Meaningful debate

[rafezetter]

I assume that if they can name the father, he might be asked to pay child support thus reducing their benefits. I seriously doubt that many of these fathers would be doing anything but claiming benefits themselves. Perhaps i am being unfair.

I wonder how many of the school age girls who get pregnant do so by responsibly working men - and how many more by other boys between 15-20? Try getting child support from a teenager.

The girls do it to get a "free" council flat, and can sit on benefits until the (youngest) child is 14-16.

I know this is a fact because we had a girl at our house as part of a couple who was 18 and was practically begging to have a child - the boyfriend refused sensibly saying they were too young, couldn't afford it etc. They split up, 10 months later she had a baby, 11 months after that she had another, not in a relationship, different fathers.

No father on the birth certificate = no benefits. If the woman genuinely doesn't know his name she should be stopped from further breeding, not encouraged.

Controversial idea but one I'm in favor of - I've said openly that if a woman has 3/4 kids by different men she should be medically rendered incapable. In other word she should be spayed like a stray animal.

Yeah I said it.

 

[finneyb]

I know this is a fact because we had a girl at our house as part of a couple who was 18 and was practically begging to have a child - the boyfriend refused sensibly saying they were too young, couldn't afford it etc. They split up, 10 months later she had a baby, 11 months after that she had another, not in a relationship, different fathers.

The issue here is also related to the self-worth of the woman. If she has failed education or been failed by education her only achievement in life will be to bear kids. There is also a biological need, sadly in some cases, to reproduce esp if the generations before have also had early babies.

As I said early on the older I get the more I see the vitally important role of parental guidance/influence - it's the parents who set the norm be that to work productively or claim benefits.

Brian

 

[finneyb]

The other side of the benefits argument is that to consider the cost in real terms ie if we had no benefits we would have far more crime which is expensive in personal, policing and prison costs - benefits may well be the cheapest alternative.

And benefits will always be here, but need to be constantly controlled as they tend to grow like topsy, see below.

Take Barnardos as an example (most big charities are the same) - they advertise that almost a third of children live in poverty - BS in my opinion, use a real definition of poverty - but Barnardos and others are well paid professional fund raisers and lobbyists they will be lobbying Govt for more benefits, they distort the system.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/what_we_do/ ... _facts.htm

Brian

 

[doctor Bob]

I've said openly that if a woman has 3/4 kids by different men she should be medically rendered incapable. In other word she should be spayed like a stray animal.

Yeah I said it.

and yet the successful city guys who have a family divorce at 40, remarry a trophy wife, have another family, repeat at 60 are not neutered, often admired for getting a bit of goer.

 

[dzj]

Meaningful debates such as this one usually only leave people more entrenched in their views.
At least there were no Hitler references.

 

[monkeybiter]

Until now

 

[Jacob]

Meaningful debates such as this one usually only leave people more entrenched in their views.
...

Not so - I think I've moved on a bit.
Reading the above and the usual descent into sanctimonious misogyny, misanthropy, general curtain twitching malice; if any of it is true I'm beginning to feel pleased that these people on the fringes are actually beating the system with their stupid scams and fiddles.
Good luck to them.
I'm glad they getting the dosh rather than the bankers, tax evaders, MPs fiddling housing benefits etc who actually are a much bigger and more serious problem, a massive financial burden on the rest of us and a threat to the whole economy.

PS I have been looking forwards to the imminent arrival of hordes of Romanians but so far there's been no sign of them around here - they could liven the place up a bit.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Jacob I strongly suggest you apologise to Chas!

 

[bugbear]

Meaningful debates such as this one usually only leave people more entrenched in their views.
...

Not so - I think I've moved on a bit.
Reading the above and the usual descent into sanctimonious misogyny, misanthropy, general curtain twitching malice; if any of it is true I'm beginning to feel pleased that these people on the fringes are actually beating the system with their stupid scams and fiddles.
Good luck to them.
I'm glad they getting the dosh rather than the bankers, tax evaders, MPs fiddling housing benefits etc who actually are a much bigger and more serious problem, a massive financial burden on the rest of us and a threat to the whole economy.

PS I have been looking forwards to the imminent arrival of hordes of Romanians but so far there's been no sign of them around here - they could liven the place up a bit.

It's almost as if you're being deliberately provocative...

NB Again.

BugBear

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Here we go.....is this what we genuinely believe passes for meaningful debate chaps?

 

[Jacob]

Here we go.....is this what we genuinely believe passes for meaningful debate chaps?

Actually - being provocative is a perfectly reasonable thing to do if a debate is to be meaningful, in a grown up sort of way. Though it can upset the children!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I've said openly that if a woman has 3/4 kids by different men she should be medically rendered incapable. In other word she should be spayed like a stray animal.

Yeah I said it.

and yet the successful city guys who have a family divorce at 40, remarry a trophy wife, have another family, repeat at 60 are not neutered, often admired for getting a bit of goer.

The difference being they are paying for their own. I don't care if they have 100 children.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Meaningful debates such as this one usually only leave people more entrenched in their views.
At least there were no Hitler references.

Yup. No Godwins Law yet.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Rafezetter mentioned spaying, which of course extreme or at least tongue in cheek, but I see no reason why a contraceptive implant shouldn't be a condition of benefit payment. It's not their breeding hat annoys me, it's my paying for it.

 

[Jacob]

Jacob I strongly suggest you apologise to Chas!

What for?

In the interests of meaningful grown up debate (I wouldn't bother otherwise!) can I explain that not believing a tale that someone relates is not the same as accusing them of being a liar. It is merely suggesting that they may be misinformed. I could be wrong - but so far I still don't believe it.

 

[Jacob]

Rafezetter mentioned spaying, which of course extreme or at least tongue in cheek, but I see no reason why a contraceptive implant shouldn't be a condition of benefit payment. It's not their breeding hat annoys me, it's my paying for it.

I think they should spay all Etonian school boys. It's not the breeding that annoys me is just they way they end up controlling everything and running things so badly.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I'm going to remember that one for future use - Just because I say I don't believe you, it doesn't mean I think you're lying ... =D>

 

[Jacob]

I'm going to remember that one for future use - Just because I say I don't believe you, it doesn't mean I think you're lying ... =D>

Work on it - it's the difference between "I don't believe it" and "I don't believe you". But they get confused e.g. people tell tall stories and saying you don't believe them isn't quite the same as calling them liars.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

CHJ gave you a list of facts (not tales) you did not not like. You said you did not believe him. Therefore you were calling him a liar. Q.E.D.

 

[Jacob]

CHJ gave you a list of facts (not tales) you did not not like. You said you did not believe him. Therefore you were calling him a liar. Q.E.D.

No - I said I didn't believe IT
I'm of for a few days - so you'll have to carry on arguing quietly amongst yourselves.
Have a nice Easter!