Jeremy and the future

annie

So grave-robbing isn't?

daphnedill = "If we had only ever had Conservative governments since the 1950s, your children would not have had a better lifestyle than you did."

I acknowledged welfare reforms of the last century.

The thing is, I was a working class girl and the only way I got out of the a) post-war slums and b) the council estate was by dint of working hard at school, working every holiday in low paid work, all temporary jobs and then training for qualifications and working my socks off all my life as a single parent.

You'll of course say I was lucky, but luck didn't come into it, nor did fortunate background or circumstances because mine were abysmal.

Poverty existed when I was a child. It is alleviated to some extent today because people can claim benefits. In our poverty back in the '50s and '60s it was a stigma to accept 'hand outs'. Times have changed and maybe people have become too used to the state providing. It can create a vicious circle meaning generation after generation lose the work ethic and full, rewarding lives. That could be one of the reasons why some people stay stuck. It probably is.

I do think we have to catch kids young and ensure there are training schemes and work opportunities, apprenticeships etc for young people leaving school. Many from disadvantaged backgrounds know only of life on benefits, but it's my belief that structure and having something to get up for in the morning gives people hope and a sort of discipline which can carry them further on. Wages for such schemes should be greater than benefits too and there ought to be properly executed (and monitored!) schemes which reward employers for giving young people a chance to get into the workplace. We have to catch kids without opportunity or encouragement at an early age. Now that I am retired I appreciate just how much a person's self esteem can be tied up with doing useful things every day, and how having other people around, in the workplace actually brightens the day.

Others have been born into hardship, disability, frailty of some sort or have been flung into poverty and I sympathise. We need to be a caring nation, and we need a welfare state that works properly, for the care of the less fortunate and increasing, the elderly.

I imagine most people, wherever on the political spectrum they stand would probably say the same. Commonsense, the industry to make it work and compassion gets my vote, not the politics of envy which imagines anyone with money or from a more privileged background is a heartless bastard. Sadly, there are Labour politicians and supporters who give me the impression that anyone not in the gutter, impoverished, or a Labour voter, is selfish and uncaring, which is patently untrue.

There isn't any one party which can eradicate poverty. If we deal with it compassionately that's about as good as it gets and I do believe Theresa May announced that her aims were to make Britain a fairer place, where everyone had a voice.

She still has to balance the books unfortunately, and ensure the NHS is alive and kicking as will her successor. The NHS is fast becoming a vote-winner. I'd like to see Corbyn have a parallel trial run (in my imaginary world) and discover how life becomes better for ALL, (me included and others who might even be deemed middle class now.) I don't think he'd succeed.

I suppose "You can't please all of the people all of the time" just about sums up politics. Politicians cannot make their focus just one group of people, (and Grace's post was all about the down-trodden) unless of course they believe a smidgen of self-interest makes a person less compassionate. It doesn't. This is why the Labour Party of late has lost it's way.

I expect the Tories also have large mustachios and tie pretty young women to railway lines as well.

I live in the affluent South East. But if I go into town of an evening there isn't an empty shop doorway. In fact I was astounded to here workers in a building society as they left for the evening wishing the occupant a good night - they even knew his name! This has only happened since the Tories took office. How macabre is that?

I have just holiday end in Spain You know that country that is going down the pan because of the EU. I didn't see a single homeless person.

Good post again Day6

It is estimated that in Spain there are around 40,000 homeless people and additional 1.5 million families living in shelters.

(Global Homeless Statistics)

Unemployment is high in Spain WW as you doubtless know ( they are all working here) and Spanish police are not like our police , they no doubt smartly move on or arrest those in holiday spots, sleeping rough.
You can't be serious..... rough sleeping in the SouthEast has been a fact of life for 20 years or more.

X posts Ana

"Day6 is not disillusioned! what a patronising thought because it does not chime with your own thoughts, she/he is a realist who sees that no Government of any political colour is going to get it all right, or stamp out poverty forever."

Thank you Roses. You got it, why didn't others?

Some people wear red tinted glasses it seems to me, and will ferociously criticise posters not sharing their point of view. I don't care if people disagree with me but to twist things as they do makes me feel I am on the hustings!

I'd like to think my views are just as valid. They are written from the heart, for sure. I am not a political animal really.

Wouldn't we all like to see a fairer world? Does anyone know of this Utopia where all live happily with the same amount of money, opportunities, resources, advantages?

I dont.

However, according to many here, Labour is the answer.

We are not forgiven if we disagree either. There are some hard-liners here for Labour's cause, and that's ok, but I often feel one or two might be writing from party HQ.

Yes but they weren't in shop doorways that's the point. Spain clearly has more compassion towards its homeless as they were somewhere other than the streets.

The nasty party doesn't care

They were probably too scraed to be in shop doorways.

IPad! Scared.... Spanish cops and shopkeepers wouldn't allow it ( and shops in Spain are open until very late at night.)Don't imagine for a moment that Spain has more compassion than we do.

Exactly, roses. 'More compassion' my foot

I see precious little compassion from the nasty party.

whitewave -"The nasty party doesn't care."

There you go, for all to see. One party is nasty, the other one is Labour.

The arrogance and lofty sneering of the left has been it's downfall.

Labour does not have a monopoly on compassion. People who imagine it does strike me as being completely bogus.

They refuse to see the truth because traditionally Tories recruited from the upper classes. It's a sort of reverse snobbery on their part and a refusal to acknowledge that the Conservative party is much broader of late and actually best serves the needs of the majority of people in this country. That's why it forms the government.

If Labour voters despise any sort of privilege, looking to work for only ONE sector of society, the disadvantaged, it's on a hiding to nothing.

Whilst caring is a wonderful characteristic, it is not the preserve of the left wing.

You do love using that phrase, don't you whitewave?

Were there no homeless, no people using foodbanks etc. during the Labour years?

No government will ever wipe out all poverty

Trisher = "Firstly no one has proposed that children should be educated in mixed ability classes, what is proposed is that all children should be offered the same opportunities in education and only a comprehensive system can do this. Grammar schools never really worked"

Comprehensive schools are failing kids unless they stream.

By that I mean they grade children according to ability. One class will contain the brightest children, one class. a bottom group, will contain the less academic.

If they don't stream then they resort to mixed ability teaching, whereby all children of all abilities go into the same classes for all subjects. Add to that mix children with special needs, either physical, emotional or behavioural.

If comprehensives stream then their top sets may as well be grammar schools.

Why does inclusive mean better? It patently doesn't. In principle it's very right-on. In practice it disadvantages almost every child, no matter what their level of ability and can make classes impossible to teach. Where are the opportunities?

Those with special needs should have more time and attention from specialist teachers. Those who are bright should be pushed on. That leaves a swathe of kids who are unexceptional academically, in that they are an amorphous blob, a huge one, neither at the top or bottom and never deemed to be in need of a push or remedial assistance. They have been overlooked and work in classes of 30. If they succeed it's great, but most of those kids will get mediocre grades at best because many of their classes will contain a disruptive element which takes up a disproportionate amount of a teacher's time and efforts. That is OK is it?

Grammar schools never really worked? Ha ha! Tell that my cousin who would have gone to school bare-foot if there hadn't been a boot fund. He passed his 11+ in the '60s, got into a grammar school and is now CEO of a huge corporation in America. He's bound to be a nasty Tory now I suppose.

He'd have been the hard-up, mediocre one in the comprehensive set up I described and probably teased/bullied because of his poverty and brains. Many bright children in comprehensives feel the need to dumb down their approach because of peer group pressure. Being clever is frowned upon by the teenage un-bookish. The adolescent bright often do more to impress their louder peers than their teachers.

How is this good? Please explain.

Oh, and the local comprehensive wasn't good enough for Corbyn's pal the wealthy Dianne Abbot who paid for her son to be privately educated. Hypocriscy or what?

Corbyn will never be PM he is unelectable. When there is another General Election they will be finished as a party just like the Lib Dems and the Conservative Party and Ukip will take their votes.

I have been following this thread with interest for sometime now being new to GN and have found it really interesting being someone who is not very political. I think the comments made by Day6 have been the most sensible and level headed I have read compared to some of the very biased views of some posters. In my opinion all political parties spend too much time trying to score points against each other rather than getting on with finding solutions to the problems societies face. I would also like to add where I worked we had a resident homeless guy who slept in our doorway for years, as there was a heater there, regardless of who was in government.

I lived in Spain and have spent many winters there in the motohome. As someone pointed out, the police won't have it.

I think you are guilty of exactly the things you accuse others of Day6.

I'd like to think my views are just as valid. They are written from the heart, for sure
Are you suggesting others are not putting forward heartfelt views? Do you think it is OK for you not to see their views as valid?

Wouldn't we all like to see a fairer world? Does anyone know of this Utopia where all live happily with the same amount of money, opportunities, resources, advantages?
Who, other than you, is saying that a fairer world means a Utopia. I had always imagined it would be a constant work in progress Day6. If it cannot be the easy Utopia you seek what is your answer. Let it continue to be unfair; give up being concerned? You offer not alternatives just criticism and personal remarks.

Some people wear red tinted glasses it seems to me, and will ferociously criticise posters not sharing their point of view. So it is alright for you to see only one point of view and then pigeon-hole anyone who doesn't agree which may not be a "ferocious" criticism but neither is it an argument about the point; just more personal remarks. It offers no more than a witch-finder would have done to justify the burning of witches i.e., "because I don't like them or their views"

I am not a Corbyn worshiper, a member of the Labour Party (or any other party) but I like to listen to all that is said. Obviously you are following some sort of party line in your attacks on others views (or indeed attacks on others) I would not even call myself a socialist but you are happy to tar everyone who doesn't follow your personal party line with the same brush. Please enlighten me as to how that differs from your description of how you believe others behave?

Ah ha! I have worked out where you are coming from They refuse to see the truth You are a fundamentalist! Just like the religious fundamentalist you are the only one who knows the truth ... your truth or we are refusing to "see". Perhaps my comparison to witch-finders was more worrying than I thought!

The loony left alive and kicking on gransnet.

What an unpleasant post, Gracesgran.