[Politics] have the right amount of kids you can afford, or should the govt stump up costs?

[FatSuperman]

No one needs more than two kids.

No-one who has two kids wants more than two!

I actually think that if you want multiple kids, you should be forced to have them 1 year apart at most. That will kill off any desire for more of the idiots

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The birth rate is dropping and has been for several years.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...letins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2016

 

[BrianWade4]

I've come to the decision that I don't want kids. Just need to break the news to my children.

Genius

 

[worthingseagull123]

With climate change and over population, the government should be paying people to have no children or one child max.

 

[Gwylan]

Births are at all time high.

I don't know you got that idea from but it's not true - the birth rate is 1.81 per mother, 50 years ago it was just under 3

When it's under 2, it means that society is not replenishing itself - which is why immigration has had to increase in the last couple of decades, otherwise we'd have an ageing population.

It's a problem faced by most countries in western Europe: Germany's rate is 1.3 (one of the reasons that Merkel was so keen to get migrants in) and Italy has a really severe problem.

The problem in the UK is not so much the children but the costs of childcare - many countries have heavily subsidised care so it's not so expensive.

 

[Hastings gull]

My daughter is 10 months old and is currently at a mix of nursery and grandparents to allow my wife to go back to work, it is affordable but only just about makes sense. We are fortunate to have help from grandparents, without that I don't think my wife would have been able to return to work until our daughter is 3. Why not just provide 30 hours free a week from say 1 years old, what is so special about waiting 3 years?

Yes, and who pays? Taxpayer presumably?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

With climate change and over population, the government should be paying people to have no children or one child max.

But I don't like the name Max.

 

[Notters]

I didn't have a kid (one, singular) until I was 40. Maybe a bit late but I have had a bit of living, got a decent sized house, an investment flat, a few nice things, no debt etc. I feel that I can have a comfortable life and look after him/spoil him and one day he can move into the flat and out of my house. That way I can give him the best possible start.

I didn't believe the amount of help on offer/available until we got pregnant, everything from free fruit, medical, dental, classes, check ups, great hospitals, loads of midwives and after care, tons of free services on our doorstep from libraries and their classes and clubs, toy libraries, cheap soft play, parks, swings, child support and we are financially ok, people on benefits get ehhh loads of extra benefits on top. Honestly you wonder where the taxes go - get a child (or three) its actually scary.

I dont think its everyone right to have a child, I don't want to sound elitist but you shouldn't be allowed to have a kid unless you are stable, and I know life changes, and I appreciate it can be incredibly hard on one salary etc but the country shouldnt pay for all of this. we are creaking at the seams.

Blimey things sound rosey in West Sussex. Virtually all free children's services in East Sussex have been cut in the last two years.

 

[Lush]

You could always spread the cost over different fathers.

 

[Triggaaar]

You could always spread the cost over different fathers.

You are Carol Jackson and I claim my £5.





I have no idea how this £5 claiming actually works

 

[Buzzer]

I come from a large and v.poor family (there were 5 of us children) and undoubtedly cost the taxpayer more than what my mother and stepfather contributed to the Exchequer but now all of 5 of us are in jobs and paying taxes, I know for a fact that I pay a lot more tax than I get back. I'll quickly add that I don't begrudge that, it's just a fact. In the long run, all 5 of us have probably covered that cost of raising us and then some.

I'm all for responsible parenting and cases where there are 8 or 9 kids with parents out of work need addressing but some of the comments on this thread smacks of eugenics. It's not as simple as saying that if you can't afford to have kids then don't have them and it ignores the benefits (sic) that most of those bring when adults.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

it's all about looking after your children if you can't don't have them, why should others have to pick up the tab , ?
regards
DR

 

[Triggaaar]

In the long run, all 5 of us have probably covered that cost of raising us and then some.

Raising you, yes, but it's not until you're old and retired that you really start costing the country.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

One excellent idea I saw on a news report in Oz last month was that one of the states (Victoria?) has started trialling a scheme whereby 80% of a claimant's benefits are loaded on to a debit card that can't be used on fags or booze or gambling. Obviously the ferals can still piss 20% up the wall, but at least the totally blameless innocent kids stand at least a sporting chance of benefiting from the 80%.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

The birth rate is dropping and has been for several years.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...letins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2016

UK population set to pass 70 million mark by 2029
http://news.sky.com/story/uk-population-set-to-pass-70-million-mark-by-2029-11099311

 

[Bold Seagull]

Raising you, yes, but it's not until you're old and retired that you really start costing the country.

I'm hoping that while 3 kids is going to hurt me in my 40s and early 50s (especially if all 3 go to university...(gulp)), I'll get some sort of payback when I'm ready to be looked after!!!

 

[Buzzer]

Raising you, yes, but it's not until you're old and retired that you really start costing the country.

True but worth bearing in mind that people born into poor backgrounds live on average 9 years less https://fullfact.org/health/life-expectancy-and-poverty/

...so I probably won't be that much of a burden after all.

 

[Bold Seagull]

One excellent idea I saw on a news report in Oz last month was that one of the states (Victoria?) has started trialling a scheme whereby 80% of a claimant's benefits are loaded on to a debit card that can't be used on fags or booze or gambling. Obviously the ferals can still piss 20% up the wall, but at least the totally blameless innocent kids stand at least a sporting chance of benefiting from the 80%.

I'm honestly not sure how anyone can afford to smoke these days. Even a moderate habit of 40 fags per week is racking up an annual bill of just shy of a grand. Any kind of addiction over 10 fags a day and you're looking at £1500+. That means £2k of your salary before deductions is literally going up in smoke...

Stick that £1500 each year in a fund for their 18th birthday from birth, and without any return you're looking at £27k

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I'm honestly not sure how anyone can afford to smoke these days. Even a moderate habit of 40 fags per week is racking up an annual bill of just shy of a grand. Any kind of addiction over 10 fags a day and you're looking at £1500+. That means £2k of your salary before deductions is literally going up in smoke...

You've not been down London Road recently then? No shortage of money for fags down there it would appear, while the mums drag their kids round the pound shops.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

UK population set to pass 70 million mark by 2029
http://news.sky.com/story/uk-population-set-to-pass-70-million-mark-by-2029-11099311

My stat has actually happened whereas yours is just a prediction.