It All Comes Down To Perspective

Yesterday The U.K. Independent posted a story about some changes to British law that occurred this year.

The headline of the story is, “While you celebrate the third royal baby, remember all of the women in Britain who aren’t allowed a third child.” First of all, the headline is totally misleading–there is no law prohibiting a third child.

The article reports:

In April this year the Government reformed child tax credits, introducing what is commonly referred to as the “rape clause”. From now on, a woman will be unable to claim tax credits for any child after her first two unless she can demonstrate conception occurred “as a result of a sexual act which [she] didn’t or couldn’t consent to” or “at a time when [she was] in an abusive relationship, under ongoing control or coercion by the other parent of the child”. To claim this exemption, she must complete an eight-page “rape assessment” form, countersigned by a third party professional to whom she must disclose her assault. Continuing to live with the father of her child will render her ineligible for support.

So what the law actually does is say that there will be no tax credits for the third child unless extraordinary circumstances are involved–not that a person cannot have a third child. One wonders if the tax credit is significant enough to make a difference. In America, we get a tax deduction for each child, but that deduction in no way even approaches the cost of feeding, clothing, and housing that child for a year.

There is another interesting aspect of this law. In recent years, Britain has taken in a large number of Muslim refugees and immigrants who tend to have large families. One wonders what impact this law will have on the Muslim population. Does the two-child rule apply to each wife or to every wife of a Muslim man? Is polygamy now legal in Britain since they now have Sharia courts? These are also questions that may apply to this law?

In 2015, The Guardian reported:

The Muslim population of England and Wales is growing faster than the overall population, with a higher proportion of children and a lower ratio of elderly people, according to an analysis of official data.

One in three Muslims is under 15, compared with fewer than one in five overall. There are also fewer elderly Muslims, with 4% aged over 65, compared with 16% of the overall population.

In 2011, 2.71 million Muslims lived in England and Wales, compared with 1.55 million in 2001. There were also 77,000 Muslims in Scotland and 3,800 in Northern Ireland.

The Muslim Council of Britain’s (MCB) study of data from the 2011 census found that Muslims are still a small minority of the overall population – one in 20. This contrasts with popular perceptions held by Britons, who overstate the proportion of Muslims in the country by a factor of four, according to a recent survey by Ipsos Mori.

In September 2016, the U.K. Mail reported:

Mohammed is the most popular name for boys in England and Wales- but it doesn’t top the official list because there are so many different ways to spell it.

There were 7,361 children born last year called Mohammed, Muhammed, Mohammad or Mohamed, according to the Office for National Statistics, which would have made it the number one boys name if the variations were taken into account.

Demographics can change very quickly. I wonder if this law is an attempt to slow down that change.

America Needs To Learn The Lesson Britain Just Learned

Yesterday the U.K. Daily Mail posted an article about what is happening to the British workforce–it is growing and unemployment is going down!

The article reports:

A record 3,100 people every day are finding work as Britain’s jobless total falls at the fastest rate in 17 years.

The number of unemployed tumbled to 2.32million – falling by 167,000 between September and November, the biggest drop since 1997.

Yesterday the Office for National Statistics said the unemployment rate is now at 7.1 per cent after falling faster than any economist or the Bank (Bank of England) predicted.

…In an unusually political statement, the Bank also said the Coalition’s benefits clampdown may have pushed more people into looking for work, rather than continuing to rely on State handouts. It said: ‘A tightening in the eligibility requirements for some State benefits might also have led to an intensification of job search.’ 

Meanwhile, Congress in America is debating extending unemployment benefits.

Statistics have shown that people collecting unemployment insurance tend to intensify their search for work as their unemployment benefits begin to run out. Extending unemployment or increasing welfare benefits does not encourage people to join the work force–it destroys motivation. In most cases, it is simply more fun not to have to get up and go to work every morning. When the government subsidizes not working, more people don’t work. I am not saying that we should end unemployment or welfare, but we should put enough restrictions on both to prevent generations of America who have not grasped the concept of working for a living. America needs to follow the example of Great Britain.


Enhanced by Zemanta