General Election 2019

I fully remember going to school in the 1950s wearing jelly shoes or plimsolls because that was all I had. As long as I was not barefooted it did not seem to matter.

It is not credible to compare the level of poverty in those days to modern Britain. The standard of living has vastly improved for all since the 50s. There will always be, in every country, those at the bottom of the social and economic pile. I believe the vast increase in spending options, drugs, easy credit, proliferation of gambling outlets and the must have society have all contributed to bad choices being made by some. When money is tight it is even more imperative to shun the unnecessary and concentrate on what really matters, food, shelter clothes etc. This will no doubt come across as harsh from those of us with plenty, but many of us have also been exactly in that position, and survived. I agree the media does not help, some of the rubbish my youngest daughter spends her money on is obscene, there seems little logic to me to work hard then waste it on clothes, eyebrows, hair colouring etc.

I wonder how many actually using food banks really have no other option? Do some of these people have disposable income spent unwisely?

Finally the number of food banks in the UK is less than in France and Germany. I imagine the need in Spain, Italy and Greece is far greater where real poverty is being experienced.

 

Is Cologne really SH?

Hi Bro.!!

 

The problem is that those born in poverty today have less chance of getting out of it than those born in the 50s or 60s. Social mobility has stagnated from about the 1980s in the UK.

 

I don't agree with this. I know many tradesmen earning as much as those in so called middle class professions. That is why the political centre has moved to the right.

My stance on the 'relative' poverty is not political, it is that many people are less prepared to take personal responsibility for themselves and their families than we did years ago, where admittedly there were easier circumstances. There is also a culture now of blaming everybody else, about life not being fair. It has never been fair and never will be.

 

You disgust me.

 

Britain has not adjusted well to post industrial society SH. This is not a poke at Britain, because I don't think any other country has done much better on this. In the 60s something like 60% of workers were working in factories - where there were regular jobs for both unskilled and semi skilled workers, and where a school leaver, without any qualifications, could earn a basic living and hope to rise within a firm. That has all changed - there is hardly any unskilled work left, other than in some branches of agriculture or gastronomy. Britain still is a manufacturing country but the numbers actually engaged in that have dwindled, largely as a result of automation. This is not just a problem in the UK. for the old industrial centres of the north of England you can substitute Essen or Gelsenkirchen or any number of towns in Germany. Technology continues apace and the projection is that automation will kill up to 10 million jobs over the next 15 years in the UK. Not everyone can be a tradesman. not everyone can work in the financial sector, or become a doctor or a lawyer - so where is the meaningfull employment of the future, if machines are producing everything for us ? This is why I would be in support of an unconditional income for every citizen (this would replace all other benefits, thus saving a great deal of bureaucratic costs) - Labour wants to attempt a pilot scheme of this sort restricted to one town (Sheffield and Liverpool are interested) and is already being experimented with in Utrecht in the Netherlands.

 

Of course, it is much easier to whinge and always blame others. This proves my point.

 

We keep being told jobs will disappear due to automation, no sign yet of jobs actually being lost, changed but not lost so far. The key is to have a flexible workforce which the UK certainly has. A business friendly government helps tremendously, it helps attract inward investment and encourages entrepreneurs to create businesses which in turn leads to employment, taxes being paid, etc. The last thing this country needs is a Marxist Labour government which will destroy all of the current advantages the UK takes for granted.

 

I regularly volunteer for the Trussell Trust. I'm not going to say what I have on my mind as I would deserve a ban from the forum.

I won't bother interacting with you again on this thread.

 

I and many of my Conservative voting relatives do regular / occasional volunteering work for the homeless, your point exactly?

We all care about the less fortunate, we just disagree on some of the causes and answers.

Try to debate without the theatrics please.

 

What do you mean by a 'flexible workforce' ?

 

Do you really think that the number of homeless on the streets think that their standard of living has improved? What would be your reaction if a row of tents appeared outside your house? Do you really think that the homeless living in tents have credit cards? Do you think it is right for government departments to refuse to help people with nothing, but refer them to charity handouts?
Of course some will always be disadvantaged compared to others, but that is no excuse to grind them down a bit further. All reports say that Scandinavian countries provide best for the whole population, not just the few, and despite the high taxes that sometimes get protests, overall the populations of those countries are more at ease with life than those in the UK or USA for example. The UK governments own official figures show that over the last three years the number of people living on the streets has risen by 73% and many charities believe they are grossly underestimated. Government can waste money on ferries without boats, but feed and house people takes second place to such nonsense ideas.

 

The days of a worker staying in the same company or even the same industry has long gone. What I mean is a willingness to try something different or re-skill.

In my lifetime I went from working as a printer (6 year apprenticeship) to owning two small printing companies, my wife and I also had 3 hairdressing salons at one time. After retiring to France for five years I set up a single use medical devices company with my eldest daughter which became, through hard work, luck and determination, an established national supplier. My point is a willingness to step outside your comfort zone and with a fair wind, a little talent can go a long way. Of course not everybody can be self employed but the opportunities do currently exist in the UK, we don't want to spoil it.

 

Er...doesn't this come under what Frenchie called 'stigmatization'. As far as I know McDonnell found Marx informative and Corbyn never got past page one of actually reading him. Try reading Marx - and then read the manifesto of the Labour Party, and you will find there is little in common. Do this rather than relying on what right wing comics are saying about the Labour Party. Use of such stigmatization simply shows up your lack of other arguments.

 

There is currently a fraction living on the streets in Britain as there is in France. The authorities in Paris are just about to clear the thousands of tents containing the homeless. Hopefully you are lobbying the French government not to take the proposed harsh stance against these unfortunates.

 

That is the worst post that you have made yet. There is no general election in France, so keep on topic or I will remove your post. Meanwhile perhaps you would like to deal with some of the questions I asked.

 

McDonnell has described himself as a Marxist, Corbyn does as he is told.

 

Having a 'fair wind' behind you implies that other people have the money to spend on your product or service. If you have eg. 30,000 unemployed steelworkers in your town and 30,000 vacancies in the IT branch you cannot match the one up with the other and end up with structural unemployment. You could of course start up your own business (if you have the capital) but if your immediate location is full of the same 30,000 unemployed steelworkers then it's not going to get very far. Which means the 'flexibility' to relocate - but then your house in Liverpool only buys a third of the same house in the affluent home counties - besides which nobody understands your lingo down there ! You could of course re train in something else - but the problem there is that you have to have re training programmes in existence in the first place and you have to be certain that the job you are retraining in will not also be killed in 5-10 years. How many jobs can you safely say will still exist in 20 years time apart from in caring for the old ?