Quote Originally Posted by baggiematt View Post
Surely this is incredibly simple. We have an ageing population and one that is expected to decline. A declining population is a disaster as there arent enough people to provide for those that are older.

That, in turn leads to an older retirement age and probably cramped housing of elderly people living with their children.

We support having one child, slightly less for two and nothing for three. Why?
I don't think its as simple as that, although I agree with you in principle about the population needing to grow with more births and younger people.

Firstly, the argument 'the parents are responsible for feeding their child' just doesn't work. Because although that's how the world should work, it doesn't for some kids. And they shouldn't be the ones bearing the brunt of their parents irresponsibility.

Secondly, this is going to make me sound like a stuck up snob, but the people who will benefit from the scrapping of this cap are the ones on universal credit. Particularly those who don't work.

What we should not be doing is incentivising people who don't or won't work to have more children. What we should be doing is incentivising those in work to have more children. We have to try and be selective about it, without penalising the child - which is difficult.

That needs to be breakfast clubs, going further with child tax credits and more nursery hours for the children of those in work.

If children grow up in a house where their parents are on welfare, they are statistically likely to join them later on in life. We have to change that culture.