This may be a stupid question, but with stuff like they are proposing such as cuts to tax credits

[Monty91]

and housing benefit for families with more than two children, would it not be fairer to implement them without applying to existing families, in other words as a deterrent against having more kids than you can afford?

Or would that simply take too long to deliver the kind of welfare savings that are needed?

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

One would imagine that any government would seek to avoid upsetting significant portions of the electorate, even 5 years before a GE, if they don't deem the action absolutely necessary.

It may be, of course, thast the number of people affected are not a significant portion of the elctorate, and George may have decided that a boot to the arse may be just what this demographic requires.

In short, the decision may be economic or it may be political. We don't really know.

That doesn't really help you, does it?

[Snin]

it worked well for that little german chappy for a while..if we did it without being racist..just do it to the scum..any of tem, not selective.. then should work out fine shouldn't it ?

[Classic Jorge]

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

We leave that sort of thing to the caring left in China and North Korea.

[Snin]

[7evens]

It's simply a Labour Metaphor for largely, Non working families who sit around on their useless arses all day doing jack **** :-)

[Monty91]

in an ideal world, they would make the required welfare savings without making low-income families worse off. If only because it would be good political PR.

So I assume that hitting existing families, rather than deterring the creation of future ones, is an undesirable but unavoidable necessity for the country to make the kind of savings on welfare that it needs.

[Berni]

Monty, you old dog - have you slung another bairn up the missus?

[Monty91]

without sponging off the state *sniff*

[Berni]

[Classic Jorge]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33463864 Communist warning.

They dont care about the effects it will have on these people because they didnt vote for them and probably never will. Meanwhile, economic illiterates and the just plain mean spirited will see this as a just and right action as we're "paying down the nation's defecit" (we're not) according to the "long term financial plan" (there isnt one).

[redgunamo]