It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


UK benefit cuts, why no cut on those having multiple children?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:18 AM
By multiple I mean over two normally..Read the whole thing before commenting please...Multiple points inside.

I'm fed up of religious view points being taken, stupid lazy excuses and rewarding the costly.

My point is simple, if you are on benefits here in the UK as a whole family or as a single person (by whole family I mean both partners) then having children is a luxury, especially in these days of austerity so why do people expect to be given extra money for children they personally are not affording and expecting the tax payer to pay for them?

I'm long term sick (genuinely sick) and my wife is a state carer so money is very tight, we left having a child until late in life because we both had great jobs, we wanted to do things before having a child and we wanted to devote our time to that child when we had it so we waited. Sadly I became ill not long after our lovely daughter was born and ended up on benefits after a few years of spending our savings to care for our selves.

Our lovely daughter Serena gets what she needs because we make cuts in what some might call luxuries, neither of us smoke nor drink other than a bottle of wine with dinner once in a while, we don't go out to places so the money we have is there to live on and look after her.

But around us its like a baby boom, all these families on benefits are having child after child and the state just gives them money. Considering the cost to the state of each child you would think they would tell families on benefits that after 2 they will not pay more money but they don't. Children are being used as a currency here, the more you have the better chance you have of a new property or just being housed, the teenage mothers now have 2 kids to guarantee a flat for them, there's no love or want for the child, its just a use.

I'm not advocating a ban on having children, just a stern warning that after a certain number no extra money will be given.

I can't get a council property because we have one child but I'm not going to deliberately try to have a second one just for that reason because a child is something special that needs things and attention, with the money we have it would be very hard to support a 2nd child and to be honest I don't want charity or to burden the state as well. Why should I be rewarded for adding to the state deficit, why?

I'm sick to death of seeing single mothers falling on their back and saying "but my BF does not like to use condoms" and then DEMAND the state looks after that child, I'm fed up to the back teeth of seeing families with 7 - 8 kids on benefits because the Religion is one of greed and waste, why are these people not taught value and right. Its not their RIGHT to get state money, its a privilege to many, others will have contributed to it via work and are entitled to money but many are simply 'on the dole' for life.

Why should these people be rewarded for causing a debt to a tax payer, why are they not taught the value of the money they get and have the same values that a working couple has, the working couple has to factor in if they can afford a child while working, they have to decide if one person stops working if that child or children can be supported yet people who do not work do not have to do the same thing because the state pays them.

Its stupidity at the highest order, the money you are given on benefits is supposed to allow you to get the needed things in life and use the spare to gain employment, its not there to buy drink and drugs, to sit on your backside avoiding work, for the sick its there to care for yourself, children are an expense to both you and the state, people on benefits need to understand that unless YOU are paying for that child out of your pocket then someone else is and its unfair.

To those that bring religion in to it, firstly I'm again not advocating a ban, I'm saying can YOU afford the child, if yes then HOW, if you can't then WHY are you bringing a child in to the world, lets say the benefit system isn't there and never was, would you if there was zero income and the child could not add to the income have more than you could afford?

Would you watch them die of starvation because you could not feed them, in this day and age I would hope that people would make the right choice for both them AND the child. Yet simply because there's a benefits system it gets abused. Lets take Islam as its one of the big religions / faiths, in that it CLEARLY states that a man should only take a second or more wives IF he can both support them and share his time fairly between them, the same applies to children, the important part here is the 'if HE can support them', getting benefits is not HIM supporting them so clearly he should not be marrying more OR having more children than HE can afford.

The same with other religions / faiths who support constant birthing.

We really have to start thinking of where the money is coming from and what happens as it starts to dry up, what is going to happen to those 8 children you stupidly had while on benefits, who then will look after them, will there be a job that will pay you enough for 8 children?

I doubt it...

Having a child is your right, so is supporting it or them, its not my right to support yours...It was YOUR choice...

So I say that while on benefits people should not increase their family beyond 2 children, single parents, not beyond 1 child, again WHILE ON BENEFITS.

What you did when you worked or after you get work is again your choice as you will have to decide if the money YOU earn covers them. Some would say that its unfair that a person who worked and had 4 kids then ends up on benefits gets money for them while those that while on benefits have 4 kids and don't get more for 2 of them but this is where values and privilege comes in, while on benefits you should be basing it on that income model, not what you can ponce of the state or what you used to earn. Get a job and have the kids if you can afford them, trust me, when its YOUR money going to pay for someone else on benefits having kids willy nilly then YOU won't be so happy.

I have no idea what these families who are sprouting kids here there and everywhere are going to do when the cuts hit deeper and their money is reduced, will they be able to ween themselves of their luxuries or simply ignore the children and spend the money on themselves, they already have proved themselves selfish by expecting others to pay for them and their children, will they just get more selfish to the children.

Of course there would be special cases such as children born from violent marriage, rape etc provable cases, I think its time the gravy train of the benefits system of this country was stopped for the greedy lazy people and restarted based upon sensible values, things like immigrants working 5yrs before being allowed to claim, the system works on people paying in, why pay people who don't. I want youngsters MADE to earn their dole money, the frauds kicked off, the lazy MADE to work, the sick & elderly cared for.

To those who would say what right have I to say you should not have kids then I reply yet again, have all the kids you want but YOU pay for them, to those that would say cutting the money would put them below the bread line then I would say that it would have to be brought in for those instantly affected in a slow way but those not yet beyond the limit would be informed and it be law straight away.

One simple cut we could make would be to come out of the EU, at 54 MILLION pounds a DAY I don't think its value for money!
edit on 8-2-2013 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:30 AM
I cant find a source but I remember reading (might be the BBC) that in the future the government wants to make changes to the benefits to discourage people having kids just to get benefits, I think it went along the lines of instead of getting a fixed amount for each child the benefits gets lower and lower for each child the more you have.

Right now its £20.30 a week for your oldest and £13.40 for the other children, I think it was the £13.40 that goes down for each subsequent child you have, as I said I cant find where I read it but I'm sure I did.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:31 AM
reply to post by Mclaneinc

In New Zealand had the same problem. Dhp mums they where called. Making a career out of having babies.
Welfare system got changed so no benefit payments for a kid born while mother already on benefit. Seems like a good idea.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:45 AM
reply to post by roughycannon

Yes, I seem to remember the same, shame they don't just make a plain and simple statement saying NO MORE FREE CASH to these people..

Its rife in America with their EBT card system..

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:47 AM

Originally posted by ZeussusZ
reply to post by Mclaneinc

In New Zealand had the same problem. Dhp mums they where called. Making a career out of having babies.
Welfare system got changed so no benefit payments for a kid born while mother already on benefit. Seems like a good idea.

Its an idea at the moment but will become reality if the country keeps going downhill, people forget that its not a bottomless pit of money and its maintained mostly by people putting money in, as jobs go so does the input.

It simply has to happen NOW, even if it just acts as a put off to out benefit tourists..

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:50 AM
You are not alone with your opinion, the majority of people in the uk think the same - except the ones who are making mugs out of the system. The gvt is happier to let old people die of cold, malnutrition and lack of proper health care than tell people the can't have baybees. These parents and their baybees will eventually suffer because there will be no money in the system that they have robbed to take care of them, so karma will prevail. Meanwhile we all suffer. I have become rather callous over the years and think that the babies should be taken off these vampires, so no benefits payable. They would soon get the message and stop having them.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:52 AM
In my case its simply guts me that we have waited 14yrs to get a council house and people who have NEVER paid a penny of tax to this country walk into newly made properties because they have 8 kids and we have one.

And I should add that since getting these properties only 50yrds from my flat they have further increased their child number while claiming every benefit going.

Lucky old tax payer...

One day the pot will be empty...

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 05:56 AM
reply to post by tazdeill2

Its not a callous attitude in my book, children are not a commodity to be used to get money, those treating them as such are not true caring parents and should lose those kids to good people who can give them a caring home.

As you say the elderly are being scalped at the moment (well as they always are by Mr Osbourne) while the rich get a tax deal.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:03 AM

These people TOTALLY agree with you. Do you have a time machine?

The US prefers bombs over food, maybe the UK should adopt similar policies.

House Votes to Cut Food Stamps to Avoid Defense Reduction

The U.S. House voted to cut food stamps, federal workers’ benefits and other domestic programs to avoid scheduled reductions in defense spending.

The chamber today passed, 218-199, a plan to cut about $310 billion in spending to replace automatic defense-spending reductions that lawmakers in both parties agree shouldn’t be allowed to take effect in January.
edit on 8-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:07 AM
You won't stop people having sex, which leads to babies.

No money for the most poor who keep having babies means more crime in poverty stricken areas.

I don't have an answer, not implying that.. but you can't fix a problem that is based on a fundamental flaw in society and the very basic nature of humans to get some.

Don't have babies you poor people.. omg eugenics.
Don't give money to that family that has 12 kids. omg the crime rate.
Lock them all up. omg the prisons are bursting.

everything is finance based. if they cant charge you for something, they tax you for it. If you can't pay, you're not my problem. But I wish they'd build more prisons to put all those homeless criminals in. I don't want to live next door to a prison though. And I don't want my taxes going to that family with 12 kids because she can't stop having kids. They don't even pay taxes. They're not my problem though. but I wish........

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:34 AM
Because telling people that their religion has imbued them with mindlessness would hurt the feelings of lots and lots of people.

Until we get honest about the BIG LIE, there will be all kinds of unsavory by-products. The children are just the beginning. Children unwanted by their parents almost always "mature" into adults unwanted by society.

This bug wants off this rock.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:52 AM
Although I agree with your general view point, you might want to try following the politics behind it. As of now there ARE benefits caps, meaning after TWO children you will recieve no more payments.


we have waited 14yrs to get a council house

Instead of WAITING 14 years, you could have re-qualified and progressed your career to improve your finances in order to start paying a mortgage... Your just as lazy as everybody else.
edit on 8-2-2013 by ObservingYou because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 06:58 AM
reply to post by roughycannon

I remember something similar, to come into effect over the next year or two. Payment for first child, less for second and nothing for any others.

I am unsure how i really feel about this though, to be honest. I can see the benefits to us as a society and i hate the benefit culture. Benefits are for the needy, not for everyone (or should be). It was always designed as a safety net but instead seems to have spawned into the monster we have today.

On the other hand though, this will in effect just punish the children born to parents that think they are entitled to benefits (rather than punishing the parents).

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 07:04 AM
In the uk, child benefit was introduced as a payment given to the mother in order that hubby didn't spend all his wages down the pub, and mother would have money to spend on the child. With the number of mothers who have their own income, whether earned or not, there should be no need for it. The uk is still paying child benefit for those in the uk who have children in other countries though - whether those children exist or not.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 10:38 AM

Originally posted by ObservingYou

Instead of WAITING 14 years, you could have re-qualified and progressed your career to improve your finances in order to start paying a mortgage... Your just as lazy as everybody else.
edit on 8-2-2013 by ObservingYou because: (no reason given)

And here lies the great issue with places like this, people presume to know you yet have no clue yet still make remarks without the actual facts.

We HAD a mortgage and a nice house BUT as I said I became ILL which with the housing collapse of the 80's AND redundancy meant I lost my house and still owe £47,000 on it so cannot therefore GET a mortgage. I also am not fit enough to work therefore am not lazy or able to strive for such pleasures.

The lazy person was you, not reading the whole thing as I made clear you had to as it says I became ill IN IT.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 10:48 AM

Originally posted by tazdeill2
In the uk, child benefit was introduced as a payment given to the mother in order that hubby didn't spend all his wages down the pub, and mother would have money to spend on the child. With the number of mothers who have their own income, whether earned or not, there should be no need for it. The uk is still paying child benefit for those in the uk who have children in other countries though - whether those children exist or not.

Yes indeed, only recently the more well off were given the choice to opt out of child support, not many did.

They should never have been given a choice tbh, for those earning 50 grand a year plus been given child support is a drop in the ocean compared to their money and isn't needed but is still taken purely based upon greed.

People have to start understanding that the once seemingly huge pot of endless cash is now dwindling away and we have to start properly vetting people to their entitlement to it, sometimes this vetting is done badly ie the ATOS issue at the moment where people are being thrown off the benefits system even if they are gravely ill. suffer severe mental health issues or even if they proves their illnesses.

But, like it or not the system needs to be overhauled and the actual needy catered for while the others are indeed moved on.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 10:50 AM
reply to post by Flavian

I've heard of benefit capping which is coming in April this year but not sure there's an actual limit on children by numbers, if there is then great, as long as its properly enforced.

posted on Feb, 8 2013 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by winofiend

Yup, I see your point and it is a real circular thing but we really have to try and break the cycle before this planet starts to have Escape from New York style city prisons, it will happen. And yes, the old longing to 'get some' is still there especially in the young but they really have to be taught the simple lesson that babies by stupidity or for gain simply will be punished.

I know it sounds draconian but I'm 51, I was taught to say please and thank you, respect your peers and elders, help the elderly and support yourself, I pass the same morals on to our lovely daughter and she's a great kid, she does not swear, says please and thank you and is kind, she's also a wonderful learner. I was always taught to look after number one and remember I'm responsible and should fix any errors I've made. Now it seems you just do as you like, be rewarded for being bad and get away with murder.

It seems people have given up on trying to enforce law and good teaching and we should accept that young people WILL turn to crime if they are poor. I think that idea has been allowed to be exploited so that the young simply go straight to crime based upon the fact that the system makes it easier to both get away with it and allow it.

Why work when you can steal, why work when you can claim non stop benefits......

In the estate where I live I'd say two thirds of the young are unemployed and in crime or just unemployed, having spoke to them during shall we say clashes of interest ie trying to mug me clashed with my interest of keeping my money and basically they have never tried to work, they see it as a thing for stupid losers, they walk around in gear I could hardly afford when I was well off.

We simply HAVE to break he ever decreasing cycle of what is classed as 'allowed'...

Sometimes rules and systems actually are good for you...

top topics


log in