Poor people shouldn't have more than two kids?

Tiddlypeeps

My next door neighbors when I was growing up are a perfect example of how the social welfare system is flawed. The mother popped out a new child every year, when I moved away she was on child number 8! Those children grew up in pure poverty. They always wore rags and were only allowed to wear there shoes to school. They were very clearly malnourished. The parents could still afford to go out drinking and go out to dinner, and the father smoked.

While limiting the number of children poor people have would solve the problem there really isn't any viable or humane way to implement such a system. Stamps for food and clothing is the only way to fix these sort of scenarios.

iPlop

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

My next door neighbors when I was growing up are a perfect example of how the social welfare system is flawed. The mother popped out a new child every year, when I moved away she was on child number 8! Those children grew up in pure poverty. They always wore rags and were only allowed to wear there shoes to school. They were very clearly malnourished. The parents could still afford to go out drinking and go out to dinner!

They should have been sterelized after number two tbh!!!

fonecrusher1

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

Stamps for food and clothing is the only way to fix these sort of scenarios.

Yup thats what i said a few times but it must be too sensible a solution for the AH crowd because it hasn't really been discussed.

I think it would have a drastic effect on a certain portion of society who seem to have dozens of children as a way of passing time. You'd soon see an increase in condom sales.

mickydoomsux

No one should be stopped from having kids but no one should get a free house or free cash just for having them either.

Childrens allowance should be abolished/have a means test applied to it. Why do people get free money just for being biologically capable of squirting out a sprog? I have blond hair, i demand 'Guy With Blond Hair Allowance'.

If you want kids you pay for them. If you don't then get the ****ing thing aborted before it's born instead of having it, not raising it properly and expecting someone else to pick up the tab.

wolfpawnat

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

You'd soon see an increase in condom sales.

Make a social welfare grant for the use of condoms! That will stop a lot of them having kids within 20 minutes alone!!!!!!

landsleaving

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Yup thats what i said a few times but it must be too sensible a solution for the AH crowd because it hasn't really been discussed.

I think it would have a drastic effect on a certain portion of society who seem to have dozens of children as a way of passing time. You'd soon see an increase in condom sales.

I agree, but it's not really very funny so I didn't want to post about it since no one would thank me

iPlop

Look the country is fooked ,is it not reasonable to ask/force people people in disadvantaged area's to stop having kids until the recession is over?NO i'll tell you why! "Wha recessinnn ,im stillll creamin' ehh" I know this through my OH ,her family is full of them

fonecrusher1

landsleaving wrote: »

I agree, but it's not really very funny so I didn't want to post about it since no one would thank me

I know i should have thrown in a father ted reference at least.:(

Something like this;

Hey Ted?....yes Dougal I think they should abandon the cash welfare supplement for children & introduce a food/clothing stamp system in its place. Do you think so Dougal?.....

dvpower

OldNotWIse wrote: »

With respect, I never said they stood to MAKE money on their children, as distinct from having everything paid for.

With respect, if you think that social welfare payments cover all of the costs associated with raising a child, you need to think deeper.

starbelgrade

syklops wrote: »

FFS, this thread is getting ridiculous. She is simply suggesting that people who receive benefit/social welfare should not be able to have as many kids as they want and get more many as a result.

What is so difficult to understand?

All of it.

dvpower

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Childrens allowance should be abolished/have a means test applied to it. Why do people get free money just for being biologically capable of squirting out a sprog? I have blond hair, i demand 'Guy With Blond Hair Allowance'.

Fair enough. Better still; can we apply this new rule retrospectively? Anyone who used to be a child could pay back the child benefits that have already been paid on their behalf? Who's in?

While we're at it, can we stop the other benefits we pay to people that are 'biologically capable of squirting out a sprog', like our free primary and secondary education systems?

Donkey Oaty

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Make a social welfare grant for the use of condoms! That will stop a lot of them having kids within 20 minutes alone!!!!!!

As a taxpayer I would insist on them having cheap and uncomfortable condoms, not the luxury ribbed buzzy ones. And no flavoured ones either.

King Felix

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

As a taxpayer I would insist on them having cheap and uncomfortable condoms, not the luxury ribbed buzzy ones. And no flavoured ones either.

And none of that KY Jelly business. Butter vouchers were good enough in my day.

iPlop

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

As a taxpayer I would insist on them having cheap and uncomfortable condoms, not the luxury ribbed buzzy ones. And no flavoured ones either.

Made out of Aspestos!

mickydoomsux

dvpower wrote: »

Fair enough. Better still; can we apply this new rule retrospectively? Anyone who used to be a child could pay back the child benefits that have already been paid on their behalf? Who's in?

What, you mean like paying taxes when you get older and get a job? We already do that. We're already all 'in', well those of us that pay tax that is.

starbelgrade

mickydoomsux wrote: »

What, you mean like paying taxes when you get older and get a job? We already do that. We're already all 'in', well those of us that pay tax that is.

Everyone pays tax.

dvpower

mickydoomsux wrote: »

What, you mean like paying taxes when you get older and get a job? We already do that. We're already all 'in', well those of us that pay tax that is.

Exactly. That's how society works. You get some benefits when you're a child (Child Benefit, free education,... ). You pay it back as an adult (tax, ...:mad:).
Everyone's happy!

iPlop

starbelgrade wrote: »

Everyone pays tax.

I got my pay check today and I had 2 days O/T ,a bank holiday and a bonus...And what did I get? 35% of it! Yes funding the useless is benefiting me!!!!LOVE THIS COUNTRY :rolleyes:

starbelgrade

Septic Leper wrote: »

I got my pay check today and I had 2 days O/T ,a bank holiday and a bonus...And what did I get? 35% of it! Yes funding the useless is benefiting me!!!!LOVE THIS COUNTRY :rolleyes:

So - tell me this... who paid for your education? Did you ever use public transport before you started working? Who subsidised that? When you were born, who paid for the hospital costs?

dvpower

Septic Leper wrote: »

I got my pay check today and I had 2 days O/T ,a bank holiday and a bonus...And what did I get? 35% of it! Yes funding the useless is benefiting me!!!!LOVE THIS COUNTRY :rolleyes:

You paid 65% tax on your earnings? You need to get a better accountant (or move to Ireland where the maginal tax rate is much lower).

iPlop

dvpower wrote: »

You paid 65% tax on your earnings? You need to get a better accountant (or move to Ireland where the maginal tax rate is much lower).

Only on everything after my TFA not 65% but it looks awfully bad.It seems to be in this country that if you work harder your penalised:mad: Im not doing overtime again! FCUK dat!!!!

iPlop

starbelgrade wrote: »

So - tell me this... who paid for your education? Did you ever use public transport before you started working? Who subsidised that? When you were born, who paid for the hospital costs?

My parents did!

Jesus Wept

People should have kids a lot less often than they do.
This is just one of the reasons.

starbelgrade

Septic Leper wrote: »

Only on everything after my TFA not 65% but it looks awfully bad.It seems to be in this country that if you work harder your penalised:mad: Im not doing overtime again! FCUK dat!!!!

So, if people on social welfare should be limited to having 2 kids, what would you say to limiting those on the lower tax bracket to just 3 kids and a free-for-all for higher earners?

Would that seem fair to you? After all, if you're not willing to put in the overtime & work harder, then why should you be afforded the luxury of spawning as you please?

iPlop

starbelgrade wrote: »

So, if people on social welfare should be limited to having 2 kids, what would you say to limiting those on the lower tax bracket to just 3 kids and a free-for-all for higher earners?

Would that seem fair to you? After all, if you're not willing to put in the overtime & work harder, then why should you be afforded the luxury of spawning as you please?

I have two kids and would not even think about three in the current economic climate! I work my OH works and we have a good life....But the top 1% of irish society earn all the money!...so why can't they have as many kids as they want!!! They can support them FFS...BTW I have done 67 hour weeks until recently and now I have stopped as it's not worth it anymore with all the new taxes...increases in PRSI and PAYE to pay for the useless:rolleyes:

starbelgrade

Septic Leper wrote: »

I have two kids and would not even think about three in the current economic climate! I work my OH works and I work and we have a good life....But the top 1% of irish society earn all the money!...so why can't they have as many kids as they want!!! They can support them FFS...BTW I have done 67 hour weeks until recently and now I have stopped as it's not worth it anymore with all the new taxes...increases in PRSI and PAYE to pay for the useless:rolleyes:

I'm happy for you. Sounds like you have a good life.

However - let's say that a 2 child cap is put on the "poor". Let's say that you decide to have another kid. And let's say that the government decide, that as they need to spend less on education etc., that the 2 child cap should be put on any couple earning less than say, €250,000. Do you think that would be fair?

I say €250k as an arbitrary figure, because in reality, once you start out on a road which bases the number if children you can have against a ratio to what you earn, then you are starting out on a road with a very slippery slope.

iPlop

starbelgrade wrote: »

I'm happy for you. Sounds like you have a good life.

However - let's say that a 2 child cap is put on the "poor". Let's say that you decide to have another kid. And let's say that the government decide, that as they need to spend less on education etc., that the 2 child cap should be put on any couple earning less than say, €250,000. Do you think that would be fair?

I say €250k as an arbitrary figure, because in reality, once you start out on a road which bases the number if children you can have against a ratio to what you earn, then you are starting out on a road with a very slippery slope.

I see where your going with this!! Good ,good....But for me personally ,I cannot see the logic of POOR people having kids..Unless you live in Ireland and have it every way like a lot of Feckers related to me through my OH!!!

iPlop

starbelgrade wrote: »

€250,000. Do you think that would be fair?

Anything under 50K would suffice in this environment!!!!

starbelgrade

Septic Leper wrote: »

I see where your going with this!! Good ,good....But for me personally ,I cannot see the logic of POOR people having kids..Unless you live in Ireland and have it every way like a lot of Feckers related to me through my OH!!!

The whole concept of this argument seems to be that poor people who can't afford to have kids, shouldn't be allowed to.

But look at it this way - if you are paying tax in the lower PAYE bracket, that means (depending on your allowances) that you earn in the region of €40-50k or around 25-35% above the average industrial wage.

There are a lot of people who would consider that as a reasonable wage & there are also a lot who earn much more, who wouldn't. Those people also pay more PAYE & taxes than you do. They could argue that you can't actually afford to have 2 kids, as their taxes go to make up the shortfall from yours which is needed to fund & subsidise your childrens education and health care.

By an extension of the logic in the argument you are defending, they have every right to decide that you should not be allowed to have more children. Or that you cannot even afford to keep the ones you already have.

And God forbid you or your wife (or both) ever become unemployed and join the ranks of the 'real' poor people.

Dudess

I fupping hate these "let's stop blaming others" Daily Mail initiatives that... er... blame others. All they ever do is demand people they deem "lesser" than them to adhere to some policy, while they sit on their smug arses arrogant enough to believe that they're above having to be pro-active themselves.