Spain does not pay any benefits to young women having children out of marriage, France only pay until a child is three years old,isn't it time the UK did the same? Spain, as a result of not having the cushy safety net, has one of the lowest single parent rates and faired much better than the UK in the recent child poverty report
2007-03-06 22:59:28 · 14 answers · asked by SunnyDays 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Absolutely- we are living in a ridiculous welfare state where we are being taxed and morally corrupted to the point of collapse.
It's a sad fact that many social engineers don't like the FACT that children with two parents have far better potential than a child from a broken home.
The solution- if you don't like each other don't marry and furthermore people should not still be having unprotected intercourse. It's criminal in a G8 country young people aren't properly educated about contraception- then we legit peope, who can keep our pecker in it's hat have to subsidise some gits poor choices.
2007-03-07 00:06:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, but why does everyone go on about single mothers. I'm not saying that they should keep it how it is but there are a lot of other lazy bas tards out there who have no reason to be on benefits. If there is a crackdown it should be on everyone who is on benefits. They should be offered a job and if they don't take it they should loose their benefits. It may cost a lot to crack down on all the leaches but not as much as they cost the rest of us now.
2007-03-06 23:05:00 · answer #2 · answered by SilverSurfer 4 · 8⤊ 0⤋
Yes, they have never had it so good, why should we pay for their pleasure after all there are lots of single parents who work,some girls are having children when they are 14 and allowed to keep them.
Unless they have children who are disabled they should only be entitled to help for a short while.
We should follow the French and change the benefit system.
2007-03-07 02:13:05 · answer #3 · answered by st.abbs 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I wish Canada would do that, currently low income (single mothers) get up to $250 a month per child to help raise her child(ren). You see these welfare moms having enough kids to keep them going for years (paid until the child is 18) plus they get bonuses for back to school and winter boots/hats. It is sickening. By the time it is all said and done they make out better than a lot of us who work 40-50 hours a week and that is not right.
2007-03-06 23:11:58 · answer #4 · answered by Cherry_Blossom 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Your a bit late with this,the government announced yesterday thats exactly what they are going to do,also they are having a big campaign against illegal immigrants.
I would also like to say the reason Spain has a low single parent rate is because it is a strict Roman Catholic country,and all the children keep to it.
Is it just young women who have children outside of marriage then?
Nothing to do with the young men who bugger off and leave them and never pay a penny?
2007-03-06 23:18:31 · answer #5 · answered by Pat R 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
About time the whole benefit system was sorted out as a lot has changed since it was first introduced many years ago!!
2007-03-06 23:14:28 · answer #6 · answered by Chris 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
the full u . s . desires a shake up. we could desire to initiate limiting how plenty housing income we pay out for starters. in case you're daft sufficient to have 8 little ones once you won't be able to discover the money for to maintain them then be arranged to sleep 4 in a mattress room. reward have been presented to ensure no person starved, they are getting used by using lazy human beings to reproduce and stay in greater effective circumstances then others that could desire to artwork for minimum salary. There seems to be like a militia of persons being paid to propose them what they could be claiming for, they have sod all to do all day lead them to study up approximately it themselves. i'm fortunate in that I even have by no potential been unemployed, as quickly as I lost my final job I in the present day went self employed and function been so for 11 years. If something did go incorrect the reality that I even have paid someplace interior the area of £200k in taxes and NI in my 30 years working might advise candy f a, yet some sixteen 3 hundred and sixty 5 days previous chav has a toddler and gets a house and could be entitled to greater reward than me. every physique that has been in finished time employment for say 5 years it is made redundant could acquire user-friendly reward plus a proportion of what they have paid in for the 1st 6 months and then decreased for the subsequent 6. If by using then they have not chanced on a job then they could settle for the user-friendly. every physique that has by no potential worked could settle for stamps to pay for food and utilities, in case you prefer to be a scrounger then each and every physique would be responsive to you're.
2016-10-17 11:32:03 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes...The system needs a shake. But, I think they should start with all the lazy men out there who help to produce children and leave it to the mothers and the government to take care of them. Get these lazy buggers into work and MAKE them pay.
2007-03-06 23:16:56 · answer #8 · answered by Afi 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the free money needs to be cut off. In countries there is no welfare, there are few unplanned pregnancies. So if anyone wants to put a break on unplanned pregnancies, just stop enabling them by giving them money.
2007-03-06 23:44:30 · answer #9 · answered by Marvin 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree - i think its seen as a easy option not to graft and get free accomodation - a friend of mine has a child and was given a brand new flat and she has more money than me and i work full time!!!
2007-03-06 23:04:18 · answer #10 · answered by Katie 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋