What is this 2 child cap benefit anyway? Who does it affect?

Perhaps the childless should receive less services, considering they've done nothing to ensure a workforce to carry them out?

Thanks MissAdventure, I was thinking along similar lines. I’m not sure if you’re serious, partly serious or winding people up biglouis. If you need medical treatment, as most of us will- it will be delivered by a medic who was once a child. Thank goodness for ‘breeders’. What a way to describe loving parents, who themselves will in the main, be people who work and pay taxes at the same time raising the next generation of plumbers, builders, teachers, medics, artists, musicians and more

biglouis I think you have parcels collected or delivered to your house, your bins emptied etc. You are indeed a beneficiary indeed of other people’s kids enabling you to have a life.

X posts Iam 👋

Am I allowed to say this? I think biglouis enjoys winding people up and running away to watch the flak from a distance.
Either that or they are very ignorant and bitter. perhaps both

I have 4 AC and I know how lucky I am that I was able to be a 2 parent family who didn't need extra help from the state but I was raised by a widow, DF killed in an accident when we 3 were very small, so know from first hand how hard it was for her (and us)

With a widow's pension and hard work she was able to make sure none of us were disadvantaged financially
Thank goodness for the safety nets.

I wish people would make their minds up. We are a country with a falling birth rate. Such that it means there will not be enough tax payers to pay for future pensioners. This can be rectified by immigration (a big no no to many) or increasing child birth ( apparently also a big no no). Or are we saying that only certain people should have children?

On child poverty, it sickens me that we have hungry children in this country. Homeless kids, kids literally without a bed to sleep in. For part of my childhood I experienced poverty. I know first hand what it can do to a child’s self esteem and their health. In a rich country like this one I thought we could at least largely solve the problem. Cathy Come Home was a wake up call to a generation . But I truly believe that as a nation we have become less caring. If the equivalent to this program was made now too many people would shrug their shoulders and mutter about the undeserving poor.

"That's the kind of dumb argument my parents would have used"

Why so dumb? Unless one lives like a hermit in splendid isolation, there is a co dependency that's a fact, even if one keeps themselves to themselves there is no doubt a multtude of services used. Interaction and coexistence is there in practically all societies, it's how we evolved from the earliest hunter gatherers. Even the more intelligent of other species, such as elephants have developed co-operation strategies to assist in the survival of their young. Of course we need to invest in the welfare of future generations, what's the alternative?

"No man is an island" John Donne

Calling people "breeders" comes across as contemptuous.

We never claimed benefits but we had a child we couldn’t afford as I didn’t want the alternative. Contraception used, child unplanned but very much wanted and loved. It happens. Maybe I’m a breeder. Maybe there are quite a few of us on Gransnet 😂

I have three adult children and said for years that child benefit needed to be capped at two children because so many people were having large numbers of children and expecting the state to pay for their lifestyle (ie we taxpayers). Most of us limited our family size to the number we could afford: generally two or three children. I always felt that two was a fair number of children for the child benefit cap. It need not stop people like me having more than two children, but we should not expect the state to pay for them.

TerriBull, Biglouis usually does refer to my disagreements with her as " dumb". In her defence, I am a " breeder" so this may contribute to her contempt of my viewpoints

Interesting thought MissAdventure!

Who the allowance is forRate (weekly)
Eldest or only child£25.60
Additional children£16.95 per child

biglouis

*If you eat, the food will have been planted, harvested, and driven to you by a person who used to be a child. If you have a need for pharmaceuticals, these will have been developed, manufactured, and delivered by a range of people who used to be children. If you travel in a bus or a taxi, need surgery or dental work....there's a theme here, I think*

Thats the kind of dumb argument my parents would have used.

The "theme" is that yes of course I use these facilities - and so do the breeders. So my taxes are still going to support "family life". However childfree people - the least selfish group in society - are not getting anything equivalent in return.

Breeders is a very ugly word.

Mouse

I wish people would make their minds up. We are a country with a falling birth rate. Such that it means there will not be enough tax payers to pay for future pensioners. This can be rectified by immigration (a big no no to many) or increasing child birth ( apparently also a big no no). Or are we saying that only certain people should have children?

On child poverty, it sickens me that we have hungry children in this country. Homeless kids, kids literally without a bed to sleep in. For part of my childhood I experienced poverty. I know first hand what it can do to a child’s self esteem and their health. In a rich country like this one I thought we could at least largely solve the problem. Cathy Come Home was a wake up call to a generation . But I truly believe that as a nation we have become less caring. If the equivalent to this program was made now too many people would shrug their shoulders and mutter about the undeserving poor.

Mouse, I watched Cathy Come Home, a Wednesday Play, when I was baby sitting my younger sisters. I was 17. It influenced the politics that have been a constant part of my life since then. I didn’t learn about careers in probation/mental health/ social work for a few more years but eventually did 40 years.

I’ve known many children with no bed, no clean school uniform, not enough to eat and parents who could be described as feckless, incompetent or sad, depressed and without the family support thst aids resilience

So, does charity really begin "At Home"?

Just with our own families?

I see nothing much to suggest it begins at home in the broad sense of the word, at times.

The two child cap has not worked. No matter how many people on here would have liked it to work and stop babies being born, it has not. All it has done is make children in households with more than two, poorer.
Why go on pretending that it is a deterrent, just admit that people don't care.

MissAdventure

Who the allowance is forRate (weekly)
Eldest or only child£25.60
Additional children£16.95 per child

That is Child Benefit (the old Family Allowance). The cap is on the part of Universal Credit that is paid to families with children, and is a lot more than that - £333 a month for the first child and £288 a month for the second. This is on top of CB, housing and other benefits, subject to the overall benefit cap.

If people are given more for every subsequent child, those who work could be forgiven for seeing it as unfair, as wages don't rise if you have more children. Even at the lower rate, someone with five children would get nearly £1500 a month on top of other benefits.

I am not arguing against it - just saying that I can understand why people get fed up when many people are struggling with high housing and energy costs, and it can seem easier not to work, or to limit hours and get top ups than to work full time.

Far better IMO to increase CB, and to provide some of the things that children need, such as a hot meal a day and affordable childcare to everyone. That would also stop the determination of Some People to insist that benefits are spent on TVs and tattoos instead of the children for whom it was intended.

I think yours is the most sensible, and fairest idea, across the board.

It's a huge undertaking though, unravelling it all.

HousePlantQueen

biglouis

If you eat, the food will have been planted, harvested, and driven to you by a person who used to be a child. If you have a need for pharmaceuticals, these will have been developed, manufactured, and delivered by a range of people who used to be children. If you travel in a bus or a taxi, need surgery or dental work....there's a theme here, I think

Thats the kind of dumb argument my parents would have used.

The "theme" is that yes of course I use these facilities - and so do the breeders. So my taxes are still going to support "family life". However childfree people - the least selfish group in society - are not getting anything equivalent in return.

Breeders is a very ugly word.

It is.

Deliberately so.

It is a bitter recrimination against those who have children by individuals who like to convince themselves that they are superior selfless beings - and should be rewarded for it.

far better to increase CB and provide sone if the things children need, such as a hot meal and affordable childcare

Good suggestion Doodledog, as well asa breakfast clubs for all chikdren, as the government propose. Children eligible for free school meals should continue that provision throughout school holidays

Ilovecheese

The two child cap has not worked. No matter how many people on here would have liked it to work and stop babies being born, it has not. All it has done is make children in households with more than two, poorer.
Why go on pretending that it is a deterrent, just admit that people don't care.

That’s not actually true Ilovecheese. The number of children born per woman, regardless of education group, has decreased. That’s not to say it’s directly related to the child benefit policy though.

www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-06-08-fertility-england-and-wales-lowest-recorded-level-women-all-education-groups-oxford

I am happy to help support that child to their full potential

Iam64

*far better to increase CB and provide sone if the things children need, such as a hot meal and affordable childcare*

Good suggestion Doodledog, as well asa breakfast clubs for all chikdren, as the government propose. Children eligible for free school meals should continue that provision throughout school holidays

Agreed, but you missed 'for everyone', which finished my sentence . I would extend those opportunities to all children. My objections to means testing are well-known, but I will reiterate some of the reasons applicable to this case:

Children feel difference keenly, and singling out those who get free meals reminds me of when I was at school and free dinner tickets were a different colour from bought ones, so everyone knew who got them.

It costs money to administrate systems where some qualify and others don't, and that money would be better spent on the meals than on spreadsheets.

Once mass catering is under way, it doesn't cost much per extra meal, and not all children would want to partake anyway, so not doing the paperwork would probably pay for the extra meals.

Working parents often struggle financially in the holidays even if they earn decent money, so charging them takes us back to the 'why should A get extra help when B doesn't?' conundrum.

Parents earning above a threshold because both work should not be paying towards those for whom their lower income is because one of them has chosen not to. It's one thing to subsidise the lower paid and another to make workers pay for people who choose to stay at home, but separating children into 'deserving' and 'undeserving' is untenable.

Far easier to just let all children have free meals if they want them, and do the same with wraparound and holiday childcare - not compulsory, obviously, but not means-tested. It might seem unfair to give places to children who have parents at home, but at least the children would all be off the streets and taking part in structured activities and/or sports.

I suppose then people would be castigated for using the free school meals, by others who
, by their own grit and determination, didn't need to.

Not if they were available to everyone and promoted as such. Means-testing brings stigma - universal provision doesn’t.