Open Editor
Rout Khalaf, FT Editor, chooses stories that he likes to this booklet.
Boss of both British (removing major families from the sward payment) is not in the world for many reasons.
One is a policy: poverty, verifying you to leave families without access to a tested support to their third or fourth child. The movement group of child poverty describes as “The biggest driver of the child's poverty in the UK today”. As a result, everything that government does reduce the children's poverty is not working so much. Make ridiculers to raise children from their poverty, and their graduate children.
One political: most MPS feel very much About a child's poverty target and will not bear the situation where the labor, and a majority, from the office and more children may have already taken the office.
Both arguments may be eligible, and there are many other appropriate reasons to scroll the cap. But the important thing is ignored: If you agree that you are in the state state to care for human family, however, the financial support zone must not be under three children. Why not? Because “three children” is a number that should produce many families to change the old age Population. (The UK replacement value is 2.1 birth, but you cannot have 0.1, for obvious reasons.)
While it does not have to be a country's business so that people do not want to make children, sometimes they have a habit to make something “this” is not a government business “.
It certainly is the country's business that people have enough children to keep their people The value of change. Identifying how many children have people who are part of the census management is part of the highest approach or potential tax rates.
There are politics and philosophy questions to ask about whether the government should provide for children overall. I think we all have been given young people who are working on knocking – and we not all had a disability when working together. Reasonable people can disagree.
What kind of promotionary methods, and those working, discuss. As freedom, I oppose forced and social engineering. The question of being “how many people take to do someone else is a political but biological question. But there is something very important in the British Britain recognizes that it is attractive to people with people with financial support after they have a second child.
Children should not be punished because of their mistakes to do their parents, or if parents lose their work or lose their years of work after their third child born after their third child.
But the government machine works partly in response to the signs that political agents send: the government takes large families as a bodily bid in children. This affects everything from 'any kind of houses that must be encouraged?' (Well, the nature of the people in the medium income can easily lift three children) to 'what responsibility do people think people should follow at work?' (Those who make them can raise three children).
If the UK contains, until recently, I have made it easy for someone to come to the country to care for adults rather than teaching the young one by the example.
It is true to say that many countries – Hungary and FranceTo call two – spend the money and encourage people to have more children, and they never raised their birth rates.
But at least at least it is important to admit that they do so, in fact, they are interested in people with children and we all have an integrated society for that. There are a policy questions that have many responses. But in this case there is only one answer: the number of children chosen to be good to the UK people if more than two.