Would you let finances determine family size?

[chell5544]

[If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

wow what a horrible thing to say. to those that are saying we spend loads on benefits, i can see 35billion out of our 691 billion budget???? correct me if i'm wrong but its not the biggest pay out is it?
income support and the like i mean

Why is it horrible to say if someone can take care of a child, they're more than likely capable of working?

In this economic crisis that were all in at the moment that isnt fair to say jobs are very hard to come by I have plenty of friends who are trying so hard to find jobs that pay the bills and our screwed up benefit system makes you better off not working sometimes

Also to be fair I would rather my taxes go to parents to put food in their kids mouth and a roof over their heads then to the criminals, drunks and druggys that get extra benefits

 

[emyandpotato]

I think I'd want to not worry every second about money, and if having another child would mean that I'd put it off or not do it. We won't be having another for a good 5-8 years which is a shame but we need to be responsible. We have housing benefit (nothing else) while we finish our studies and our first was unplanned but I'd be quite ashamed of myself to have another child knowing we weren't financially stable. Not to mention that relying on government help at the moment is dangerous because there are so many proposed cuts that it's scary!

 

[Dk1234]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

Probably not gonna be very popular for saying this, but women shouldn't plan children they can't take care of on their own. What if one person dies or becomes disabled, etc. I know things happen that no one plans for, but it's really irresponsible to have a bunch of kids and rely on others to take care of them right from the start.
If one goes to the trouble of planning children, they should at least plan to take care of them. Children aren't just pets there for people who 'want' them. They're human beings that should be raised as valuable contributors to society. If people just "want kids" because they like to collect things, I'd suggest stamps or coins or something other than babies (which I'm told grow into adults later).

While I see what you are saying, I went to only working for people on vacation since having the baby to be a SAHM mostly. If my husband died, I would have a hard time. We have savings and things and life insurance but I think that isn't exactly something you can plan for. If I lived my life like that, I wouldn't be a SAHM and get to watch my precious baby grow.

 

[mummy2lola]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

Probably not gonna be very popular for saying this, but women shouldn't plan children they can't take care of on their own. What if one person dies or becomes disabled, etc. I know things happen that no one plans for, but it's really irresponsible to have a bunch of kids and rely on others to take care of them right from the start.
If one goes to the trouble of planning children, they should at least plan to take care of them. Children aren't just pets there for people who 'want' them. They're human beings that should be raised as valuable contributors to society. If people just "want kids" because they like to collect things, I'd suggest stamps or coins or something other than babies (which I'm told grow into adults later).

So by ur logic,every woman on earth should not contemplate having a baby ever if SHE doesn't have an amazingly well paid Job? U can't even contemplate a child with ur dh even if he's a millionaire incase he leaves u and the prenup gives u nothing? It's all getting abit far fetched now I think

 

[Hanskiz]

I think the major problem with the 'system' in regards to benefits is that the vast majority of people who claim benefits actually do work, but they don't get paid enough. Where I live, if I worked full time earning minimum wage I wouldn't even be able to afford to rent a room in a house, so tax credits would have to make up the difference. The real issue here is not that people abuse the benefits system (although I'm sure some do) but that the taxpayer props up a system whereby it's ok for employers to pay a wage that you can't live on! A living wage has been calculated at more than £1 (£2 in London) an hour more than minimum wage - if employers paid their workers a decent wage, much of the benefits system would no longer be needed!

https://www.citizensuk.org/campaigns/living-wage-campaign/

There are far more hard working people out there who simply do not get paid enough claiming benefits than lazy people who can't be bothered (unless you read the Daily Mail).

One of the biggest chunks (after pensions and disability allowance which are completely different) of benefits spending is housing benefit. If there wasn't a chronic shortage of social housing in the country, much of this wouldn't be needed either.

Anyway, I've totally digressed.

 

[Liesje]

[If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

wow what a horrible thing to say. to those that are saying we spend loads on benefits, i can see 35billion out of our 691 billion budget???? correct me if i'm wrong but its not the biggest pay out is it?
income support and the like i mean

Why is it horrible to say if someone can take care of a child, they're more than likely capable of working?

It looks like you meant, if you can't get a job you're unable to care for a child? what about people searching for work who can't find any??

People who "can't find a job" are different from people "can't work"... Some people go to the government claiming they "can't work", for whatever reason, those people probably "can't" take care of a child either.
If I were a case worker, I'd suggest to someone who "can't work" who goes out and plans a child to perhaps look for a job and not expect to be supported by benefits for the rest of their life.

 

[honey08]

well those who have a family, 2jobs, pay for nurserys but are still so skint, but those on benifits ,aving as many kids as they want ..... were all doing the wrong thing

 

[lau86]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

Probably not gonna be very popular for saying this, but women shouldn't plan children they can't take care of on their own. What if one person dies or becomes disabled, etc. I know things happen that no one plans for, but it's really irresponsible to have a bunch of kids and rely on others to take care of them right from the start.
If one goes to the trouble of planning children, they should at least plan to take care of them. Children aren't just pets there for people who 'want' them. They're human beings that should be raised as valuable contributors to society. If people just "want kids" because they like to collect things, I'd suggest stamps or coins or something other than babies (which I'm told grow into adults later).

really???? in your argument there's no place for the "traditional" family, SAHM dad working providing financially. i think there's a difference between financially supporting your kids and being an excellent parent. no one seems to be getting that, everyone on benefits seems to be lumped into one group of lazy, irresponsible. I'm not even on benefits and it annoys me! I also get annoyed at people who have loads of kids for the wrong reasons.

 

[Celesse]

We have 2 children. I'm now a SAHM. OH has a decent paying job, he's a graduate but at the start of his career. Because of how tax credits work in relation to how much OH earns another child for us would mean an extra £250+ a month in tax credits and child benefit. Technically we could go from 2 children to 3 children and be better off. The increase from 3 children to 4 children is even greater.

We would need a bigger car and house if we got to 4 children, but would be "earning" another £500 a month from what we are now.

 

[emyandpotato]

[If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

wow what a horrible thing to say. to those that are saying we spend loads on benefits, i can see 35billion out of our 691 billion budget???? correct me if i'm wrong but its not the biggest pay out is it?
income support and the like i mean

Why is it horrible to say if someone can take care of a child, they're more than likely capable of working?

It looks like you meant, if you can't get a job you're unable to care for a child? what about people searching for work who can't find any??

Wow. First of all jobs are difficult to come by at the moment for many people. Graduates are struggling to find work at the moment let alone those with few qualifications. It doesn't mean they are incapable parents because they aren't brilliant academically. And what about those who are simply struggling through bad luck? That's a horrible statement to make.

 

[Buttercup84]

IMO there is a big difference between popping out kids without a second thought because it's taken for granted that the state will pay and someone losing their job and falling on hard times/having to claim benefits temporarily. As for having a child being a basic human right i'm a bit torn: Generally I agree but I think some personal responsibility has to be factored in too.

 

[Dk1234]

@DK1234 and I think therein lies the problem. Its not the people who are claiming, but the system that is at fault. Its made too easy to claim. If money was pumped into cheaper childcare, instead of benefits then maybe we would get people working more. A while ago I was having a dabate on here and a lady had been on housing benfit for a long time, yet her husband now earnt over 50k a year and legitimatly they can have that house for life. THAT is where I think its scandalous. Benefits should constantly means tested.

The system in the states is completely flawed. However, IMO people should hold themselves to a certain standard and not take advantage of stuff just because it is there.

 

[Liesje]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

Probably not gonna be very popular for saying this, but women shouldn't plan children they can't take care of on their own. What if one person dies or becomes disabled, etc. I know things happen that no one plans for, but it's really irresponsible to have a bunch of kids and rely on others to take care of them right from the start.
If one goes to the trouble of planning children, they should at least plan to take care of them. Children aren't just pets there for people who 'want' them. They're human beings that should be raised as valuable contributors to society. If people just "want kids" because they like to collect things, I'd suggest stamps or coins or something other than babies (which I'm told grow into adults later).

So by ur logic,every woman on earth should not contemplate having a baby ever if SHE doesn't have an amazingly well paid Job? U can't even contemplate a child with ur dh even if he's a millionaire incase he leaves u and the prenup gives u nothing? It's all getting abit far fetched now I think

Why? I did it and I'm not all that special. There was a time in my life where I had no job and no education just like everyone else. Everyone makes choices. I know accidents can happen, but people shouldn't set themselves up for failure and poverty on purpose.

 

[honey08]

like i said b4, b fairly boring if we were all the same :/

 

[lau86]

i think if your husband has a job that can support a family and you insist on waiting to have children until you yourself have a good job that can support a family that must make you a fairly negative person, either you assume your husband will leave you or that he will die. i don't want to live like that. I could support my son on my own just about but i would have to work full time rather than part time. i have a good job and life insurance, as does my husband. I think there are very few women who have a husband/ partner yet could support a family by themselves, families are made by merging money/ assets etc. I'm not talking about women who choose to be single parents here. anyway, i see this has been moved to news and debates that normally spells the end for a decent debate!!

 

[dgirllamius]

Please stop tarring everyone with the same "scrounger" brush

I spent 6 months out of work because the place where I worked closed down. I had to claim job seekers. I hated it. Finding work was so hard - it was pure luck I got a job 6 months later as my mum knew the manager of the place.

I know some people don't want to work and it's just easier to claim benefits but there are some people who spend their every waking moment filling in applications - the job market is absolute arse.

At any given moment, any of you could lose your job or lose your main source of income, whether it be from your husband or whatever. You may need that help one day. Not everyone is a scrounger and sits on their arse all day.

 

[Liesje]

I don't think anyone looks down on people who are out of work or looking for work, it's the people who make a lifestyle out of it or consider benefits their profession.

 

[xsadiex]

There are so many people on benefits that do get tarred with the scounger brush because so many fail to realise that 'people on benefits' aren't just those without work on JSA, included are those on tax credits and housing benefit who do work but unfortunately get low wages because society is pretty screwed.
I also think this debate is a bit deeper than money, money isn't even real. Love and family are real though


Oh and in answer to the question, I would only have children within our means, with our income and tax credits we can afford a second if we pull the purse strings a bit tighter.
I would hate to grow old and have not had the children I'd wanted, as long as everyone is fed, clothed and the bills are paid all is well. And of course there will be extra money left over for school trips and the odd treat.

 

[Natsku]

Not all benefits are the same. While I wouldn't TTC while I'm still on welfare I wouldn't have a problem TTC while on housing benefit as its a fairly common benefit over here and not considered the same as being on income support or unemployment - you need a pretty good income to not need some housing benefit and I don't think people should have to be in a higher paying job to have children.

Having money for luxuries etc isn't that important I think. I didn't have brand name clothes and the latest toys and stuff when I was a kid but my parents were able to take us on holidays abroad often (by doing it cheaply, house exchanges, staying with relatives etc.) but even without that you're not depriving your children of anything as long as you can feed them, clothe them and love them.

 

[Yammas]

Ive always said that I would have as many children as I was blessed with because people always seem to find a way to afford their children as long as everyone is clothed fed and bills paid then all is good. Me and OH didnt have the a lot of luxuries growing up and agree that its not really neccessary to be happy all most children want is to spend time with thier parents and feel loved and secure although of course holidays would be nice from time to time when I was young wed go and stay with family and for me those were the best. Also what if you have a child whos disabled and needs extra equipment/care how can you plan for that?

As for the benefits and ttc my mum couldnt afford to work as the cost of childcare tor twins alone wouldve laft her with barely any money so she stayed at home with us but took the responsibility to not have any more children as she couldnt afford them and is angry at how many women continue to do so. I think that if you are working whether or not you receive a top up through working tax or housing benefit then at least you are contributing something so dont see anything wrong with ttc then unemployment is a bit different though if they were to go work once child reaches school age (assuming their a lone parent) then thats fine too. While im on this point everyone gets soo riled about large families on benefits but what about people over in africa who have 8+ children when they dont even have clean water to drink no-one gets mad at them for takin billions of pounds worth of charity.....