Monday, 12 May 2008

Twats of the day (4)

From today's Metro (article not online):

Child poverty is linked to the gender pay gap and the lack of jobs for women ... Two out of five poor children are living with a single mother, while a third have a mother on little or no income, says the Fawcett Society... Lone mothers are at twice the risk of poverty as couples with children, says the society... The society wants ministers to ban the dismissal of pregnant workers, to raise maternity benefits and make gender pay audits compulsory.

I'm not sure I can even be bothered fisking that properly, but here goes:

1. Main cause of child poverty is poor people having children. People without jobs tend to be poor. No sane welfare system can possibly 'lift' such kids out of 'poverty'.

2. Excessive 'rights' for pregnant women makes it harder for other women to get well paying jobs (employers are over-cautious about taking them on).

3. Before my wife had kids, our salaries were roughly equal. Now we have two kids and Her Indoors has had a 'career break' and works slightly shorter hours, so my salary has continued to rise and hers is slightly lower than it was. Big deal. If she's underpaid, then by definition I must be overpaid; and as we pool all income and expenses, we end up roughly equal when it comes to spending power.

4. As to raising maternity benefits, I see no reason why all non-working mothers shouldn't get the same Citizen's Basic Income, regardless of household composition or household earnings. That gives you a 'safety net' without a 'poverty trap'. About £60 per week seems about right.

5. As to the 'mother's pay gap' (for that is what it is), to the extent that this is not alleviated by points 3. and 4. above, I am also in favour of scrapping means-tested Child & Working Tax Credits and rolling them into a higher flat-rate Child Benefit of £30+ per week for each of the first three children in each family.

6. And finally ... how about doubling the tax-free personal allowance, which will further reduce the %age gap in net pay between low- and average-paid workers?

That's that fixed. Next.

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

MW

I trust you realise that implementing your suggestions would mean putting a slew of useless bureaucrats (and part of Gordo's client vote) out of a job. Really, is this fair? You'll be suggesting next that the relative - rather than absolute - definition of "child poverty" makes it the ideal Labour target (ie the problem can't be solved so shovel in more cash).

BTW on a (related note) a quote from Reagan concerning an aspect of LBJ's Great Society. The Great Communicator said that "We declared war on poverty . . . . . and poverty won."