amount can make. If are right on the line of being able to feed your kids an extra tenner a week would be a godsend. £34.50 is not exactly a massive amount but spent wisely (and i'm sure in most cases it will be, people are not stupid) it can make a big difference.
Agree, in practical terms it can make a difference. It is just the grandstanding is a bit much, just to distract from the other issues surrounding the budget. If they were that passionate about it, they could have done it a year ago.
I bring up my grandson. He has been diagnosed with autism. He was tested for 2 hours and in everything they did , puzzles, questions, observation etc, he was given a tick for autism. This was 2 years ago. He leads a normal life in every way. If you didn't know him the only giveaway is that he finds it hard to keep still. My partner takes him to school every morning in her car and I pick him up in mine. We've been told now that we can have a car if we want it . Why? That's where the system is wrong and you know there'll be people who take for the sake of taking. The system is broken.
And from my anecdotal experience, it’s more the middle class people who take the P here - they know what they can get and take what they don’t need.
I think that attitude comes from an everyone else is doing it type attitude but it’s so expensive for the tax payer
2 child benefit cap on 13:58 - Nov 27 by mellowblue
I think there has been a fair amount of look at us, do-good posturing on this from the government. I suspect there is just as much chance of being in poverty with 2 children as there is with three, yet the 2 child family will be seeing no increase and therefore no nearer to escaping poverty. And if you are a 4 child family in poverty, that extra £34.50 per week will improve the situation, but is it likely to make so much difference that it actually brings hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty as how it is currently defined? Or am I being cycical (yet again). For what it is worth I support the decision anyway.
It’s more than £34.50 because, confusingly, the ‘two-child benefit cap’ is nothing to do with child benefit, which you can get for an unlimited number of children if you qualify. It’s about the extra amount of universal credit you get for having additional children.
0
2 child benefit cap on 23:14 - Nov 27 with 172 views
I can see the principle behind it, and understand the case, but in times of real struggle for everyone it does just feel like another tax on working people to go towards those who don't work.
Ultimately the budget was fine all round, Labour have now done the tax take, and have 3 years to ensure public services are in a good state, and that the ballooning welfare bill can be brought to heel and that there can be some giveaways in run up to next election so the working people and small businesses who are currently bearing the brunt for everything feel better off for once
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
