Is it now impossible for Toxic Corbyn to win a GE?

When my Mum died she left my sisters and I exactly the same amount of money each. In last 7 years since she died sister 1 put her share in stocks and shares ISA and her share has now grown, sister 2 put her in building society her share only grown a tiny bit, sister 3 has bought a new car, been on expensive holidays to Mexico and the Maldives, had new bedroom furniture and has about 25% left in bank. I invested my share into 3 btl houses to bring in some income in my retirement and also to leave to my 3 children in due course. The houses has increased in value and so I have grown my share. My other sister spent all of hers within one year on 1 expensive holidays for all of her family children and their partners and grandchildren, one holiday for herself and dh and had her garden landscaped which was expensive. She has very little left. The point being 5 people start off with the same amount and within a few years some have spent all or most of it, others have invested and grown their share. It is the same with all people everyone could start off with an identical amount but some will always prefer to spend and others save. Often, but not always, the difference between rich and poor is their attitude towards spending and saving. We are constantly hearing about the gap growing between rich and poor and I think this because the rich invest more. In the same way some families on benefits struggle but cope without getting into debt whilst others waste some of their money and get into debt. You can't legislate for personality differences. How often should government take savings away from people who save and give it to those who spend a lot more?

newnanny excellent post ??

Except not everyone starts from the same point in life.
Some have awful parents, poor housing, bad schools and are undernourished, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Well Said MissAdventure

Newman Often the difference between rich and poor is the start they have been given in life. As we progress the difference becomes wider.
Your story sounds like a parable in the Bible.

We can't legislate that all parents are good parents Miss Adventure. As a teacher I can tell you that I have taught some children who on paper did not have much going for them. One girl was eventually thrown out of her home by her drug taking Mum when she was only 14 and had to live with her Aunty sleeping on sofa in lounge and meant she could not go to bed until rest of family had gone. She was determined to do well at school so she could make herself a better life and knew she would get no help from her family. She worked really hard and eventually went on to become a Social Worker. Now she is married with her own home, husband and two children and is very happy with her life. Over the years I have seen many children with poor home lives and some went on to do well and others not so it clearly is not just home life that determines success. Personality factors play a large part, in why some give up and turn to drugs whilst others work even harder. As a foster carer I see this a lot too.

I got took in by the "Rights and responsibilites" sound bite of the 1990's. I will never vote Labour again.

That said, I will not vote for Corbyn because I believe in small government , little interference and personal choice and responsibility.

I am not wealthy by any means I would imagine. My husband and I have been as close to being on the streets as anyone and probably closer than most here. he lost his parents when he was a child. The NHS didnt come to the rescue then even though it was at the height of its golden years. My family were not wealthy. They looked after their own as my father always would say.

I have saved carefully for what we have. Often we have gone without although nowadays it seems to be all the rage to do many of the things we have done. Its part of the new save the planet eco friendly rage. We did it from necessity.

I have aquired some savings and a house, fully paid for. We did it by hard work. I have a garden too. I will be hanged if I am going to let some communist take that from me in the interests of making us all equal.

However, I have always believed that utilities should be in public ownership . However, Corbyn will never be able to do that as long as we reamin in the EU. They do not allow re - nationalisation of such industries ( unless of course you are German or French and never put them in private ownership in the first place and besides which if we have our own industries they wont have a market to offload inferior products and materials from other EU countries) , just as they do not allow governments to bail out our national industries such as steel or mining. So in my book, there is no reason at all to vote Labour.

We can't make all parents good parents but we can do our best to ensure that support and encouragement are given to everyone from an early age. That was what the Sure Start programme was doing until the Conservatives cut it, Labour would bring it back. Not only does it help even up differences for school starters it also helps reduce crime rates for older children.
As for this fear that everyone is going to lose their money and possessions most of the people I know who vote Labour are middle class house owners with savings, investments and good pensions. In fact many times on GN people have complained about middle class socialists. It isn't the middle class who are being asked to contribute it's the rich tax dodgers.

trisher I do agree with you that Sure Start was an excellent programme and it should not have been cut. But by closing down private schools that would cost £5 billion pounds to the taxpayer and add even more children in the state system who need educating so larger classes just to spite the few who can afford and choose to send their child to an independent school is utter madness. Anyway many Labour ministers choose to send their children to independent schools including Dianne Abbott.

By the same token there are children whose parents have done everything but breathe for them, who have turned out lazy sods, with drug issues and so on.
There are many complicated reasons why some do well and others not.
Its not all down to being feckless.

MissAdventure, I agree with your last post.

That's good. Its nice to agree sometimes.

Anyway many Labour ministers choose to send their children to independent schools including Dianne Abbott

Oh that gets trotted out quite a lot doesn't it?

I have tried to keep away but I'm afraid I can't. There seems to be horrible culture of blaming people who through no fault of their own fall on hard times.

The days of the dole being a lifestyle choice are long gone.

newnanny private schools will not be closed. They will be expected to pay proper taxes and will lose their charitable status. Effectively the very low paid are subsidising the schools they can't afford. Why on earth should they? If you want private education pay the proper cost.

trisher The Labour Party do want to close private schools, it has been widely reported.

I would be happy for the Charitable status to be removed, but not happy to have my ACs choice to where my GC go to school removed.

I don't think he is 'toxic' - but I truly don't think he is the man for the job and needs to make way for someone who is, Keir Starmer.

Actually they DO want to close them. And academies.
Technically they want to take away their autonomy so they have no choice but to close, which anounts to the same thing.

notanan2 the LP conference voted to stop all tax and charitable status benefits and to redistribute the grounds and assets. Many private schools were originally set up as charity schools to benefit poor children and the land was given for this purpose, as they no longer do this they should not have the benefit of that gift. Yes Academies would go they are anyway a very mixed and varied group with some failing. At present it is still not policy but may become so.

Hard to see Labour winning a GE for years the way it is at the moment ( thank goodness.)

At least they haven't expelled 21 MPs lemon.

Labour want to abolish Ofsted too so no scrutiny for schools. As a teacher i say this is a bad thing. Ofsted pushes improvement in and flags up bad schools.

Do you have any actual examples of this please newnanny?

What constitutes a bad school?

No newnanny Ofsted doesn't. Ofsted presents a snapshot of the school taken in a few or even a single day. It does not look at the everyday working of the school and every teacher knows that various steps are taken to get the school through it, including sending failing staff members home 'sick'. There was one school which failed without Ofsted inspectors seeing a single lesson or teaching staff. They arrived eary morning only a cleaner was there and she let them in. Immediate fail on safeguarding and of course no look at the shool's work! Labour are proposing a system much like the old one with more local inspection and a support system. Ofsted has been a joke for many years I'm surprised a teacher didn't know that.

Indeed trisher - Ofsted preparation takes a huge amount of time and energy that could be used so much better. And I say that as a teacher too. I do not know any teacher working currently who does not say the same as you, trisher.

Thanks jura2 I wondered if things had changed since I retired, I suspected not. I agree about the time and energy and then there's the money.I met an someone who worked for Ofsted and she was saying in very nice hotels when she was working. Local inspectors would be cheaper and better.