I don’t mind paying what is a pittance in taxes (compared to defence expenditure or tax breaks for private industries) to ensure a child genuinely from a poorer background at least gets a decent start in life..
unwanted (or more often unplanned) pregnancies do happen and its not acceptable in a modern European nation to “punish a child for being born”.. babies don’t always arrive when couples are at the right point financially for them.
bear in mind the alternative before the welfare state was unwanted kids either meeting with a lot of “unfortunate accidents” such as “accidentally eating the rat poison”, being sold for cash (still done in foreign countries) or being put into badly run childrens homes run by the dominant faith groups, and we all know what happened to many of them in these places!
I also strongly believe all children should have access to playgroups, infant, junior and high school and apprenticeships/further education from age 0-18 – but I see no reason why higher earners should get extra benefits for their children – if they want extra from what the state provides they should pay for it from their own pockets..
As for the broken middle class families, in 90% of the time (unless of course a parent has died but they should have had pensions/investments) these families split becuase of the same aggressive, stubborn competitive nature what made them high flyers in business anyway, often it gets translated into aggression within the family home. If they choose to live like that, its a price they must pay same as the risk of a business failing or redundancy in the free markets many of them worship (even if they claim to do otherwise), and there is still a financial duty of each ex-partner to contribute to the upkeep of children.
Some parents (like my own) do still realise its a lifetime commitment having children and stay together “till death do us part” even when times are bad and irrespective of how much money each partner is making…
