Has someone hacks Pete's account - or left himself logged on and the nurses at his nursing home are posting on his behalf ?
As instead of the usual complete twaddle that he spouts, some of it actually makes some sense. Either that or Pete is not the true dye in the bed leftie he like to make us believe ! Or could it be he is as old as he says and he has started to see the world for what it is ?

Richard

 

Maybe only the first child should get state education and access to the NHS too

 

Martin do you think we should be paying people to have children? We're full up as it is!

 

Yeah,I am waiting for them to put a tax on sex because I am due a massive rebate. and the single persons allowance.

 

do you think if people didn't get paid child benefit , they wouldn't have kids ?

They were always having kids , its just at the minute they can claim for them. I don't see much changing in conceptions if the Child Benefit was stopped. I imagine we will always pay for the in some way.

 

Sorry, but they are planning to tax that too....

 

I would rather bang nails through my hand than agree with Lewis on anything but on this subject, there is some validity in the proposal, in my opinion. It raises all sorts of moral questions not least as Martin has mentioned about what State services a 2nd, 3rd child etc would be entitled to, but for me, much like the obesity/smoking/drinking thing, something at some stage will have to give way; you can't expect handout after handout just because "that's the way it's always been".

 

Totally agree with the benefit to be restricted to one child, it's your right to have a child as a human, it's not however your right to have a tax payer funded large family.

I currently have my third on the way, but this was after a lengthy conversation about whether we can afford to provide a good life for them all.

I have had to comletely forgo my child benefit, but in a way I welcome it. It's never been something I have been completely comfortable receiving.

 

You need to phase any rule changes in gradually at say a change of 5% per month otherwise you'll have people inducing premature babies left right and centre.

 

I reckon you should change the law in 8 months' time

 

But what if you lost your job , and couldnt pay your mortgage and the missus had triplets , and there was no state benefits , what would happen ?

The same could happen to someone with 1 child and i just worry what would the outcome be ?

 

Yes you are right of course. I put it badly and meant that one child's benefit would help with the first child but having twins would be an expensive occurrence. It is fair to say that one cannot expect to deliberately have twins and that it is a bit hard in the above case if you do. I can't see the government making that a special case though.

Les

 

I never suggested there should be NO state benefits, just restricting the child benefit to one child. I believe there are a whole range of other benefits to act as a safety net for the above scenario.

 

We are not paying people to have kids (not with child benefit anyway). So to answer your question, no obviously we should not pay people to have kids.

It appears to been forgotten that it is actually quite important for the future of humanity that we reproduce!

Oh and as for this being a 'vote winner', I'm pretty sure this would go down about as well as the poll tax

 

As iam a single bloke with no kids but work full time and pay tax, it would be nice if i could have instead of child benefit, a monthly contribution to my fuel costs for my pickup as its a thirsty *******!

 

I agree, I would like some Ferrari benefit to help me buy one as I have no kids either

 

For people without earned incomes I disagree, it would be financially impossible for them to support children without it. The trouble is the range of benefits available adds up (housing benefit being the most obvious one), so actually we are paying them to have kids.

As for being a vote winner, my opinion is that you are in a minority. The trouble today Martin is as a country spending 170bn pounds a year more than we earn. It simply can't continue. The old ways have to go. Where would you put the knife?

 

Only the intelligent should be encouraged to breed, now that is a vote winner