PDA

View Full Version : Man criticised by Labour MPs for saying something sensible



Mich the Tester
7th October 2010, 13:17
So this chap Hunt suggests that people who don't have any money should think it over a bit more before producing lots of children, and Labour call that "unreasonable and very cruel".

Cap on family benefits will make claimants 'take responsibility' for their large families, Jeremy Hunt claims - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8047486/Cap-on-family-benefits-will-make-claimants-take-responsibility-for-their-large-families-Jeremy-Hunt-claims.html)


FFS

thunderlizard
7th October 2010, 13:22
At least he's learned something from the old Keith Joseph business: say stuff like that after you've won the election, not before.

TimberWolf
7th October 2010, 13:24
You should hear the criticism you get if you use the word "deserving poor".

EternalOptimist
7th October 2010, 13:30
If it's not right to punish the kids for the irresponsibility of the parents (by slashing the cash), the irresponsible parents (in this case the mum) should be prevented from being irresponsible, which means sterilisation

is this where the labour position will eventually lead us to?



:rolleyes:

d000hg
7th October 2010, 13:32
Someone suggested this on CUK the other week, and I'll admit I said it was a stupid idea that'd never happen... it seemed unbelievable a government would have the balls, or get away with it.

Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.

Mich the Tester
7th October 2010, 13:33
If it's not right to punish the kids for the irresponsibility of the parents (by slashing the cash), the irresponsible parents (in this case the mum) should be prevented from being irresponsible, which means sterilisation

is this where the labour position will eventually lead us to?



:rolleyes:Scary thought indeed, and I know that once the kids are born they have to be looked after; but that doesn't mean giving the money directly to parents who clearly can't take responsibility. The money really needs to be administered by someone who can take responsible decisions with it.

Mich the Tester
7th October 2010, 13:35
Someone suggested this on CUK the other week, and I'll admit I said it was a stupid idea that'd never happen... it seemed unbelievable a government would have the balls, or get away with it.

Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.

I can see there are problems with this, but you can't call it cruel to raise the issue and make the suggestion. After all, it would seem to me to be quite normal to expect people to consider their family finances before taking on the responsibility of raising a chiild.

SupremeSpod
7th October 2010, 13:35
Someone suggested this on CUK the other week, and I'll admit I said it was a stupid idea that'd never happen... it seemed unbelievable a government would have the balls, or get away with it.

Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.

Re-assess the claimants needs.

Simples.

shaunbhoy
7th October 2010, 13:36
Scary thought indeed, and I know that once the kids are born they have to be looked after; but that doesn't mean giving the money directly to parents who clearly can't take responsibility. The money really needs to be administered by someone who can take responsible decisions with it.

Sod giving them money. Give them food and clothing vouchers.

Mich the Tester
7th October 2010, 13:36
Sod giving them money. Give them food and clothing vouchers.

indeedy

AtW
7th October 2010, 13:37
Of course, suggesting it is not the same as implementing it. For instance putting a cap on families who already have the children is problematic, you can't really just say "tough" and give benefits that genuinely are not enough to buy food, in a country with a welfare state... that would lead to homelessness and more importantly, bad PR.

Solution for current "large" families wholly on benefits - hire social worker to be paid by State to look after kids during day time and parents HAVE TO work, ANY job they MUST take - from salary they get deductions made to pay for social worker. This way at least kinds might learn something and it would be fair.

d000hg
7th October 2010, 13:39
Sod giving them money. Give them food and clothing vouchers.Is that food from the state supermarket? Or is someone going to turn up with a state-sanctioned basket of healthy food :)

wobbegong
7th October 2010, 13:40
So this chap Hunt suggests that people who don't have any money should think it over a bit more before producing lots of children, and Labour call that "unreasonable and very cruel".

While I agree with the principle (and salute his courage for saying as much), unfortunately, I can't see it stopping them, people like that who have no social concience or, indeed common sense, will carry on regardless, secure in the knowledge that "it's their right". Sadly, it's the kids who'll suffer in the end.

Decades of handouts have led to the emergence of the freeloader culture. We've made a rod for our own backs.

Mich the Tester
7th October 2010, 13:41
You should hear the criticism you get if you use the word "deserving poor".

Yes, that's quite a big taboo too. Some kids at school spent their days bullying the brainy ones. The same kids laughed about the sporty ones while having a fag behind the bike shed. I wonder if there's a correlation between the current socio-economic position of these three groups and their actions at the time. I think there probably is.

The_Equalizer
7th October 2010, 13:52
Is that food from the state supermarket? Or is someone going to turn up with a state-sanctioned basket of healthy food :)

Never had a problem with people eating carp. There's a fair chance they'll pop their clogs early and save a few quid on the tax bill. Speaking of such, I am pretty sure that what you eat has a big say in how well you age. When bored in a shopping queue I always have a quick look at people's shopping baskets and have noticed a definite correlation.

Doggy Styles
7th October 2010, 14:59
Never had a problem with people eating carp. There's a fair chance they'll pop their clogs early and save a few quid on the tax bill. Speaking of such, I am pretty sure that what you eat has a big say in how well you age. When bored in a shopping queue I always have a quick look at people's shopping baskets and have noticed a definite correlation.What, pensioners can't afford proper food?:wink

shaunbhoy
7th October 2010, 15:10
Is that food from the state supermarket?

We can start them off at LIDL/ALDI, and if they prove themselves worthy, upscale them to quarterly visits to ASDA.

HTH

SB in "cruel to be kind" mode

SupremeSpod
7th October 2010, 15:13
I'm waiting for the "Well it's me human rights init?" argument. Standby for a raving left-footer to start harping on about every sperm being sacred...

SupremeSpod
7th October 2010, 15:17
I'm waiting for the "Well it's me human rights init?" argument. Standby for a raving left-footer to start harping on about every sperm being sacred...


Ok.

YouTube - Every Sperm is Sacred {Monty Python's Meaning of Life} (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8)


:laugh