Damage done to the UK ALREADY following the elction

Obviously, but some people would not expect the government to provide for them and their families and hopefully would have been sensible enough to limit their families to what they could afford thereby limiting the risk of falling on hard times in the first place. Why is it that most of the so called poor people portrayed on t.v. have more than two children, smoke, drink have all the technology imaginable and what's more are constantly demanding larger council accommodation.

Because TV producers choose families which will attract audiences.

Many people, including families, are just a couple of pay "cheques" away from destitution.

I agree Becket and although posts are allowed to be entirely comprised of old quotes/tweets/links instead of the thoughts of the poster, it does get tedious after a while.I just skip over them rather than read things from twitter/random bloggers etc.

The media, both newspapers and tv have their own agenda.

The right wing script highlights feckless scroungsrs with too many children, just as the brexit vox pops always came from leavers in a Labour constituency, never Remainers in a Tory constituency.

Janpt

... of course it is, that's what the viewers want to see, no point seeing people like me that have hit hard times through no fault of their own - it's called PROPAGANDA!

So .... when myself and my husband were earning good money between us and decided to have a family at the age of around 30, we should have instead not bothered just in case at the age of 43 I would be struck down with a potentially curable illness that took 12 years and 18 operations to sort out, eventually leaving me far worse off than I was in the first place! Obviously I should have spent my money on a crystal ball instead!

Same here Janpt, husband, both working decided to have 2 children. Still both working and ok money wise. Daughter developed medical problems and husband couldn't cope so off he disappeared leaving me a freckless one parent family.

Small amount of savings was spent on moving and there I was living hand to mouth and boy was it hard. So don't EVER think it won't happen to you or your family.

Obviously there are many like yourselves who through no fault of their own have fallen on hard times. I was referring to those like the young couple with seven children living on benefits and expecting the state to provide who have made totally irresponsible life choices. Please do not take offence at my comments. I do recognize the differences.

So sorry. I did not expect my comments to be taken personally by those they did not apply to and certainly not to anyone in your situation. I will not post again. Please accept my sincere apologies.

You have nothing whatsoever to apologise for Janpt

Whenever anyone makes any comments on here about those obviously abusing the benefits system, there are always howls of outrage from some quarters.

I also read about the unemployed couple with 7 children complaining about how short of money they are.

They shamelessly appealed for money to pay for their children’s Christmas presents.

Neither parent works of course. The father reckons he’s depressed and stressed.

Yet still some wonder why Iain Duncan Smith was determined to force layabouts like him and his wife to get off their backsides and get a job.

I'm sure they could have asked you how to write an application letter and CV for a job in the modern workplace JenniferEccles. You obviously have so much experience of getting off your backside to earn a living.

I am sure everyone was perfectly well aware that Janpt was not referring to those who through no fault of their own fell on hard times, whether it be through illness or disability.

However some never miss an opportunity to deliberately mis read a post and come on here, all guns blazing.

I was a stay at home mum yes, but the difference is I NEVER claimed benefits.

I didn’t work because we could afford for me to stay home and bring up the children.

That is the important difference as well you know.

Why so much resentment over my lifestyle when it cost the taxpayer nothing ?

You have no right to dictate to anybody how they should live their lives. By your own admission, you haven't worked outside the home for years. I doubt if you have any idea at all about finding a job. I assume you're not going to claim a state pension, don't ever use the NHS, wouldn't dream of ever using any public service and don't use publicly funded roads. You obviously didn't claim any family allowance/child benefit.

I don't resent your lifestyle, but I am outraged that you have so little experience of life that you think you can judge other people's lifestyles.

The number of families with five or more children in the UK is miniscule - approximately 76,000 families had five or more children in January 2019 (including well-known "scroungers" such as Jamie Oliver and Gordon Ramsey). There are approximately 19 million households.

You cannot design a benefit system designed to "punish" the exceptions.

Add Jacob Rees-Mogg to the list of people with more than five children.

Thank you for your support Jennifer. There are a lot of jealous people on here and a lot of people out there who think nothing of asking for more and more to be given to them as if it's their right. As I have already said I know that there are those with many problems through no fault of their own and the issue is not with them. Many seem incapable of understanding how outrageous it is to bring children into the world who they cannot afford to feed and clothe themselves. I hope the government will keep the benefit cap on 2 children

Poor youJenniferEccles the vitriol directed against you here is absolutely awful.

Seems to me all you’ve done (I’ve not waded through all the posts, just the recent ones) was to be a stay at home mum? My aunt who is now 76y did the same. Her husband earned (just) enough to make it a viable alternative. She returned to paid work as a hospital bed maker (probably called an auxiliary nurse nowadays) when her youngest child, my cousin, was 12y.

You made a choice. Others make different ones. Each to their own I say.
?

I’m perfectly certain JRM doesn’t claim benefits so using him as an example is pointless.

I don’t care how many children people have so long as they don’t expect the rest of us to pay for them.

Incidentally my work record is irrelevant.

I don't like the way some people talk about children as if they are some sort of optional extra to society. Children are necessary to society or society will die. We should welcome them into our country and be glad to support them when they are vulnerable in the hope that they will support us when the positions are reversed. Young people pay our pensions, without young people there will be no future taxpayers.

Janpt Why on earth do you think that a lot of people on here are jealous. I haven't gained that impression at all. As for your hope that the government keeps the 2 children limit in place - it's outrageous. Child number 3 (or 4, or 5 or 6) didn't ask to be born. All children need the best possible chance in life.

I was a volunteer for Save the Children for over 20 years and one thing I learned was that the children are not at fault. As well as working abroad the charity works with families in the UK to narrow the gap between children living in poverty and their better off classmates. It's doing essential work, which shouldn't be necessary in one of hte richest countries in the world.

My son has 5 children, 2 came with the mum, 2 were planned and the last one was a surprise. So should he have not any children of his own because he already had two? Should the last one not been born? He has worked, he has also been out of work, due to wife having a stroke at an early age and he stopped work to bring up the children and care for the wife. Could he have done it any different?

We cannot as a society just close down any help needed because there are people who abuse the system. If you think that is the case then MP should not be claiming any expenses after their abuse of the system.

And yes JenniferE you have claimed benefits, family allowance for one.

JenniferEccles I think growstuff has already pointed out that if you live in this country you will have benefited from the social and physical infrastucture those who are or have been employed have paid for via income tax.

But, setting that to one side, what exactly do you think should happen to struggling families who, by your reckoning, are irresponsible because they have insufficient income to afford the basics for these supposed great hordes of children? It appears that you believe society as a whole has no obligation whatsoever to provide for families in such a situation. That it is just "hard luck" if those children cannot be properly, fed, clothed and housed. That it is desirable and necessary for them to pay for what has been described by some as the fecklessness of their parents. And how do you think these underfed, poorly housed and clothed and under-educated children are likely to end up? As upstanding citizens who are grateful to this society and who will work willingly and hard to contribute to it?

Or perhaps you believe that their children should be taken away and put into "care" (that would be expensive and doesn't have a great track record), or even that some women or men should be sterilised (there's certainly a historical precedent for that).

In reality, there are very few families containing large numbers of children, although according to right wing newspapers, you would think the country was overrun with them. The average number of children per family in this country is 1.7. On a personal level, I don't know many people who have more than two children.

In 2013, in an article about welfare provision, the Observer reported:

"To quote the Economist: "Though most of them seem to end up in newspapers, in 2011 there were just 130 families in the country with 10 children claiming at least one out-of-work benefit. Only 8% of benefit claimants have three or more children. What evidence there is suggests that, on average, unemployed people have similar numbers of children to employed people ... it is not clear at all that benefits are a significant incentive to have children."

These days many working people - even people with professional qualifications - can hardly get by, even with two incomes. Do you suggest they never have children? Have you seen what is happening in Japan and China where people have been discouraged - or forced - into limiting their families? They now have a massive problem with too few young people to provide for the growing number of older people.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Maybe you're not the only one Urmstongran but I have no objection to what you rudely describe as GagaJo's "verbiage" and I guess some others found her OP interesting and relevant..

Very relevant