Friday, September 29, 2006

Cost of kids

What a shame the 5,000-odd beneficiaries who add a baby to their benefit each year aren't thinking this way.

5 comments:

Oswald Bastable said...

they aren't doing a lot of thinking, period.

Gerrit said...

Because they see kids as income not expenditure.

All expenditure will be born by the tax payer. They get the income support.

iiq374 said...

"We can't afford another baby unless we have two incomes," she said.

And of course part of the reason for that - paying for everybody elses children instead...

Brian Smaller said...

We only had two kids because we could not realistically give three the education we wanted for out kids. My deadbeat dpb tenants keep popping them out.

I get told that they are producing the kids who will be the tax payers of the future who will look after us in our dotage. Yeah, Right.

iiq374 said...

I get told that they are producing the kids who will be the tax payers of the future who will look after us in our dotage. Yeah, Right.

Heh - I think that is the greatest lie toted out there, along with the "children are an asset" line. True most kids are an asset but their own statistics as to crime clusters etc belies that "those" kids are assets or tax payers...