Well I know how I've been done. Both my kids have left home, and I'll still have to pay my share one way or another.
When I were a lad, we knew what caused babies, and how to stop them. My wife used to hold the pill between her knees !
Seriously though, thought was given to whether we could afford children without state help.
Conditions were better then, with a choice of steady apprenticed jobs, not too far away. Employers offered sponsored university grants in sensible job related subjects as well. Even so, our own house was the first priority, seen as our own responsibility. We both worked, and "social housing" was not even considered, much less children at this stage. We lived with my parents until we could afford a deposit on a large enough house for a family. It was a 4 bed detached, with a large garden and cost £3,750. The mortgage was a struggle at the time (1970) but we still live in it.
Children followed when we could afford for my wife to stop working until the kids were older. Child care was seen as our problem, not the state's.
I know circumstances have changed, but had we spent this early period of our lives in the current situation, we would simply have not had children, until we were able to provide adequate support. In a broader sense, we need more children like a hole in the head, at the moment!
Childcare payments help people with children already, but the trend towards "willy nilly" breeding has been around for a long time, often as
as means of queue jumping for social housing, securing immigration status, and a general money spinner on a per child basis.
My point is (knew I'd finally get there) they made the choices, and they are mostly responsible for their situation, not the rest of us.
I know are a good few exceptions to this, job insecurity for one, but this is looks like a budget gimmick which may be very difficult to take back,
will only add to the debt / deficit, and is entirely the wrong "message" for the future.
Time to batten the hatches again.:Biggrin2:
