Jobless parents who insist on breeding may face losing benefits.

[Prepper1]

It doesn't help with the culture they have nowadays. The entitlement culture of I want, I need but I don't want to work for it I want somebody to give it me for nothing.
And it doesn't help matters that you earn a penitence when you work either unfortunately.
Kids are observant, and they see there mates at school with all the latest gear when their parents are on the dole and they have nothing hardly are your working...

---

That should be pittance not penitence !!!!

[bigpaul]

ah yes, we are now into the "Designer" label and the must have gizmo's, i was brought up in an age if you wanted something you saved up for it, not bought it now and worried(or not) about paying for it later! i never was "into" fashion or stuff, i like stuff that works not what the "brand" is!

[Hexyprep]

Just to stir a bit.
I agree 100% people who can't afford kids to start with shouldn't have them or shouldn't be paid for by the rest of us!... but... also I know someone who wants to work and infact got a job to support her 3 kids... but being on minimum wage and having her benefits taken away meant she was earning so much less than she was on benefits that she had to quit in order to pay her rent and feed the kids. Her story goes like this: her and her husband decided to have 3 kids when they could aford it... but he died of cancer 9 months after their youngest was born and he only had a small life insurance policy through his work which basically covered the funeral and gave her a little to fall back on. She made the decition to sell their house as the mortgage was too much for her to handle alone. She made a little over £5000 on the house... although she had been on benefits for about 4 months at this point (as the bit of insurance money dried up)when her little one was about 18 months she went back to work. She used the money she made from the house to top up her earnings... but when that money ran out she was unable to make enough to cover basic needs and got behind in rent... after weighing it up and working out how much she would get on benefits she left her job and is now on benefits and recieving enough to live. She volunteers locally a couple hours a week so she has something to put on her CV in the future, but does live off benefits and can't see a way off them right now.
So baring this in mind should she not be entitled to help?

[bigpaul]

(8 October 2012, 14:33)Hexyprep Wrote: Just to stir a bit.
I agree 100% people who can't afford kids to start with shouldn't have them or shouldn't be paid for by the rest of us!... but... also I know someone who wants to work and infact got a job to support her 3 kids... but being on minimum wage and having her benefits taken away meant she was earning so much less than she was on benefits that she had to quit in order to pay her rent and feed the kids. Her story goes like this: her and her husband decided to have 3 kids when they could aford it... but he died of cancer 9 months after their youngest was born and he only had a small life insurance policy through his work which basically covered the funeral and gave her a little to fall back on. She made the decition to sell their house as the mortgage was too much for her to handle alone. She made a little over £5000 on the house... although she had been on benefits for about 4 months at this point (as the bit of insurance money dried up)when her little one was about 18 months she went back to work. She used the money she made from the house to top up her earnings... but when that money ran out she was unable to make enough to cover basic needs and got behind in rent... after weighing it up and working out how much she would get on benefits she left her job and is now on benefits and recieving enough to live. She volunteers locally a couple hours a week so she has something to put on her CV in the future, but does live off benefits and can't see a way off them right now.
So baring this in mind should she not be entitled to help?

we were talking about people who have NEVER worked and never intend to but continue to have more and more kids all paid for on benefit, we werent talking about people like your friend.

[Hexyprep]

(8 October 2012, 14:38)bigpaul Wrote:

(8 October 2012, 14:33)Hexyprep Wrote: Just to stir a bit.
I agree 100% people who can't afford kids to start with shouldn't have them or shouldn't be paid for by the rest of us!... but... also I know someone who wants to work and infact got a job to support her 3 kids... but being on minimum wage and having her benefits taken away meant she was earning so much less than she was on benefits that she had to quit in order to pay her rent and feed the kids. Her story goes like this: her and her husband decided to have 3 kids when they could aford it... but he died of cancer 9 months after their youngest was born and he only had a small life insurance policy through his work which basically covered the funeral and gave her a little to fall back on. She made the decition to sell their house as the mortgage was too much for her to handle alone. She made a little over £5000 on the house... although she had been on benefits for about 4 months at this point (as the bit of insurance money dried up)when her little one was about 18 months she went back to work. She used the money she made from the house to top up her earnings... but when that money ran out she was unable to make enough to cover basic needs and got behind in rent... after weighing it up and working out how much she would get on benefits she left her job and is now on benefits and recieving enough to live. She volunteers locally a couple hours a week so she has something to put on her CV in the future, but does live off benefits and can't see a way off them right now.
So baring this in mind should she not be entitled to help?

we were talking about people who have NEVER worked and never intend to but continue to have more and more kids all paid for on benefit, we werent talking about people like your friend.

Fair enough... then all I do is agree.

[Barneyboy]

(8 October 2012, 14:46)Hexyprep Wrote:

(8 October 2012, 14:38)bigpaul Wrote:

(8 October 2012, 14:33)Hexyprep Wrote: Just to stir a bit.
I agree 100% people who can't afford kids to start with shouldn't have them or shouldn't be paid for by the rest of us!... but... also I know someone who wants to work and infact got a job to support her 3 kids... but being on minimum wage and having her benefits taken away meant she was earning so much less than she was on benefits that she had to quit in order to pay her rent and feed the kids. Her story goes like this: her and her husband decided to have 3 kids when they could aford it... but he died of cancer 9 months after their youngest was born and he only had a small life insurance policy through his work which basically covered the funeral and gave her a little to fall back on. She made the decition to sell their house as the mortgage was too much for her to handle alone. She made a little over £5000 on the house... although she had been on benefits for about 4 months at this point (as the bit of insurance money dried up)when her little one was about 18 months she went back to work. She used the money she made from the house to top up her earnings... but when that money ran out she was unable to make enough to cover basic needs and got behind in rent... after weighing it up and working out how much she would get on benefits she left her job and is now on benefits and recieving enough to live. She volunteers locally a couple hours a week so she has something to put on her CV in the future, but does live off benefits and can't see a way off them right now.
So baring this in mind should she not be entitled to help?

we were talking about people who have NEVER worked and never intend to but continue to have more and more kids all paid for on benefit, we werent talking about people like your friend.

Fair enough... then all I do is agree.

this pains me to say it but i agree with BP AND NR AND ALL, sorry that really hurt

[Weyoun]

NorthernRaider Wrote: Theres a neighbour of my wifes friend who has five kids, she gets over £32,000 a year in various benefits, shes got sky TV and drives a car !!!!, my wifes friend works permenant nights an an HCA in the hospital and makes £22,000 and cannot afford Sky or Car !!!

My Wife's cousin has 7 kids. She brags about having them to keep on benefits. Owns a house, car, Xbox, all usual chav extra's. I work damn hard to keep up with her lifestyl;e and it irks me that I have to pay for her brood.

[Rupert]

They should limit child benefit to the first two children.
I've got no problem having a welfare state for genuine people but not people who don't want to work.
If people don't want to work but milk the system make them have food stamps and make it so they can only buy essentials such as bread, milk, baked beans etc.

[Straight Shooter]

ITs about time everyone takes on their responsibilities ...............this also would apply to banksters and politicians........... lead from the top down...... but don,t hold your breath

[NorthernRaider]

(8 October 2012, 16:46)Rupert Wrote: They should limit child benefit to the first two children.
I've got no problem having a welfare state for genuine people but not people who don't want to work.
If people don't want to work but milk the system make them have food stamps and make it so they can only buy essentials such as bread, milk, baked beans etc.

Eh? Hang on why should when some feckless git decides to breed that i should have to pay for THEIR kids??? There should be no child benefits at all, If they cant feed em they should not breed them.