Yesterday I was listening to Any Answers and of all the subjects on 
Any Questions, the possibility of cutting benefits caused the most 
replies. The subject came up because Iain Duncan Smith announced on 
Thursday that child-related benefits for families may be capped at two 
children. He did this because he feels that benefits meant that some 
families no longer thought about whether they could afford to have 
children. According to Iain families had to cut their cloth 
  according to their capabilities and the money available.
The
 welfare state looks after the poor and needy and if you have children 
then it's much easier to fall into that safety net. The trouble is that 
it isn't a very good net. If you want an idea on the strength of that 
net the you could do worse than watch the programme on TV yesterday 
evening -  What Sitcoms Say About America
 Now. The comedy in The Middle summed up the devastating impact of a 
parent losing a job, and it doesn't agree with Iain's view. This family 
are panicking and it isn't related to a few pounds of benefit related to
 a third child. 
What if the parents have jobs and then 
lose them when they already have children? Iain's answer is quite 
simplistic and he is a person who is often praised for his concern for 
the poor. Families do not tend to be rich. Iain believes that benefits 
are too generous and working parents have to think twice about the cost 
of having children. I wonder what he thinks about the Chinese one-child 
policy. George Orwell's Big Brother would have been in favour.
Change the world
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment