Panorama, 13th feb - crumbling USA

[Notmegov]

But in fairness they don't have jobs as such - most of them earn their meager living from wandering around streets and buses selling food or trinkets. And that's not a viable option for people in Western countries, as no-one would buy what they're selling.

I would, i love that sort of brick.

 

[thfcsteff]

They don't have a welfare state in these countries. How do the poor feed ant house themselves? They work alright!!

No mate, they either turn to crime or they starve or they wander the streets homeless. A lot of developing countries have sub-standard water/sewage treatment, electricity, etc, etc...are you suggesting a return to feudal times? Maybe the 3 field system? dingdongens for PM? I thought we wanted a civilized society mate...

 

[thfcsteff]

Most multi-child families are from lower socio-economic groups.

These people disproportionately get and use welfare money.

I would 'fund' the first 2 children, any more and you're on your own!

Ah ha, along the sorts of lines the Chinese used to work! You commie pinko!!!!!!!

Seriously, I do agree that there are some people who have children for the wrong reasons, and that should be discouraged somehow (hopefully through education) but the moment you start implementing the sort of thing you're suggesting, freedom of choice goes out the window and we approach a dangerous world where such 'rules' become even more malleable...

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

I read on the guardian website the other day that we spent more on welfare then we did on education health and defence combined that can not be true surely does anyone know if it is?

I have to say im with leeds on this one that child benefit should be capped at 2 children, seems unsustainable to have it any higher.

 

[Leeds Spur]

It's true. We spend £200 billion a year.

 

[Leeds Spur]

And no one is saying ban having kids. Just don't expect other people to pay for the food on the table!!! Every person wants to have a kid can have one, even if they need a hand, fine. But 2/3/4/5?? fudge off

 

[Leeds Spur]

No mate, they either turn to crime or they starve or they wander the streets homeless. A lot of developing countries have sub-standard water/sewage treatment, electricity, etc, etc...are you suggesting a return to feudal times? Maybe the 3 field system? dingdongens for PM? I thought we wanted a civilized society mate...

Doesnt seem like underclass living in sink estates are very civilised to me. I'd shoot the lot if em, it's the easiest way. They can't be 'educated'.

 

[thfcsteff]

Doesnt seem like underclass living in sink estates are very civilised to me. I'd shoot the lot if em, it's the easiest way. They can't be 'educated'.

:ross::barnet::barnet:\o/

I'm not falling for it matey!!!!!!
Either that or I shall make it a personal mission to make sure Leeds Spur is never allowed within a 100ft of any type of firearm!!!!

 

[thfcsteff]

here are the figures for 2013 (projected obviously)...

more on welfare than education and defense, yes, less than on health care though...I'd like to know what 'other spending' counts as, because that's 59 billion right there; you'd have to assume that could be re-apportioned somewhat!!! I presume 'protection' is the police and fire depts?

The clearest way to lower the spend on welfare, is to start apportioning some of that budget to education and commit to a 10 year cycle whereby a better educated people will result in less welfare-reliant people...IMHO...



http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_year2013_0.html

In billions...

[+] Pensions 137.5
[+] Health Care 125.3
[+] Education 28.6
[+] Defence 43.5
[+] Welfare 55.7
[+] Protection 14.6
[+] Transport 10.5
[+] General Government 12.0
[+] Other Spending 59.1
[+] Interest 50.9
[+] Balance 2.2
[+] Total Spending 539.8 0.0
[+] Public Net Debt 0.0 0.0

 

[papaspur]

here are the figures for 2013 (projected obviously)...

more on welfare than education and defense, yes, less than on health care though...I'd like to know what 'other spending' counts as, because that's 59 billion right there; you'd have to assume that could be re-apportioned somewhat!!! I presume 'protection' is the police and fire depts?

The clearest way to lower the spend on welfare, is to start apportioning some of that budget to education and commit to a 10 year cycle whereby a better educated people will result in less welfare-reliant people...IMHO...

To get to a societal level, why is it that education is so undervalued? I'm in my mid-20s, so I don't really know what goes on in the head of a parent (ie., I've spawned some creature that I must look after and be responsible for), but wouldn't a reasonable person conclude that in order for their child to succeed in life, they ought to push them to do well in school in addition to seeking increases in the quality of their education.

Just as a principle, education shouldn't be the first item on the list of trimming the budget. As another principle, I find it inherently unfair that moneyed parents can send their children to more expensive, and therefore better, schools. The idea reeks of nobility and counters the notion of the 'American dream'. This might sound like crazy conspiracy talk, but I think there might be an active interest in keeping the masses from attaining the same education as those more economically fortunate.

 

[thfcsteff]

To get to a societal level, why is it that education is so undervalued? I'm in my mid-20s, so I don't really know what goes on in the head of a parent (ie., I've spawned some creature that I must look after and be responsible for), but wouldn't a reasonable person conclude that in order for their child to succeed in life, they ought to push them to do well in school in addition to seeking increases in the quality of their education.

Just as a principle, education shouldn't be the first item on the list of trimming the budget. As another principle, I find it inherently unfair that moneyed parents can send their children to more expensive, and therefore better, schools. The idea reeks of nobility and counters the notion of the 'American dream'. This might sound like crazy conspiracy talk, but I think there might be an active interest in keeping the masses from attaining the same education as those more economically fortunate.

There is a sad and simple answer.

In the last 25 years, there has been a steady decline in what the words 'quality of life' mean.
At one time it meant a decent family, a decent education and thus a decent society.
It has become a greedy society who want everything they can get and want it now regardless of how it is attained.

Your final sentence is not quite as crazy as you think...

 

[Leeds Spur]

We spend more than ?ú731 billion a year, you forgot a very important ?ú50 billion a year in debt interest, that's nearly the same as the education budget!

And according to the figures on the link we spend ?ú110 billion on the Welfare State, excluding the ?ú137 billion we spend on pensions, so yes.....we do soend more on 'Welfare' than NHS, Education and Defence combined.

 

[monkeybarry]

We spend more than ?ú731 billion a year, you forgot a very important ?ú50 billion a year in debt interest, that's nearly the same as the education budget!

And according to the figures on the link we spend ?ú110 billion on the Welfare State, excluding the ?ú137 billion we spend on pensions, so yes.....we do soend more on 'Welfare' than NHS, Education and Defence combined.

i agree that we need a focused and sustained period of education in people to realign beliefs and notions regarding living and the "rights" of the individual to a certain standard

if we look through this thread (and general rhetoric), we often see the term "benefits" used.
Leeds, above you have used the terms "welfare".

The country has become increasing aligned to the term "benefit" - which is of course a piece of positive rhetoric when used correctly, but the mindset of the UK seems to have shifted towards "i am entitled to get some benefit from being a UK citizen" rather than "as a UK citizen, when i fall on hard times the state is their to help me out and ensure a level of welfare"

I agree in part with some of the draconian measures Leeds often mentions, but i think we need a balance between forcing people to take more responsibility with budgeting and making their own way financially and educating people as to why it is important for them and our society

i think the current Gvot has got the right idea, but im not sure we doing enoguh regarding the understanding part and creating a lot of "victimisation" type feelings (which will always be the case in part when cuts are made)

 

[Leeds Spur]

Thank you!!

Sanity prevails.

The entitlement culture is prevailant in the middle classes as well, that's why there was un uproar over HIGHER RATE TAXPAYERS losing child benefit.

I get child benefit....which is a complete joke IMO.

We just put the money in my daughter Baby ISA, as do most higher rate recipients no doubt.

 

[monkeybarry]

Thank you!!

Sanity prevails.

The entitlement culture is prevailant in the middle classes as well, that's why there was un uproar over HIGHER RATE TAXPAYERS losing child benefit.

I get child benefit....which is a complete joke IMO.

We just put the money in my daughter Baby ISA, as do most higher rate recipients no doubt.

not that im telling anyone how to spend their money, but maybe that money could be split between trust fund (sensible planning for a secure future) and hiring a babysitter (job creation and teaching certain ethics to a teenager)

oh course, it could just be means tested! :lol:](*,)

 

[Leeds Spur]

Means testing winter fuel benefit would save ?ú3 billion.

 

[scaramanga]

To get to a societal level, why is it that education is so undervalued? I'm in my mid-20s, so I don't really know what goes on in the head of a parent (ie., I've spawned some creature that I must look after and be responsible for), but wouldn't a reasonable person conclude that in order for their child to succeed in life, they ought to push them to do well in school in addition to seeking increases in the quality of their education.

Just as a principle, education shouldn't be the first item on the list of trimming the budget. As another principle, I find it inherently unfair that moneyed parents can send their children to more expensive, and therefore better, schools. The idea reeks of nobility and counters the notion of the 'American dream'. This might sound like crazy conspiracy talk, but I think there might be an active interest in keeping the masses from attaining the same education as those more economically fortunate.

I don't belive that education had become undervalued, more that with the demise of grammar schools there's no longer an option for poor parents to get their kids out of the rut.

A parent who can only afford to live in a brick area has one of two options - send their kid to a brick comp or send them to a brick comp a little further away. If one of those comps becomes even half-decent, the parent then gets priced out of the area and has the choice of two or three other brick comps to send their kids to. No matter how much money you give a school, if the parents of most of the kids don't give a brick then the kids of even the most conscientious parents will be heavily influenced by feral kids.

 

[thfcsteff]

We spend more than ?ú731 billion a year, you forgot a very important ?ú50 billion a year in debt interest, that's nearly the same as the education budget!

And according to the figures on the link we spend ?ú110 billion on the Welfare State, excluding the ?ú137 billion we spend on pensions, so yes.....we do soend more on 'Welfare' than NHS, Education and Defence combined.

NO! NO! NO!

PENSIONS SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED 'WELFARE'...it is what people have worked for and PAID INTO!!!!!!! It is one of the things, like our healthcare system, that makes Britain Britain!

And how the fudge did I 'forget' the interest figure, I put the fudging link up with ALL the figures in!!!!! It's there!

On a few aspects we absolutely agree: I have no time for scroungers, wasters, tossers or lazy people. I have been self-employed since I was 16 (I finished my A levels as I revved up my career) so I understand the notion of hard work. i equally feel that a civilized society should understand that there are certain things which will happen; there will always be runts. Where you and I differ (I suspect) is that you take a blanket approach whereas I'd like a more selective approach. I AGREE we must BALANCE spending...

But I'll tell you this; the SECOND you start to think of pensions as 'welfare' which in your language is apparently a rather dirty word, then my friend you are on a path to UNcivilization and MASSIVE CHAOS!!!!!

IMHO...

All in the spirit of debate incidentally mate... ;-)