2015 post UK election discussion

[Tree13]

Mate, I'm not saying you are wrong - if you wish to be more cautious then that is your choice - we all have to be true to ourselves.

For me the additional responsibility of a child on its way was sufficient incentive to position myself so that the risks became negligible. But even if I had failed I would have the most precious asset of all, a child. A child is no more or less precious because of your financial circumstances.

I get that. More than happy to accept that point.

The question I'm asking is, do you and I just look at the same scenario (the risk of not being able to fully provide for our own children without having to become reliant upon state benefits) and see totally a different likelihood of risk, and also view very differently the subsequent drain upon public finances should the risk materialise?

I'm trying to understand the aspects that we view differently.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

In this day and age, if everyone worried about having children because of financial restraints there would be a lot of unhappy couples out there.

 

[The Esk]

I get that. More than happy to accept that point.

The question I'm asking is, do you and I just look at the same scenario (the risk of not being able to fully provide for our own children without having to become reliant upon state benefits) and see totally a different likelihood of risk, and also view very differently the subsequent drain upon public finances should the risk materialise?

I'm trying to understand the aspects that we view differently.

Totally this.

Firstly I had total confidence in my own abilities to generate income, and secondly in the very unlikely event it was required my taxes paid more than justified state support.

 

[marty mcfly]

I get that. More than happy to accept that point.

The question I'm asking is, do you and I just look at the same scenario (the risk of not being able to fully provide for our own children without having to become reliant upon state benefits) and see totally a different likelihood of risk, and also view very differently the subsequent drain upon public finances should the risk materialise?

I'm trying to understand the aspects that we view differently.

The welfare state is for people like you if things go wrong. Cut your standard of living and don't wait.

 

[daylightrobber]

How is that any different to UKIP closing the door to immigration. I know. You are using everyone's tax money to build houses for the lucky few that just happened to live in those areas.

Do you think that's fair?

It's another example of how socialism "picks" winners rather than allowing people to earn it.

We most certainly aren't using tax payers money. We have raised funds from the community, negotiated good rates with builders and mortgage lenders, begged the local church for their land to build on and basically explained the reality to everyone in the hope that they'd engage. On top of that we've vetted potential occupants and drawn up contracts so that the community will always retain the properties. The residents will benefit from affordable housing whilst the community benefits from their skills staying in the area. I suppose it could be looked at as a kind of social engineering where everyone wins.

What isn't fair and what does favour a lucky few is Right to Buy.

 

[The Esk]

The welfare state is for people like you if things go wrong. Cut your standard of living and don't wait.

Or maintain your standard of living and use your skills to increase your earnings.

 

[Woolly Blue]

Yes, that kind of thinking might have meant sommat forty or fifty years ago when Britain was replete with a manufacturing base and the shipyards, steel foundries and car plants were employing thousands upon thousands of people and even the most dim witted among us could leave school at 15 and make a life for himself in one of them.

The days when lads started working with proper plumbing companies, electrical contractors or glazing companies and emerged after a five year apprenticeship as an accomplished tradesman who maybe eventually started his own small business.

But your sentiments and your thinking are pure bunkum in this day and age where successive governments made it easy for multi national companies to leave these shores so they could exploit third world labour and render our industrial base devastated.

That is a hand wringing post and you don't even know what you are saying.

The key word is "aspiration".

Every poor kid on the sink estate "aspires" to do better but long gone are the opportunities to lift themselves out of it.

Every homeless person dossing down in a shop doorway "aspires" to having a place to call home.

It us quite disgusting for chaps to smugly imply that the only thing necessary to lift oneself from poverty is the "aspiration" so to do.

No, my friend.

What people really need to rise out of poverty is the "opportunity" to do so.

And there is precious little of that in this once industrial powerhouse of a country.

The best most of these poor kids can hope for is minimum wage Mac Jobs, zero hour contracts or agency jobs with the council or in old people's homes without any kind of job security.

Job security.

That is another old fashioned concept which had gone out the window since Thatcher started her attack on industrial Britain and those people who depended on it to lift themselves out of poverty ......and to "stay" out of it.....and raise a family.

Oscar Wilde once said that we are all in the gutter. But some of us are looking at the stars.

Ponder on that and think of the hopelessness of kids who long to reach for the stars but lack the opportunity to do so.

To be honest, that post won't be bettered.

I don't agree 100% with everything you've said, there are still opportunities for people to lift themselves out of poverty, but the barriers to that are way bigger than they were 30 years ago. The problem is, that, if you're sat in Middle England, and don't even realise there is a problem, you're not likely to care too much about it.

 

[Khalekan]

To be honest, that post won't be bettered.

I don't agree 100% with everything you've said, there are still opportunities for people to lift themselves out of poverty, but the barriers to that are way bigger than they were 30 years ago. The problem is, that, if you're sat in Middle England, and don't even realise there is a problem, you're not likely to care too much about it.

Correct.

 

[glorydaze]

To be honest, that post won't be bettered.

I don't agree 100% with everything you've said, there are still opportunities for people to lift themselves out of poverty, but the barriers to that are way bigger than they were 30 years ago. The problem is, that, if you're sat in Middle England, and don't even realise there is a problem, you're not likely to care too much about it.

I suggest people listen to, or read the words of the song "praying for time", ignoring the religious bits. That to me is how the lower class feel the rest are.

 

[marty mcfly]

We most certainly aren't using tax payers money. We have raised funds from the community, negotiated good rates with builders and mortgage lenders, begged the local church for their land to build on and basically explained the reality to everyone in the hope that they'd engage. On top of that we've vetted potential occupants and drawn up contracts so that the community will always retain the properties. The residents will benefit from affordable housing whilst the community benefits from their skills staying in the area. I suppose it could be looked at as a kind of social engineering where everyone wins.

What isn't fair and what does favour a lucky few is Right to Buy.

I'm not sure I agree with right to buy either as its another government run scheme. I don't know the details of what you're doing so I'll slightly modify my position based on what you've said and simply say while I have reservations I also accept it might be a good thing.

 

[marty mcfly]

Or maintain your standard of living and use your skills to increase your earnings.

Growth or austerity

 

[marty mcfly]

To be honest, that post won't be bettered.

I don't agree 100% with everything you've said, there are still opportunities for people to lift themselves out of poverty, but the barriers to that are way bigger than they were 30 years ago. The problem is, that, if you're sat in Middle England, and don't even realise there is a problem, you're not likely to care too much about it.

Middle Englans cares as globalization has effected everyone. I work in a field that also is massively at the whim of multi national corporations and their insourcing and outsourcing and moving where tax breaks are. However it's not a right or left issue.

 

[toffyslick]

With Blair everyone is a winner....

Mr brown a fine Tory.

 

[Gwladys St. Glory]

Hey, look on the bright side England...you'll still have better foreign policy than us. That's got to count for something, right?

 

[Milk]

Oh dear ... rioting & injuring policemen outside No 10 isn't going to speed up an easing of austerity and reduce benefit cuts.