2015 post UK election discussion

[daylightrobber]

Because everyone thinks they should have a right to procreate.

Everyone DOES have the right to procreate. For absolute fooks ache.

 

[marty mcfly]

You mean like the queen.

Off to the tower for you.

 

[chrissyjack]

We called it pillaging.......

And I hear you were good at it, too

 

[The Esk]

Good try pal, but I'm not here to tell other people what they should or shouldn't do. All I can say is what I would do.

Because I don't want to be in a position where I am reliant on state support to raise my children, I would not choose to have children before I had saved the amount of cash I felt was sufficient to provide the cushion necessary to compensate for the temporary drop in income that would result from Mrs. Tree taking time off for maternity. Mrs. Tree feels the same way, so we have spent five years saving up, building our careers, buying our house and have got married in the meantime.

Other people may choose to do it differently, but that doesn't mean that their approach would be any more palatable for me than mine would be for them.

Not wanting to throw a spanner in your works, but what would happen if you're wife became pregnant with twins or triplets?

 

[marty mcfly]

Everyone DOES have the right to procreate. For absolute fooks ache.

Do they?

Most people accept you have to be able to find someone who wants to procreate first with you.

 

[daylightrobber]

I've got 4, but then again I'm loaded.........

You might have been once. With four of the blighters you'll have been rinsed by now surely.

 

[daylightrobber]

Not wanting to throw a spanner in your works, but what would happen if you're wife became pregnant with twins or triplets?

Ha ha. That moment when you go for the first scan though and you're bricking it incase it is!

 

[marty mcfly]

You and I both know that it doesn't always work like this in reality. There are lots of men who leave and do not provide.

So, if the man leaves the mother with a child and doesn't provide, what should the single mother do to improve her financial situation, given that it was previously a reasonable situation before the relationship broke up?



Sounds like the only winners in this scenario are the solicitors.

Bearing in mind that legal aid has been cut drastically over the last 5 years and access to justice is at an all time low, do you really think it's practical for the government to pay contract lawyers to negotiate prenuptial agreements every time a couple get married? It would cost crazy amounts of money.

You would no doubt then complain that people shouldn't be getting married on a whim because it costs the tax payers money to pay the lawyers.

Prenups aren't worth the paper they're written on anyway. If you think about the situation you're trying to solve (woman being left to bring up a child and not having enough money), do you really think she will have the funds to bring a breach of contract claim through the courts? Or do you think that should be funded by the state as well?

Ok - being serious for a minute.

If it was a reasonble situation i.e. the man had a decent paying job then it shouldn't be impossible to get the money of him. If that's not the case then I view it a bit like losing your job and the welfare state should help out but force the mother into work within a reasonable amount of time while covering child care. Then I would pay the child benefits in vouchers so the state controls what she spends and more importantly who she spends it on.

Any single mother where the father isn't in the picture at all under the age of 21, possibly 25 I would pin the costs on to her parents if I couldn't find or pin the costs on the father then also follow the 2nd part of my answer above. The girl shouldn't get her own house but continue to live in her parents house if at all possible.

The legal aid would be saved in the long term. We could also take the costs out of it from the individuals if they where mean's tested however both parties should be only be allowed to spend the same amount. The pre-nups since agreed by the courts before marriage would be binding.

 

[marty mcfly]

There's nothing you can do to stop people having children, regardless of their financial circumstance.

I know I won't be rushing into having kids until I can give them a good standard of life but who am I to tell other people what to do with regards to this.

Tell that to the grand parents if they are forced to pick up the bill.

 

[marty mcfly]

Not wanting to throw a spanner in your works, but what would happen if you're wife became pregnant with twins or triplets?

He's [Poor language removed].

 

[Tree13]

Trying to understand what your saying.

Are you saving up £230.000 before you have a child because that's what this article says its costs to raise a child up to the age of 21

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11360819/Average-cost-of-raising-a-child-in-UK-230000.html

If we could save £230,000 in five years mate, we wouldn't be living in the UK!

Mrs Tree earns £28k a year, I earn £22k; Given that her income will drop (I presume?) when she is off on maternity we felt it best to build up some savings to cover that, in addition to those savings we were already trying to build up anyway (in case of redundancy or any of life's other unexpected problems). Because we don't have children, we are able to save and build our careers more quickly / effectively.

I'm not saying it's easy to get jobs on £22k and £28k a year, but equally neither of them are high-powered positions: she's a teacher, I'm a council pen-pusher. What I am saying is we have chosen to live within our means and save up for our longer-term plans. We tell people to save up deposits to buy houses, and to save up to buy cars or holidays. Why is it so strange to suggest that people should save up a bit before having children? As I said before, I am very aware that this is not relevant to people who ALREADY have children - but in difficult financial times I don't quite understand why people (who DON'T already have children) don't consider and plan their finances before having kids.

 

[daylightrobber]

Ok - being serious for a minute.

If it was a reasonble situation i.e. the man had a decent paying job then it shouldn't be impossible to get the money of him. If that's not the case then I view it a bit like losing your job and the welfare state should help out but force the mother into work within a reasonable amount of time while covering child care. Then I would pay the child benefits in vouchers so the state controls what she spends and more importantly who she spends it on.

Any single mother where the father isn't in the picture at all under the age of 21, possibly 25 I would pin the costs on to her parents if I couldn't find or pin the costs on the father plus also follow the 2nd part of my answer above. The girl shouldn't get the her own house but continue to live in her parents house if at all possible.

The legal aid would be saved in the long term. We could also take the costs out of it from the individuals if they where mean's tested however both parties should be only be allowed to spend the same amount. The pre-nups since agreed by the courts before marriage would be binding.

A few things.

Why do you have a hang up on single parents?

At 21 you are not your parents responsibility.

What do you think costs the country more, providing child benefits or tax relief on pensions? Why should single parents have to put up with people getting more tax relief on a pension than they could earn each year?

 

[The Esk]

He's [Poor language removed].

not under a socialist Gov, he's not lol

 

[edge]

QUOTE="Adversus, post: 3549105, member: 11918"]No it's not.[/QUOTE]

from the child maintenance website
How is child maintenance worked out? In most cases, we follow six steps when we work out how much child maintenance a paying parent must pay. Step 1 – Income We find out a paying parent’s yearly gross income or we check if they are getting benefits Step 2 – Things that affect income We check for certain things that could change this gross income amount, such as pension payments, or other children who the paying parent supports We also convert the yearly gross income amount to a weekly figure Step 3 – Child maintenance rates We apply one of four rates, based on the amount of gross weekly income Step 4 – Children we take into account We take into account the number of children who the paying parent must pay child maintenance for and any family-based arrangements
show me were it says anything about being married or not having a difference of payments

 

[chrissyjack]

Not wanting to throw a spanner in your works, but what would happen if you're wife became pregnant with twins or triplets?

Or another scenario. Couple , married or otherwise, decide to get their home in order before having kids . They still have their nighttime enjoyment , and the inevitable happens ....