2 child benefit cap.

jamrumples

Does anybody know if this is going to be changed? Any of the benefit caps? I think there has been voted on it before but can’t be sure. I just wondered if anybody had any inkling as to whether the government were going to scrap this and help choldrem in our country not go to bed Hungry. 

poppy123456

I’m not aware of any changes to this in the future. 

jamrumples

Thank thanks poppy

racyguy

jamrumples said:

Does anybody know if this is going to be changed? Any of the benefit caps? I think there has been voted on it before but can’t be sure. I just wondered if anybody had any inkling as to whether the government were going to scrap this and help choldrem in our country not go to bed Hungry. 

To be honest I doubt that many in the country would want to see this cap removed. Do we really want to go back to the days of 'Benefit Street' with young girls producing more and more children simply because the more kids they have the more benefit money they will get plus have a better chance of getting housed by the council?

Biblioklept

I would very much like to see the 2 child cap and the benefit cap removed.

The media and government did a very good job at convincing people that there were endless young girls having kids just to get more money but there is very little evidence to support this. This notion has been going on for years without a scrap of evidence aside from the odd article you see in the news. 

The 2 child cap and benefit cap are both outrageous in my opinion.

woodbine

racyguy said:

jamrumples said:

Does anybody know if this is going to be changed? Any of the benefit caps? I think there has been voted on it before but can’t be sure. I just wondered if anybody had any inkling as to whether the government were going to scrap this and help choldrem in our country not go to bed Hungry. 

To be honest I doubt that many in the country would want to see this cap removed. Do we really want to go back to the days of 'Benefit Street' with young girls producing more and more children simply because the more kids they have the more benefit money they will get plus have a better chance of getting housed by the council?

That's very judgemental, teenage pregnancy has been falling for some years now, and what housing by the council ? the waiting list are huge.

bg844

I agree with the concept of the 2 child limit but agree there should be some instances where you get a little bit of extra help if you have more children (I know they have exceptions for some cases which I think is the right thing). Ultimately people would agree and disagree either way.

Biblioklept

I still don't agree with it even with the exceptions for multiple births of abuse victims. I won't rant on about the reasons but I have a lot of them  

Interesting that in 2019 a House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee report agreed: 

The Government must return to providing support for all children through the benefits system. This would involve the reversal of a major policy, which is not something that we would recommend without serious consideration. But the two child limit not only fails to achieve the Government’s own objectives, but has unintended consequences that no Government should be willing to accept.

Cartini

I think the cap should stay in place for a very simple reason; if you can`t afford children, don`t have them.

There is a 5 year gap between our 2 sons for this very reason; we couldn`t afford to have a 2nd child until I had been promoted.  We never had a 3rd for the same reason; even after promotion, a 3rd child would have been too expensive.

Cartini

bg844 said:

 Ultimately people would agree and disagree either way.

You are absolutely spot on there.  For every person that says the cap should stay in place, there will be one person that says it should go.

Karen7788

I have three children, all grown, in professional careers and paying quite a lot of tax. This country has an ageing population and we need to start planning for the future, so we can either have more children, have more immigration or perhaps both. 

Regardless of any decisions parents make or don’t make children shouldn’t go to bed hungry. We all have a duty as a country to support our most vulnerable, children included. 

poppy123456

I think it’s a little harsh saying you shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them. When is it a good time to have children? 

My daughter had her 2nd baby 3
weeks ago. Her first was born in March 2020. Both her and her partner work full time and claim no benefits. My daughter worked until 2 weeks before the baby was born. 

From October their earnings will be £1,200/month less because she will be claiming just SMP. Still no benefits entitlement. It will be a struggle but if they had waited until they were more financially stable with cost of living increased so much they may never have had my granddaughter. 

woodbine

The family allowance act of 1946 saw a payment of 5/- a week for each child EXCEPT the eldest, it was part of the Beveridge report of 1942 and had actually been discussed as early as the 1920's. A free commons vote overturned plans to pay the allowance to the father, In 1981 family allowance became child benefit payable for all children.

Karen7788

My third child was a lovely surprise, 11years after my second. I then found myself to be a single mum, no fault of my own, after 22 years of marriage. I worked three jobs, went to college and made sure that my children had a good education. The only benefit I got was child benefit and it was a massive help. 

All children are a blessing and should be treated as such. If we only had children that we “could afford” most of us wouldn’t have been born. 

Cartini

poppy123456 said:

I think it’s a little harsh saying you shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them. When is it a good time to have children? 

It`s not harsh at all poppy, it`s common sense (that`s a general statement, not criticising you).  Having children when you can`t afford them means they will most likely go to bed hungry.  A good time to have them is when you know you can dress & feed them and give them a secure life.

I have to say, in my mind, there is a difference between "bit of a struggle" (your daughter) and not being able to afford them (my then wife and I).  Had we had our 2nd child close to the first one, it wouldn`t have been a struggle, it would have been a choice between having food or not.  We were that skint, which is why we waited.

janer1967

Controversial subject that Dan also be sexist 

A man can have several children with different women but in most cases because it is the woman claiming the benefits or seperate household claims the man can have lots more than the 2 children cap 

Eg my ex had 2 children with his first wife claimed benefits for whole time together never worked 

Then had q child with me we didn't claim any benefits at the time we were together but now I claim for his son 

He now has 2 more kids with his partner and she has 3 from prev relationship (my ex grandkids BTW) and they claim benefits neither of them having worked since my ex stopped working so he didn't have to pay mr any maintenance 

So in effect he is getting more than the 2 children cap for his own children 

poppy123456

Cartini said:

poppy123456 said:

I think it’s a little harsh saying you shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them. When is it a good time to have children? 

It`s not harsh at all poppy, it`s common sense (that`s a general statement, not criticising you).  Having children when you can`t afford them means they will most likely go to bed hungry.  A good time to have them is when you know you can dress & feed them and give them a secure life.

I have to say, in my mind, there is a difference between "bit of a struggle" (your daughter) and not being able to afford them (my then wife and I).  Had we had our 2nd child close to the first one, it wouldn`t have been a struggle, it would have been a choice between having food or not.  We were that skint, which is why we waited.

I call it harsh, you call it common sense. We are both entitled to our opinions so lets just leave it at that.

Cartini

poppy123456 said:

Cartini said:

poppy123456 said:

I think it’s a little harsh saying you shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them. When is it a good time to have children? 

It`s not harsh at all poppy, it`s common sense (that`s a general statement, not criticising you).  Having children when you can`t afford them means they will most likely go to bed hungry.  A good time to have them is when you know you can dress & feed them and give them a secure life.

I have to say, in my mind, there is a difference between "bit of a struggle" (your daughter) and not being able to afford them (my then wife and I).  Had we had our 2nd child close to the first one, it wouldn`t have been a struggle, it would have been a choice between having food or not.  We were that skint, which is why we waited.

I call it harsh, you call it common sense. We are both entitled to our opinions so lets just leave it at that.

We are indeed but, unfortunately, with your closing line you are saying I cannot voice my opinion

calcotti

Cartini said:..Having children when you can`t afford them means they will most likely go to bed hungry.  A good time to have them is when you know you can dress & feed them and give them a secure life.

That argument rather assumes that people have stable lives. People can make perfectly rational decisions based on their circumstances but then something changes (whether due to economics, pandemics, health etc) and then need support, It's the children that end up living in poverty. If nobody had children unless they had already secured enough money to support a child for the next 18 years then nobody would have any children.

Cartini

calcotti said:

Cartini said:..Having children when you can`t afford them means they will most likely go to bed hungry.  A good time to have them is when you know you can dress & feed them and give them a secure life.

That argument rather assumes that people have stable lives. People can make perfectly rational decisions based on their circumstances but then something changes (whether due to economics, pandemics, health etc) and then need support, It's the children that end up living in poverty. If nobody had children unless they had already secured enough money to support a child for the next 18 years then nobody would have any children.

At the point of deciding to have children, that is absolutely correct.  No where have I stated about changing circumstances; circumstances do change, some for the best and some for the worst, that`s a given.

calcotti

Cartini said:

calcotti said:

Cartini said:..Having children when you can`t afford them means they will most likely go to bed hungry.  A good time to have them is when you know you can dress & feed them and give them a secure life.

That argument rather assumes that people have stable lives. People can make perfectly rational decisions based on their circumstances but then something changes (whether due to economics, pandemics, health etc) and then need support, It's the children that end up living in poverty. If nobody had children unless they had already secured enough money to support a child for the next 18 years then nobody would have any children.

At the point of deciding to have children, that is absolutely correct.  No where have I stated about changing circumstances; circumstances do change, some for the best and some for the worst, that`s a given. 

But that’s why the two child limit makes no sense. Your argument appeared to be that the cap makes sense because it stops people being feckless, my argument is that people are in difficultly because they may have experienced a change.