Cut children's allowance after 3 kids

end of the road wrote: »

i would be surprised if in reality, that they would think twice about anything with your suggestion.
also, sending children off for adoption because you don't like the parents or they don't fit your view of a perfect parent, or they don't comply with some nonsense course which has no guarantee of achieving the aims you would like, would effectively be stealing children in my view. no better then what the catholic church, among others were doing. it would also be impossible to do, as you would probably be removing children from every parent bar yourself, and maybe a small few others, as very few would actually comply with any of this, and rightly so. not only that, but there is no guarantee that adopting these children to other parents would mean they turn out decent, as there have been decent parents who have turned out scumbags, and scumbags who have turned out decent people. this is why your idea of a perfect parent cannot be realised as a whole across society.
when the state intervenes to remove children from their parents, in this country at least, it's (rightly) because there is a genuine reason to do so, their parents are a genuine serious danger to their children. it is not because the state doesn't like the parents.

I think that suggestion was tongue in cheek

Grayson wrote: »

It's effectively making life harder for those kids who come after the first two.
I fully understand where the desire to cap the allowance comes from but if it's going to hurt kids then it's probably a bad thing.

I can understand the angle you're coming at it from, but personal responsibility has to play a part.

If this came into effect, in theory it shouldn't harm any kids, as people who aren't able to support a child wouldnt (or at least shouldn't) have one.



As an aside, I like the OP suggestion, except if it were up to me, I'd be harsher.

Increase the Child benefit payment and give it as a full rate to the first child. Half the rate for the 2nd child, quarter for the 3rd child and nothing for any children thereafter.

There is an anti-welfare stance on boards in general, but the unfortunate reality (as someone living on a council estate who sees it every day) is that people are milking the system.

People who never have worked, and never will work, will have children to:

1) Get up the housing list
2) Claim single motherhood, and stagger their kids so they can state they need to look after their child, so FAS/SOLAS/etc. won't make them do courses or get jobs.

It might sound far-fetched, but I see loads of these 'mothers' every single day. I think the people that claim this stuff is nonsense are the ones who are fortunate enough to not have to mingle with them.

Also, just to add, I am 30, male, making a self employed wage that keeps me ticking over, but couldn't support a child on it properly. Partner's wage included and we'd get by but there'd be no luxuries.

I live in a 'disadvantaged' area (full of scummers) that even I hate. I'd never have a child because 1) I couldn't afford it, and 2) the chances of having a child that's surrounded by useless lazy scumbags, turning into a useless lazy scumbag by association, would annoy me a lot and I'd view it as a failure of parenting.

So I make the sensible decision to not have a child. Effectively meaning when I'm 60-70-80 and need assistance, I'll have no kids there that can do anything for me. No one will call around to me when I'm old and financially fcuked, but that's the responsible, decent thing to do.

If I sat on my hole for the rest of my life and made some nonsense disability claim, had a few kids, i'd get a reduced rent, extra benefits, etc. and I'd probably still see similar money coming in.

I wouldn't pay for anything because if the fridge breaks, the welfare officer will buy me a new one (exceptional needs payment). I'd be where I am at the moment, probably not much better or worse off, but I'd be a sponger and I'd hate that. This country simply won't let you starve on the streets (no matter how hard certain people try to portray otherwise).

So I applaud all the people out there that go to work, bust their hump all day and make the sensible and respectable decisions. Especially those on lower incomes and just about getting by. They're the ones keeping the country running, but it's generally not worth their while.


The Margaret Cash's of society need the proper boot in the hole they deserve (as we enter into Budget 2019, full of both welfare increases and income tax increases.. who's really winning here?!).

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

The very fact that Citizens information have to publish the below, is worrying enough.

Family sizeMonthly rate, €
Eight children 1,120

Yes, which is the cost of putting one of those eight kids in crèche for a single month. The idea of there being a Children's Allowance which incentivises people to have more children only exists in the minds of the morons here who utterly fail to see how the wealthiest in society have a myriad of ways to ensure they get much more from the state than somebody on welfare could ever get.

It's quite extraordinary how obsessive people here get about people on welfare, but never once start threads about the enormous rise in inequality in the western world since the early 1970s, a divide which has actually become significantly larger as a result of the last recession.