The Student Room Group

Poor families shouldn't get extra benefits for having more children

If you can't afford children, you should be banned from having so many, not paid extra benefits just for having more...

The world's finite resources can't support so many people already, we are long past the optimum level where we are benefiting from economies of scale from a higher population and there needs to be more control over birth.
(edited 8 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

I hate the counter argument "the government shouldnt be telling people how many children to have"

In that case then, why dont we abolish child benefits completely. I believe child benefits give incentives for the poor to reproduce.
Chavs tend to have around 8 children smh and they get away with it. Breeding more stupid people into the country.
We live in a regressive society when poor people are having 5 children and your elite rich are having no more than 1 child.

Inexcusable.
Original post by Raven of the Sun
If you can't afford children, you should be banned for having so many, not paid extra benefits just for having more...

The world's finite resources can't support so many people already, we are long past the optimum level where we are benefiting from economies of scale from a higher population and there needs to be more control over birth.


If it weren't for immigration, our working population would be decreasing... without chavlings, how would we feed our pensioners? And lets face it, our governments all exist to benefit the pensioners, because they are the ones who vote.
And you wonder why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Its because the poor are reproducing at such a rate, they cant allocate the resources between the children.

The rich only have 1 child so they dont have to divide the wealth too much.
I'm usually against people scrapping benefits but this is one of the cases where I completely agree. They have children to get benefits and to get them moving up the waiting list for council houses
I somewhat agree, but how exactly can you ban people from having more children?
Original post by Johann von Gauss
If it weren't for immigration, our working population would be decreasing... without chavlings, how would we feed our pensioners? And lets face it, our governments all exist to benefit the pensioners, because they are the ones who vote.


And our working population decreasing would help with unemployment if the type of workers we have an excess of is decreasing.
Original post by EmmaOfNormandy
I somewhat agree, but how exactly can you ban people from having more children?


Drop them a 5k bill. If they refuse to pay send them to jail.
Original post by EmmaOfNormandy
I somewhat agree, but how exactly can you ban people from having more children?


Same way China did, fine them.

(and as OP said, scrap benefits)

They would be forced to learn to use condoms then.
Reply 11
Avatar for Reue
Reue
20
Original post by EmmaOfNormandy
I somewhat agree, but how exactly can you ban people from having more children?


There are ways, although none pleasant.
Original post by Reue
There are ways, although none pleasant.


What is wrong with restricting child benefit?
Reply 13
Avatar for Reue
Reue
20
Original post by Need2Study4Exam
What is wrong with restricting child benefit?


Nothing. That's not the same as a ban on having children.
Original post by Reue
Nothing. That's not the same as a ban on having children.

Do you think poor folk would keep reproducing if they knew nobody was going to pay for it?
Original post by Need2Study4Exam
And you wonder why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Its because the poor are reproducing at such a rate, they cant allocate the resources between the children.

The rich only have 1 child so they dont have to divide the wealth too much.


Did you copy-paste that from a Victorian workhouse owners letter?
Reply 16
Avatar for Yael
Yael
11
Original post by Need2Study4Exam
I hate the counter argument "the government shouldnt be telling people how many children to have"

In that case then, why dont we abolish child benefits completely. I believe child benefits give incentives for the poor to reproduce.


In that case we should reward the poor adequately for their work, in which case they would need no benefits but would be able to sustain themselves and families from their labour.
Reply 17
Avatar for Reue
Reue
20
Original post by Need2Study4Exam
Do you think poor folk would keep reproducing if they knew nobody was going to pay for it?


I think after they had a child taken away by social services due to neglect they may reconsider having more.
I think another great way to control population is prison.

Make sure anybody who commits a crime gets put in. Now im not talking about sentencing someone to 2 years for murder. Im talking sentencing 20 years for theft.

That way, you can keep criminals in there until a late age. By the time they get out, its too late for them to have children.

Its a win win. Control population, eliminate the bad genes from the pool. And boost the economy by making them work.
Child benefit is £20.70 for your first child and £13.70 for any others per week... That really isn't very much money and anyone thinking that they or others can make a financial gain by having more children because of it is clearly a total moron.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you