What happens to state benefit in a recession

PasturesNew

izzybusy23 wrote: »

Not read the whole thread so not sure if this has been mentioned, but was speaking to my mother on New Years Eve and she was saying that some state in the US (sorry, cannot remember which one off the top of my head) had no money to pay for state benefits in January... She lives in Kentucky but I am sure if was the other side of the US she was referring to.. so guess there is always the possibility that the same could happen to the UK if people lots their jobs on mass?

Probably California - they've been handing out IOUs as they ran out of money.

moggylover

leveller2911 wrote: »

Totally agree, when I left school in around 1982 ish everybody could read and write,not the case now.
A friend of mine teaches at college, he showed me some forms that had been filled out by the new "students" the handwriting was ineligable ,some couldnt do joined-up writing and 2 of them (and I kid you not) didnt even spell there own names correctly.

They arent taught to form letters correctly and neatly and when it comes to the alphabet its not A-B-C-D-E, theyre taught to say how the letter sounds (phonics) .
Im sorry but the old saying is "if it aint broke,dont fix it".....

(yes I know my grammar is poor):rotfl: for me the 3"R"s come before any other lesson.especially religion....:rolleyes:

I would totally agree with the later part of this post, however, I once had a boyfriend who left school around 1986 and could not read or write (despite being very clever and intelligent to talk to) to any acceptable standard due to undiagnosed Dyslexia;) - so not ALL who left school in earlier times were literate. Indeed, I also had a neighbour as a child who had left school in the very early 50's and whom I taught to read and right when he must have been approaching 45 and I was a mere 10 year old:D .

However, as one who sat O levels rather than GCSE I would agree that the overall standards have most definitely been dummied down to allow an appearance of better overall education, and would confirm that my old professor from Uni days shakes his head in dismay at the amount of "catching up" that some of his intake require these days, and also at the lack of "free thinking" that appears common amongst them.

PasturesNew

leveller2911 wrote: »

...he showed me some forms that had been filled out by the new "students" the handwriting was ineligable ,some couldnt do joined-up writing

I think you mean the handwriting was illegible.

When I was learning to write we started by using a pencil. Once you were good with a pencil you were allowed to use a stick with a nib on the end of it and the school-issued ink (ink wells topped up by ink monitors).

Once you had proven yourself to be good with the stick/nib, you were allowed to use your own fountain pen and to use blue ink that you bought yourself. This stage would have been reached by everybody between the ages of 8 and 9.

So by age 9 you were capable of producing good, clear, neat writing with an ink pen. That would be joined up writing.

moggylover

PasturesNew wrote: »

It does. Halve housing costs, all work half time, no WTC, but everybody who wants one has a job. With all the spare time we'd have, we'd stimulate the economy's growth because we'd need to fill that time with activities, from DIY to learning a new skill or just shopping.

Everybody would feel happier and everybody would be contributing.



Glad you're doing well.

I think it is a great idea, but how would we then pay the people enough to live on for doing less hours . Not such a problem if people who are living on 80K would find it acceptable to live a lower standard of living to "share" their job and ensure everyone has employment: but I don't think they would go for it:o

Not sure that with increased globalisation, increased mechanisation, decimation of resources and the "smaller" pot of jobs that the future will more than likely have that it may not be the only solution other than "Soylent Green" though.;)

PasturesNew

moggylover wrote: »

... once had a boyfriend who left school around 1986 and could not read or write ... so not ALL who left school in earlier times were literate.

My first bf couldn't read and write. He was a forklift driver in a factory. I thought he had somebody else as he was always busy on a Tuesday night, it turned out he was at classes to learn.

I wonder if these days it would be possible to be a forklift truck driver in a factory without being able to read/write?

Probably a degree is needed now.

treliac

moggylover wrote: »

would confirm that my old professor from Uni days shakes his head in dismay at the amount of "catching up" that some of his intake require these days, and also at the lack of "free thinking" that appears common amongst them.

Off topic I know, but doesn't it seem strange that generations of young women fought for equality in the past and that now so many prefer to worship empty headed celebrity and the extent of their apparent ambition is to convey an image of sexual availability.

leveller2911

PasturesNew wrote: »

I think you mean the handwriting was illegible.

When I was learning to write we started by using a pencil. Once you were good with a pencil you were allowed to use a stick with a nib on the end of it and the school-issued ink (ink wells topped up by ink monitors).

Once you had proven yourself to be good with the stick/nib, you were allowed to use your own fountain pen and to use blue ink that you bought yourself. This stage would have been reached by everybody between the ages of 8 and 9.

So by age 9 you were capable of producing good, clear, neat writing with an ink pen. That would be joined up writing.

Thank you kindly for the spellcheck.
Im a Joiner by trade so im much better with my hands...The local primary school in this area doesnt even let the children have lined paper. Ive pointed out to the head teacher (use to be headmaster till the PC brigade got in)that it helps with neatness,spacing between words etc, but It falls on deaf ears.They are now teaching them joined up writing.My son is 9 , he just about knows his 7 times table,it seems he,s about average for his age(girls are always quick learners) but instead of concentrating on basic ,important things they would rather teach them about religions(christianity,islam,hindu etc) im not saying it doesnt have a place in the modern world but at the age of 9 ?????:eek:

olly300

leveller2911 wrote: »

Totally agree, when I left school in around 1982 ish everybody could read and write,not the case now.
A friend of mine teaches at college, he showed me some forms that had been filled out by the new "students" the handwriting was ineligable ,some couldnt do joined-up writing and 2 of them (and I kid you not) didnt even spell there own names correctly.

They arent taught to form letters correctly and neatly and when it comes to the alphabet its not A-B-C-D-E, theyre taught to say how the letter sounds (phonics) .
Im sorry but the old saying is "if it aint broke,dont fix it".....

(yes I know my grammar is poor):rotfl: for me the 3"R"s come before any other lesson.especially religion....:rolleyes:

I was taught to read at home but when I was taught again at school I was taught phonics. However we also were taught the alphabet.

For some strange reason though kids for about the last fifteen years haven't been taught the alphabet as well when they are learning to read. I just find that plain weird as it presumes kids are thick.

All the kids I know and met have been taught joined up writing. In fact the thing that has been in for the last 15 years or so is to teach them joined up writing from the beginning.

So unlike you and I their natural handwriting style is joined up.

I actually don't write joined up when I'm filling in application forms as even though I was in a primary school where we had handwriting lessons and did my cousin's handwriting homework as a teenager it's easier for me not to write joined up if I want it to be legible.

So it sounds like your friend teaching a college is teaching the kids who aren't that bright.

PasturesNew

moggylover wrote: »

I think it is a great idea, but how would we then pay the people enough to live on for doing less hours . Not such a problem if people who are living on 80K would find it acceptable to live a lower standard of living to "share" their job and ensure everyone has employment: but I don't think they would go for it:o

Not sure that with increased globalisation, increased mechanisation, decimation of resources and the "smaller" pot of jobs that the future will more than likely have that it may not be the only solution other than "Soylent Green" though.;)

Yes, that's the problem, but managed over, say, 10 years, it could be achievable.

As for Soylent Green - it would make more sense to eat criminals and chavs.

olly300

leveller2911 wrote: »

Thank you kindly for the spellcheck.
Im a Joiner by trade so im much better with my hands...The local primary school in this area doesnt even let the children have lined paper. Ive pointed out to the head teacher (use to be headmaster till the PC brigade got in)that it helps with neatness,spacing between words etc, but It falls on deaf ears.They are now teaching them joined up writing.My son is 9 , he just about knows his 7 times table,it seems he,s about average for his age(girls are always quick learners) but instead of concentrating on basic ,important things they would rather teach them about religions(christianity,islam,hindu etc) im not saying it doesnt have a place in the modern world but at the age of 9 ?????:eek:

I remember we only received paper with lines on it for handwriting class and then at age 11. Before that all paper and books, unless they were for Maths and had squares, had no lines.

Teaching kids things like religion, history and science at primary school with the right teacher is another way to get them to use their reading and writing skills.

After all you have to read about something - some kids will read about anything but other kids particularly boys will only read if the stuff really interests them.