Why do we give money to people who have babies?
What is the ‘right’ that people feel they have to get cash payments in ‘child allowance’ or ‘child benefits’ or whatever, just because they’ve elected to reproduce?
Why should the rest of us have to pay?
I mean, I don’t expect others to pay towards the upkeep of my pussycat collection, do I?
In addition to having to pay for their children, there’s all the cost of the disruption as these ‘parents’ demand 6 months to a year off work in order to look after the child we are paying for.
Well, that’s the ones that bother to work, of course. For a large number of the population, popping out baby after baby guarantees a free house, rent paid, and lots of cash to bring up the child with. The more babies the girl can pop out, the larger the free house we give her, and the higher the money we pay her.
An ideal target is for the scrounger to have between 4 and 6 children, and the free house will be larger than a hard worker with no children could ever afford. All the free money the scrounger gets equates to a take home pay that those struggling on minimum wage could only dream of.
Working or scrounging, the facts are that popping out babies guarantees free money.
Surely we have no reason to encourage the population of this country to keep having babies? We already have far too many children maturing into adults that have no employment prospects. We don’t need to encourage any more.
If anything we need to reward couples or women that don’t have children.
We should pick a date for a changeover. From that moment, all women who have never had a baby should start getting, say, £1,500 a year, every year. As soon as they decide to have children, payments should stop.
I’m not proposing we tax people having children, but maybe those with over 3 should pay something towards the extra burden on society these children represent. This would make our society a lot fairer and would work to disincentivise the scroungers who reproduce and expect the rest of us to pay.