How much wealth is acceptable?

N1AK

Cleaver wrote: »

However, she's finding that a lack of formal education is now holding her back in her career somewhat. However, is that societies fault? Or her fault? DO we have a role in 'helping her' as a society? Or should she have just been better behaved when she was 15?

I think the issue of finding who is at fault is sometimes the worst way to look at this. Often, letting the past go and focusing on the best course for the future will get better results.

Regardless of whether your wife made mistakes in her mid-teens, or whether society, or her parents could have done more to help ask: What would be best now?

If helping people who didn't value education when they were younger, will help them to be more successful, and thus pay more tax and consume fewer benefits, it would be in the best interests of our society to do so.

PasturesNew

I was a 'problem child' (turns out it was ASD, discovered 40 years too late), I questioned everything and was seen as difficult (still am). I had no clue about how the world worked (still don't and am confused by it). I did what I thought was right and bumbled along, but always in/out of jobs and managing to find abusive employers and lots of failing companies who'd employ me then close down. I only ever found one good employer, where I excelled ... until they were bought out a year later and closed the Dept.... if that hadn't happened I'd be a high flier by now (inspirational manager/right environment, correct job for my abilities).

I've no connections.

In the right environment etc, I'd have easily ruled the world.

Cleaver

The_White_Horse wrote: »

if a lot of the problem is caused by kids coming from disadvantaged backgrounds, why do we keep paying scum to breed like bacteria?

Just to annoy you. And it's working like a treat.

By the way, how are your financial troubles going White Horse? I seem to remember the last time we were chatting you were looking for some advice after going over your overdraft limit a few times. Are you managing your money any better nowadays?

ninky_2

The_White_Horse wrote: »

if a lot of the problem is caused by kids coming from disadvantaged backgrounds, why do we keep paying scum to breed like bacteria?

because it suits the capitalist machine.

increased underclass means increased demand for goods and services

cost of the underclass paid for by workers means they not only must pay for their own (inflated) goods and services but for those of the underclass.

if only those who could afford to have children had them capitalism would soon run out of wage slaves.

chucky

Originally Posted by N1AK
I was a problem child

apologies for upsetting anyone in advance but why is it that the majority of children that are diagnosed with ADHD are boys and are from single parent families?

ninky_2

chucky wrote: »

apologies for upsetting anyone in advance but why is it that the majority of children that are diagnosed with ADHD are boys and are from single parent families?

well one of those factors is genetic (maleness). but could it be that both of those factors might also be genetic? i.e. is it possible that certain genetic factors predispose a person to be more likely to be a single parent and/or absentee parent - these might also be linked to risk taking / lack of consideration of consequences etc.

lostinrates

Cleaver wrote: »

However, is that societies fault? Or her fault? DO we have a role in 'helping her' as a society? Or should she have just been better behaved when she was 15?

None of the above..by the time we reach adulthood anyway my anwer might be different were she 15 nowThe answer is that it IS now your wife's (and yours as a household to look at how best to afford this) prerogative to look at whether she care's to redress the academic issues now or continue as she is. Your wife must take credit for the hard work that's seen her succeed as she has and responsibility for the decisions she makes now about academic qualifications.

edinburgher

There are millions of people living on, say, the equivalent of £20 a week. That's a huge proportion of Africans, Indians and some Chinese.........

In fact it's considerably worse than that, as there's over a billion people living on less than $2/day according to the mighty Wikipedia

quantic

With regards to bankers, why on earth would they care about putting in place sustainable long term plans if they get enough in wages and bonus' to retire after a few years? Surely bonuses would be more sensible if over a longer period to show sustained performance. To avoid boom bust scenarios?

Pete111

ninky wrote: »

because it suits the capitalist machine.

increased underclass means increased demand for goods and services

cost of the underclass paid for by workers means they not only must pay for their own (inflated) goods and services but for those of the underclass.

if only those who could afford to have children had them capitalism would soon run out of wage slaves.

But surely the 'wage slaves' ending up paying for the non paying underclass is a textbook definition of a 'drag' on pure capitalism?

I can't see how these useless mouths are anything but a hinderence..unless you start from the point that the majority must be working all hours to live more or less hand to mouth for capitalism to work. Is that it?