According to comments by Louise Casey, the head of the Government's troubled families programme “there have got to be sanctions” where poor families are having more children, and women should be forced to accept contraception. Casey suggested that instead of having more children they should “do something for themselves” such as “getting a job” .
This is already a country where birth control of all kinds is free on the NHS. Doing anything more than that to encourage family planning – among all people, not simply 'problem families' – has to be a matter of more carrot and less stick.Well, OK, that’s a little unconventional, Brooke, but I bow to your acknowledged expertise in these matters.
Now, just where are we supposed to insert the carrot?
Like, perhaps, providing comprehensive and up-to-date sex education to children …?Excuse me…? That, too, is something we already do, and in exhaustive detail.
In fact, in far more detail than we ever did in my schooldays...
The simplistic demand to “get a job” particularly rankles. Even I, as a childless woman, know how much you need to be making per hour to break even on childcare, never mind actually make a worthwhile difference to your family's income.Which makes it all the more surprising then that so many women in far less lucrative careers than yours keep having them, eh?
The resistance to the widespread changes in services being suggested by the Government is not, I believe, simply about people not wanting the 'welfare state' to change. There are inefficiencies and areas of deep deprivation that need addressing, and are clearly not being served by the current system. On that all sides agree. Rather there is a deep – and in many cases, justified – mistrust of what will happen and how money is being spent. Will we get better services for the same money, or streamlined services for less?Frankly, at this point, I no longer care. I've resigned myself to the fact that the public sector will be a money-sink no matter what. I just want to stop paying the underclass to breed little replicas of themselves.
If there's one thing families don't need, it’s people who earn more in a day than they get all year telling them how to keep their noses clean. What they should eat, how many children they should have, how long their skirts should be.Well, when the rest of us are paying, that's what's going to happen! Get a job, support their own children and they can happily go back to ignoring government advice like the rest of us.
But if they want to suck on the public teat, the government gets to tell them how long for and how hard...
What should we be doing? Talking to folks already on the ground providing services, and asking what resources will help them do their jobs better. More training, more staff, more equipment? Great.Well, of course! Why didn’t I think of that? The answer is obviously to ask the people doing the work if they want more resources…
They'll be honest about that, won't they?
There is something in what she says--The insect upon the leaf pronouncing on the too many bad habits among the insects in the dust etc. The key to that is that we should stop paying for the teaming life down there. You get welfare for 2 kids etc (in whatever form) but any more than that and you pay for 'em yourself. That might sober up the prolific and cramp the style of those followers of the RoP who are raising a future army on our Social (unless I'm wrong and their all hardworking entrepreneurs and 90 hrs a week-three-jobs type grafters (in which case they might deserve to win).
What are these bloody services they keep bleating on about?
For something so 'vital' it's funny I've never needed them, even though I pay a fortune for them
The State is nothing short of a parasite.
If the State had less, then fewer people would be able to take from it.
This to me is Socialism writ large. And Socialism always plays to the lowest common denominator.
Solution: Starve the Beast !
I get sick and tired of welfare queens bleating about things like the cost of childcare, the difficulty of finding and holding down a reasonably well paid job, the costs of travel to and from work. These are hurdles faced by each and every one of us. The parasites are the ones who are just too lazy to bother to tackle any problems at all.
The benefits cap needs to be brought right down, to a level below the equivalent of the minimum wage. That would set the limit at roughly £16,000. And that should encompass everything, no extras for housing, or child benefits. And the tax allowance should be lifted to at least £18,000.
Free school meals! Doubles all round.
"But if they want to suck on the public teat, the government gets to tell them how long for and how hard."
Could you change that to the taxpayer and government?
I can only echo all the comments above.
And just like Bucko; I wouldn't know half of these services existed if I didn't see them driving around in their fleets of newly liveried vehicles... even the blasted parking wardens have them. Then there's the gleaming office blocks adorned with signs proclaiming "Working in partnership with..." or other such Stalinist slogans.
"Talking to folks already on the ground providing services..."? Oh here's a novel idea, how about talking to the folks paying for these services? Do you think you'd get the same answers?
" The key to that is that we should stop paying for the teaming life down there."
"For something so 'vital' it's funny I've never needed them, even though I pay a fortune for them"
Well, if we all used them, they'd be unsustainable. The balance is already tipping...
"The benefits cap needs to be brought right down, to a level below the equivalent of the minimum wage."
Yes. And those who'd whine about 'the children!' should be invited to take the sex and travel option...
"Could you change that to the taxpayer and government?"
But we don't! We just get to pay. And pay, and pay, and pay...
Post a Comment