Corbynomics: A Dystopia

economic

Cakeguts wrote: »

My parents were reasonably well off. We lived in a small 4 bed detached house. We had camping holidays in the UK and sometimes abroad for 2 weeks in the school summer holidays. Flying and hotels were too expensive.

We had loose covers on the furniture when the orignal covers wore out. Who has those these days?

Who goes outside in the dark in the middle of winter these days to get several hods of coal to put on the fire?

2nd hand cars. New cars were too expensive.

Lot of things that people now feel they are entitled to have were much too expensive for people years ago.

My grandmother lived in a 1937 3 bed semi that she and my grandfather bought new. They didn't have central heating or a phone or a fitted kitchen. There was a bathroom and toilet upstairs and an outside toilet downstairs at the back. There was a seperate heater for water in the kitchen and bathroom because there was no boiler. Later they had a boiler added in the back bedroom. If you can remember this, what people have these days is luxury.

We have a lot of entitled people now who feel that they should have whatever they want without going without anything.

I do remember some parents saying that they were going to give their children everything that they themselves didn't have and I remember thinking that this was a bad idea because the children would have no idea how much work something took to get and they wouldn't learn that they couldn't have everything they wanted. I really don't think that taxes should pay for parents to give their children branded clothing because the parent is unable to say "no" to the child.

What really annoys me is the way that some people use child poverty as a reason to pay more in benefits. What annoys me about this is that people have children by choice. No one stands over someone and forces them to have a child when they don't have anywhere to live or a job to pay for a child. No one ever mentions the disabled in our communities who have never had a choice to be disabled. I have never heard a politician say that they will build more homes for the disabled or more supported housing for the disabled. Some disabled people do not have the choices that most people feel entitled to have. They can't have children, they can't live independently, there isn't enough supported housing for people to live away from their parents, they can't afford holidays or cars. Compared to many children living in so called poverty, single disabled people have nothing and no way of getting anything.

but perhaps disabled people are like that cos of karma? so why should they be helped?

Cakeguts

economic wrote: »

but perhaps disabled people are like that cos of karma? so why should they be helped?

It was mental health day this week. There are a lot of young and older single people who would not be considered homeless by local councils because they live with their parents. The reason why they live with their parents is because they are disabled by mental illness but they don't look ill. However these parents are getting older and older with these disabled adult children who are obliged to still live at home because there is a shortage of supported housing. I have never heard the UK communist party led by Jeremy Corbyn once mention helping the vulnerable in our society. It is all free university fees and helping keep people with choices out of poverty.

These vulnerable adults who are living with elderly parents have no choices about anything. They can't move out and live independently because there is nowhere for them to go, they can't have children, they don't own cars, they don't go on holiday, they have very little money, they often are not well enough to work. That is what I call living in poverty. Not the parents of children who all have choices. Having a child is a choice. If you make that choice you can also choose how many children you can afford without expecting the rest of society to help you out if you make a wrong choice. People who choose to have children also make the choice of how they are going to pay to bring them up. Someone who is living in an expensive area can always choose to move somewhere cheaper. These vulnerable disabled adults have no choice.

I would love some of these people who are supposed to be living in poverty try to live with something like MS where you are dependent on local disabled transport to take you out of your home.

economic

Cakeguts wrote: »

It was mental health day this week. There are a lot of young and older single people who would not be considered homeless by local councils because they live with their parents. The reason why they live with their parents is because they are disabled by mental illness but they don't look ill. However these parents are getting older and older with these disabled adult children who are obliged to still live at home because there is a shortage of supported housing. I have never heard the UK communist party led by Jeremy Corbyn once mention helping the vulnerable in our society. It is all free university fees and helping keep people with choices out of poverty.

These vulnerable adults who are living with elderly parents have no choices about anything. They can't move out and live independently because there is nowhere for them to go, they can't have children, they don't own cars, they don't go on holiday, they have very little money, they often are not well enough to work. That is what I call living in poverty. Not the parents of children who all have choices. Having a child is a choice. If you make that choice you can also choose how many children you can afford without expecting the rest of society to help you out if you make a wrong choice. People who choose to have children also make the choice of how they are going to pay to bring them up. Someone who is living in an expensive area can always choose to move somewhere cheaper. These vulnerable disabled adults have no choice.

I would love some of these people who are supposed to be living in poverty try to live with something like MS where you are dependent on local disabled transport to take you out of your home.

thats not surprising. politicians only care about their career and will target the group that gives them the largest vote. disabled people in this country are a very small minority compared to young people by a massive margin. this wont ever change.

i also know some people who are disabled getting many various benefits and abuse it to quite some extent. its simply human nature to be greedy. i think the best we can do is think long term and allocate resources and money to encourage business ideas and things like robotics to make lives easier for disabled.

antrobus

economic wrote: »

thats not surprising. politicians only care about their career and will target the group that gives them the largest vote. disabled people in this country are a very small minority compared to young people by a massive margin. this wont ever change....

The ONS have 5.7 million 18-24 year olds.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/timeseries/jn5q/lms

Scope says there are 13.3 million disabled.
https://www.scope.org.uk/media/disability-facts-figures

Play with your definitions.:)

economic

antrobus wrote: »

The ONS have 5.7 million 18-24 year olds.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/timeseries/jn5q/lms

Scope says there are 13.3 million disabled.
https://www.scope.org.uk/media/disability-facts-figures

Play with your definitions.:)

scope are a charity, they would be the ones playing with the definitions to make the situation more serious then it is. do you see 1 in 5 people in the public disabled enough to not work?

it says 3.4m disabled in employment. it also says there are 2.4m disabled people who are working age. sure some are pension age who also work. but some pension age disabled may not need to work.

disabled born here who have parents born here are more then likely to be financially ok. their parents would have owned homes which will be passed onto the disabled.

those who are disabled who immigrated here - well maybe we should restrict immigrants who will be a burden on our economy.

those born here to parents who are immigrants - chances are the parents would also be owning homes here, if not then sure financially they wont be great but then you really have to be severely disabled to not work and there are not that many like that that it is easy to support them through benefits.

cogito

antrobus wrote: »

Luddism.

Some people have always feared change.

Economic growth is driven by changes to trade and technology. They always lead to workers losing their jobs. It's an example of what Schumpeter called 'creative destruction'. The workers find new jobs in the new industries.

State capitalists like Corbyn always want to 'protect jobs', and use government intervention to prop up declining industries. Which is one of the reasons why state capitalism fails to deliver growth.

Corbyn truly is a luddite. There were all these fears when computers were introduced but instead of jobs being destroyed, computers opened up new jobs in manufacture, design, servicing, development etc.

Corbyn speaks utter bollicks but most of his supporters are too dense to see it.

StevieJ

cogito wrote: »

Corbyn truly is a luddite. There were all these fears when computers were introduced but instead of jobs being destroyed, computers opened up new jobs in manufacture, design, servicing, development etc.

Corbyn speaks utter bollicks but most of his supporters are too dense to see it.

Spot on, he even supported Brexit didn't he :eek:

Moby

cogito wrote: »

Corbyn speaks utter bollicks but most of his supporters are too dense to see it.

I suppose that's one view. Another would be that the real dense people are the ones who are too stupid to realise they are being exploited or too cowardly to do anything about it;) and sometimes it's easier to be the bosses lackey than stand up for the exploited!
Capitalists hardly run their businesses based on principles of philanthropy. We see it time and time again from the cotton mill owners to the mine owners to the bankers taking advantage of de-regulation. They are all looking for an edge to maximise profit and guess what the easiest way is to reduce their costs..... yep the biggest cost for most businesses is what they have to pay to employees and the standards of conditions employees are required to work in. This is where unions come in. Its called health and safety and without unions many of you would be working horrendous hours, having no hot water in the showers after a shift in the mine and have no redress if the bosses son decided to touch you up. No one ever read any Dickens?

Besides many of us think the coming revolution in technology needs to be harnessed for the good of everyone and not left in the hands of such self serving capitalists.
What's utter bollicks is that resources like water services should be privatised in the first place! Things are changing.....get used to it!

cogito

The self serving capitalists who invest huge amounts of money to develop technologies which should then not be left in their hands? I can see big investment in the UK if Jeremy got his way.

GreatApe

Moby wrote: »

I suppose that's one view. Another would be that the real dense people are the ones who are too stupid to realise they are being exploited or too cowardly to do anything about it;) and sometimes it's easier to be the bosses lackey than stand up for the exploited!
Capitalists hardly run their businesses based on principles of philanthropy. We see it time and time again from the cotton mill owners to the mine owners to the bankers taking advantage of de-regulation. They are all looking for an edge to maximise profit and guess what the easiest way is to reduce their costs. The biggest cost for most businesses is what they have to pay to employees and the standards of conditions employees are required to work in. This is where unions come in. Its called health and safety and without unions many of you would be working horrendous hours, having no hot water in the showers after a shift in the mine and have no redress if the bosses son decided to touch you up. No one ever read any Dickens?

Besides many of us think the coming revolution in technology needs to be harnessed for the good of everyone and not left in the hands of such self serving capitalists.
What's utter bollicks is that resources like water services should be privatised in the first place! Things are changing.....get used to it!

Corbyn has fooled you good. What exactly do you think is going to change?

Think of it this way. There are over 100 countries in the world many of them are more left wing than the UK. Can you name one of these countries that look and feel like the utopia you want?

If these other lefty nations still have billionaires still have poor people still have non perfect healthcare still have mediocre railways and power grids still have substandard housing and still have unemployment and low wages then what us dear leader corbyn going to do that one of the 50 other lefty nations weren't smart or capable enough of doing?

Corbyn might a true communist and if you feel that is what you or he want then out with it