Problem families

**TimberWolf** · 21 July 2012, 08:08

Having kids is the best way to get a house and benefits.

**EternalOptimist** · 21 July 2012, 09:52

I f you pay people to wear red noses and flowers that squirt water, they will do it, no matter how silly it is. If you pay people to be feckless and churn out the kids, they will do it, now matter how damaging it is

**xoggoth** · 21 July 2012, 14:27

We need a lot more Darwin in British society. If we carry on paying for the least able to have kids while taxing the most able so they can't afford as many we are going to turn back into Primeval soup.

**al_cam** · 22 July 2012, 10:57

Originally posted by xoggoth View Post

We need a lot more Darwin in British society. If we carry on paying for the least able to have kids while taxing the most able so they can't afford as many we are going to turn back into Primeval soup.

Quite - have you read Kornbluth's Marching Morons?

I say a condition of a woman receiving benefits should be being fitted with a long term contraceptive device.

**escapeUK** · 22 July 2012, 11:06

This clip explains the problem, dont see how it can be reversed. Other than a nice war, plague or some such event to cull the unnecessary.

Idiocracy - YouTube

Its not a complete clip. But the intelligent couple end up not reproducing, where the trash have 100s........

**tractor** · 22 July 2012, 11:13

....

Whilst I agree with the sentiments on this thread, does any of you think you will pay less tax if this phenomenon were to be eradicated?

Your tax would simply be diverted into the pockets of the hoarders aka politicians/financiers who would not recycle it nor would they invest it in your business.

**escapeUK** · 22 July 2012, 11:51

Originally posted by tractor View Post

Whilst I agree with the sentiments on this thread, does any of you think you will pay less tax if this phenomenon were to be eradicated?

Your tax would simply be diverted into the pockets of the hoarders aka politicians/financiers who would not recycle it nor would they invest it in your business.

Id pay more tax to get the problem eradicated. But for me the problem isnt about the tax, its about the roads being packed, going to the doctors to find their being 40 people waiting. Life would be better with less people, the fact im forced to pay for them is just the final insult.

**tractor** · 22 July 2012, 12:08

...

Originally posted by escapeUK View Post

Id pay more tax to get the problem eradicated. But for me the problem isnt about the tax, its about the roads being packed, going to the doctors to find their being 40 people waiting. Life would be better with less people, the fact im forced to pay for them is just the final insult.

Like I said, I agree with the sentiment, you will get no argument from me here but it does lead to some searching questions. Really, the argument isn't about doctors and congestion (of the road type lol); it's about fair share of work as well as tax, fair share of opportunity etc etc, but the human condition does not care about fair except when it is looking to garner votes for politicians. The human condition is all about me when push comes to shove.

If your doctor worked proper hours and did his fair share, the queues would be lower, if all immigrants were kicked out of the country, the queues would be even lower, if fat people were made to jog instead of go to the doctors, even lower still. You see where this is going? Enforced Darwinism is perilously close to the 'final solution' if you take it to it's ultimate conclusion.

**IR35FanClub** · 22 July 2012, 12:42

The simple problem has a simple solution - no additional benefits for you Nth child. As a society we have to decide what N is. I'd say it should be political interference free, so it should be set based on the average family size of tax paying families. Though that means you can define what exactly an average tax paying family is. Obviously this couldn't be retrospectively applied, but all children born after D-date. I'm sure the lefties will say it's not fair on the children, as it's their parents who are unedcuated who bring them into the world and they will suffer from poverty etc. My answer - look at china, it's become part of their culture. Even now the 1 child 1 family has been dropped, couples still don't want more than 1 child.

The other problem I've spotted - "chavs" for want of a better description are breeding faster than the middle classes. I.e they are on 14-18year generation cycles. Whilst those with careers are about 25-35 year cycles as getting a job and a stable career comes before starting a family. If the state is paying why wait?.

Unfortunately natural selection won't sort this out as it relates to species - ie. it doesn't differentiate chavs as a separate subspecies which is an off shoot of humanity,

If you bring in maximum supported family size it will take 20 years for it to have a major effect on society, but it will stop the yearly increase in budget required, eventually it will level out and start to shrink.

Is it a vote winner? Dunno, are working tax payers the majority these days? Sometimes I'm not sure!

Problem families