children:= "Licencing"???

bearfraser

Having read yet another Daily mail article about a single mum with FOUR kids spending 3k ++ on their Xmas all of which we as tax payers are funding.(dad walked out nimerous times but still managed unprotected sex to sprog yet more of their brats)
Can I put the cat in with the pigeons and probably be called all sorts , Why dont we introduce some form of licencing so as you have to apply to have children and try and stop this "Jermey Kyle generation asssuming that they have the right to sponge off the state

getonyourbike

That idea sounds a bit like the One Child Policy in China. It'd never happen here, being a democracy, unlike in China where they can do whatever they like and people just have to put up with it.

Pross

I can't believe I'm responding to what must surely be a trolling thread but this is one of the most stupid ideas I've ever heard. Who would decide who is suitable? So one person out of millions is reported (in the Mail of all places) of having behaved like this and you'd have everyone applying for a licence to have kids? What would you do if someone had kids without a licence? Throw them in prison and put the kids in care? That would be far cheaper wouldn't it! :roll:

Jez mon

Personally I would prefer forced sterilization for the poor

Jez mon

Jez mon

Pross

Got something in your eye Jez?

hatbeard

bearfraser wrote:

Having read yet another Daily mail article about a single mum with FOUR kids spending 3k ++ on their Xmas all of which we as tax payers are funding.(dad walked out nimerous times but still managed unprotected sex to sprog yet more of their brats)
Can I put the cat in with the pigeons and probably be called all sorts , Why dont we introduce some form of licencing so as you have to apply to have children and try and stop this "Jermey Kyle generation asssuming that they have the right to sponge off the state

the issue isn't how many kids she has it's the broken welfare system that allows her to spend that much money on them.

there's no way I'd stand for the government telling me if i can or cannot reproduce*, it's a basic function of nature ffs.

especially if they based said policy on the handful of edge cases dredged up by a rag of a paper who's only goal in life seems to be to raise the ire of the white middle class in britain by any means necessary.

*the onus on that denial stays firmly with the women of britain

Lazywheeler

Or if they decide to have more kids they would just have to send them out to beg like any other thirld world country.
Or are you suggesting enforced sterilisation like the Nazi party?

Ignorant post by someone that cannot spell licensing.

Mind you it is a free country and you are free to post as you wish, just as the Dail Hate is free to publish it's bilge.

Jez mon

Pross wrote:

Got something in your eye Jez?

:oops:

To be honest I can't really see a practical solution to the OP's issue. Child licensing, would:

a) cost more money than it saved
b) be a bit too close to fascism in my mind!

Now I dislike that x% of my hard earned money goes to taxes, which support people like her as the next person. But I've yet to truly see a proposed solution that would work...

15peter20

bearfraser wrote:

Having read yet another Daily mail article

the clue is in this line - i.e. yet another Daily Mail article - as someone else mentioned, it is the Mail's prerogative to pick out extreme cases to get the bile rising among the curtain twitching classes who make up their readership. You have fallen for their evil bait hook line and sinker.

finchy

bearfraser wrote:

Why dont we introduce some form of licencing so as you have to apply to have children and try and stop this "Jermey Kyle generation asssuming that they have the right to sponge off the state

So what you mean is... a licence to have unprotected sex?

Yes, that's feasible, can't see any difficulties in enforcing that one.

spen666

Bring back the Poor Law

tebbit

Or that lovely Social Democratic country Sweden which introduced eugenics from the 60's to the 80's.

Daily Mail the newspaper of British Facism, it doesn't change.

spen666

Troll?
Idiot? or
Forward Thinker who is ahead of his time?

Ollieda

johnfinch wrote:

bearfraser wrote:

Why dont we introduce some form of licencing so as you have to apply to have children and try and stop this "Jermey Kyle generation asssuming that they have the right to sponge off the state

So what you mean is... a licence to have unprotected sex?

Yes, that's feasible, can't see any difficulties in enforcing that one.

Might be cheaper to just send everyone a monthly supply of free condoms

rake

what

plowmar

Ollieda said

Might be cheaper to just send everyone a monthly supply of free condoms

You can take a horse.......... etc.

Previously it was said 'one in millions' therefore less than 60 in the country. Not worth the effort to get a***ed about.

If it the system works that well then nothing to change.

Anonymous

This thread is a good argument for the Daily Mail being banned.

Listened to this on he radio today -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00wr5mw

Is kinda relevant to this. Found the bit about tacky Christmas light displays quite interesting (I don't like them myself, but each to their own), but that's another thread.

shouldbeinbed

How would you & the andrex mail propose to deal with existing parents fallen on hard times?

graeme_s-2

Basically if the parents cant afford to support more than their first child then we should just let them starve to save the rest of us a few quid. Perhaps we could have "kick a poor baby to death" nights on Wednesday's in town centres uo and down the country? Would save us a couple of quid in income tax. Seems a fair trade.

TuckerUK

tebbit wrote:

Or that lovely Social Democratic country Sweden which introduced eugenics from the 60's to the 80's.

I thought that was the US and Germany (who the US were funding) during the 1930s?

Wheelspinner

There are plenty of financially secure people who are total failures at being parents, and plenty of financially wrecked people who are fabulous parents.

Money, or lack of it, state-provided or otherwise, has zero to do with being a decent parent.

mr_poll

If we can ignore the Daily Mail angle of benefit scrounger on the take for a second.

Given we live on a finite sized planet with diminishing resources, a population explosion which will only get worse as the developing nations develop thus increasing family size and living longer and with no prospect of getting off this third rock from the Sun - surely it will come a time when population is limited by licence or sterilisation.

Anonymous

shouldbeinbed wrote:

How would you & the andrex mail propose to deal with existing parents fallen on hard times?

+1 Or young people with good intentions facing becoming unplanned parents?

What's the next logical step?

And how will this be policed?

Are you talking about compulsory abortions for people who can't prove the means to support their children?

ilm_zero7

spen666 wrote:

Troll?
Idiot? or
Forward Thinker who is ahead of his time?

+1

rick_chasey

I think the solution is for the OP to read a proper paper.

tebbit

TuckerUK wrote:

tebbit wrote:

Or that lovely Social Democratic country Sweden which introduced eugenics from the 60's to the 80's.

I thought that was the US and Germany (who the US were funding) during the 1930s?

There was a scandal a few years back over the eugenics subject in Sweden and it was that recent.

markyboy2005

Graeme_S wrote:

Basically if the parents cant afford to support more than their first child then we should just let them starve to save the rest of us a few quid. Perhaps we could have "kick a poor baby to death" nights on Wednesday's in town centres uo and down the country? Would save us a couple of quid in income tax. Seems a fair trade.

You are onto something here. Not only would it reduce the number of poor babies in the country, it would give exercise to the overweight children from "better" families, further saving the country money in not looking after their fat asses when they have type 2 at the age of 12.

Also, it would bring back that national pride thing that's missing. " hey kids there is going to be a baby kicking tonight"....woohoo, "let's get our kicking boots on" team spirit and all that.

Tally ho.

I like it....kind of like chop chop square in Saudi.

cakewalk

Jez mon wrote:

Personally I would prefer forced sterilization for the poor

Lets hope your parents would not have fallen below the threshold.

Anonymous

shouldbeinbed wrote:

How would you & the andrex mail propose to deal with existing parents fallen on hard times?

Thats easy. look in the fridge to see if they have houmous. Guardian in the paper rack. Not skiing in gstaad this year. Sold one of the ponies.

If these criteria are met then they are in "hard timesville" and should be bailed. See that silly woman journalists column about Christmas in the mail from a little while ago, that should be the bar.