A Question for Tory Supporters

Cakeguts

Herzlos wrote: »

More likely still is that the parents who couldn't afford school ties couldn't afford the luxury food either.

So what you are basically saying is that the children who lived in mining villages had less money than those that didn't. Because the school tie thing only happened in mining areas and nowhere else.



This was probably about 25 years ago now so still at the time when school uniform was cheap.

Green_Bear

Herzlos wrote: »

More likely still is that the parents who couldn't afford school ties couldn't afford the luxury food either.

If I was working underground in a dangerous mine, I'd expect to decide whether my kid needed a school tie or not. Not some functionary in an office somewhere.

Green_Bear

Cakeguts wrote: »

So what you are basically saying is that the children who lived in mining villages had less money than those that didn't. Because the school tie thing only happened in mining areas and nowhere else.

This was probably about 25 years ago now so still at the time when school uniform was cheap.

It should be much cheaper now, like other clothing is.

Green_Bear

Herzlos wrote: »

We all do.


But it turns out that you're not. You just want to justify not having to care about those that are less well off because it's their fault for being poor. It's a pretty common phenomenon like victim blaming - "the bad thing happened to them because they did something bad", rather than "the bad thing happened to them because life isn't fair" and that we all need help some time.
You almost certainly got plenty of breaks that those gormless workshy poor didn't, but you don't realise because it's not always that obvious. You've presumably been fairly close to having life go horribly wrong but didn't for some reasons that may be outside of your control.


Don't get me wrong; there are definitely some workshy unemployed (I've known some) who are either happy on benefits (I wouldn't be, it's almost nothing) or doing some side-jobs under the table, but the vast majority would rather not be drains on society given the appropriate help.

I certainly think tax evasion (both with millionairres and off-shore accounts, and the cash-in-hand industry) are a far bigger problem than paying a few people to stay at home.
Even thinking about it selfishly, paying those few lazy folk keeps them away from the hard workers, and gives them money to put through the economy. Not enough to be complacent, but at least enough they don't need to decide between heating and eating.

There's also the issue of whether people on benefits are actually employable - or at least wanted by employers these days.

There are huge issues to do with references, criminal record checks, red tape etc that excludes large numbers of people these days.

There was someone on the radio not long ago saying that just finding someone who could drive a van, pass a drug test and not have a criminal record or problematic medical condition was really difficult.
All these are requirements were mandated by the company's insurers - for obvious reasons.

Herzlos

Indeed. There's not much demand for a trained builder who can't climb a ladder after a back injury, for instance.

I'd heard the diffulty finding people who can drive vans, but the cost for learning to drive (assuming you have a car at the end) seems to have gone up significantly in the last decade, and for those who are already poor (or on jobseekers) it's a luxury that they can't afford.
I'd be surprised if the Government would pay for driving lessons and test to enable them to access more jobs. If they did, there would be outrage from the "I'm alright, Jack"'s


Employment is apparently so high now, that we're probably getting to the point that those who aren't currently employed are likely the few genuinely unemployable. So how do we get them into work?

Cakeguts wrote: »

So what you are basically saying is that the children who lived in mining villages had less money than those that didn't.

I thought mining villages were generally fairly poor?

Because the school tie thing only happened in mining areas and nowhere else.

I never said it only happened in mining villages.

Green_Bear

Herzlos wrote: »

Indeed. There's not much demand for a trained builder who can't climb a ladder after a back injury, for instance.

I'd heard the diffulty finding people who can drive vans, but the cost for learning to drive (assuming you have a car at the end) seems to have gone up significantly in the last decade, and for those who are already poor (or on jobseekers) it's a luxury that they can't afford.
I'd be surprised if the Government would pay for driving lessons and test to enable them to access more jobs. If they did, there would be outrage from the "I'm alright, Jack"'s


Employment is apparently so high now, that we're probably getting to the point that those who aren't currently employed are likely the few genuinely unemployable. So how do we get them into work?




I thought mining villages were generally fairly poor?


I never said it only happened in mining villages.

I don't think it was the lack of a driving license that was the main problem. That's always been a requirement.
It was the additional tick boxes that have crept in over the last few years.

babyblade41

The costs of learning to drive .... very expensive, but to me as a parent when they became 17 this is what I had to pay for..

We lived very rurally so public transport wasn't an option. both mine passed before they turned 18 , it was essential for future employment .

One worked part time after school and holidays and one worked in a coffee shop after school and holidays .

I felt my job as a parent was to set them on the right road giving them all the necessary tools to get there., and yes it's very expensive and I think I went through many years with so little sleep

Some parents have these kids and as soon as they are born they aren't taught anything... their education level is poor and yet they have the ability to fill out forms to claim benefits.

If they have a bad back then they can do a job sitting down..admin , call centre....it's called having pride. Doesn't matter if it's the same or just below what they have in benefits ..it's about showing pride and respect

Herzlos

And your implicit priviledge allowed you to pay for both of your kids to learn to drive, and presumably helped them out with a car.


Mine did too - I didn't pay for driving lessons or my first car (or insurance). I'll do the same for my kids.


But we're relatively well off to be able to do that. Can you imagine trying to pay for 2 sets of driving lessons (at £20+ an hour) when you've maybe got £10 surplus per week?

Malthusian

Green_Bear wrote: »

I don't think it was the lack of a driving license that was the main problem. That's always been a requirement.
It was the additional tick boxes that have crept in over the last few years.

Plus the ASBO culture and the endless new laws introduced by the compassionate Labour Government and its successors makes it increasingly difficult to reach working age outside the middle classes without acquiring a criminal record.

Who's going to give up smoking pot just so they can pass a drug test and get a job that will be taxed at 90% due to withdrawal of benefits? I wouldn't.

babyblade41 wrote: »

Some parents have these kids and as soon as they are born they aren't taught anything... their education level is poor and yet they have the ability to fill out forms to claim benefits.

Not necessarily. There are government employees and charities which exist for the sole purpose of filling the forms in for them.

Green_Bear

babyblade41 wrote: »

The costs of learning to drive .... very expensive, but to me as a parent when they became 17 this is what I had to pay for..

We lived very rurally so public transport wasn't an option. both mine passed before they turned 18 , it was essential for future employment .

One worked part time after school and holidays and one worked in a coffee shop after school and holidays .

I felt my job as a parent was to set them on the right road giving them all the necessary tools to get there., and yes it's very expensive and I think I went through many years with so little sleep

Some parents have these kids and as soon as they are born they aren't taught anything... their education level is poor and yet they have the ability to fill out forms to claim benefits.

If they have a bad back then they can do a job sitting down..admin , call centre....it's called having pride. Doesn't matter if it's the same or just below what they have in benefits ..it's about showing pride and respect

You didn't have to pay for their driving lessons (and car?). You chose to.
Did their part time wages cover these costs? Did they pay you back, with interest?

At 18 they could move out into lodgings in town and sort their own lives out.
It seems they've been spoiled.
Plus you chose to live in the middle of nowhere and have kids.