I believe that if someone is unemployed, and then has a baby while they are unemployed, they should not receive more benefits for having the baby.
Obviously if someone has already has kids when they become unemployed they should get more money because they have kids because it isn't their fault.
But if someone is unemployed, they should not be becoming pregnant! And they should not be rewarded for doing so with more benefits! Anyone having a baby whilst on benefits is almost certainly a benefit scrounger, because those genuinely looking for a job would wait until they found one to have a baby, so we are paying benefit scroungers to breed, and they will most likely be breeding kids who will go on to become benefit scroungers themselves.
Last edited by izpenguin; 20-05-2012 at 18:01.
£40bn/year for 2,000 jobs (ie £20m/job) is probably not why they are doing it.
(Original post by chefdave)
You're joking, right? The UK is one of the most charitable nations on the planet, we're actually ranked 5th according to the World Giving Index. The reason the UK gov't gives aid is because it provides cushy jobs for those 'working' in the public sector.
Otherwise they'd just employ another 10,000 people in HMRC for £200m.
Its for politicians to say their dong is bigger because they are more charitable than the next country.
Last edited by Quady; 20-05-2012 at 18:10.