Common Ground:

MaizieD We actually agree on quite a lot. It is when we disagree, we are so many poles apart

Nicely put, MOnica. I agree with you (for once )

Katy59, we are not all born equal. Nature means we are a combination of the genes of our parents and that means we are all born with a varied and different array of strengths and weaknesses.

Equality is having a society that means that we all have equal opportunities to make the most of what nature has given us that means that all children offered equal opportunities for a good education, are adequately housed and fed and can be sure that whatever way they earn their living it will provide them with a wage sufficient to support them and their children at a decent standard so that Food Banks, Warm places and the whole panolpy of charities now necessary to enable so many households in this country to barely exist are no longer necessary.

I know that definition is not complete, feel free to add everything I have forgotten to include.

We can 'balance' Colville with Simon Wren Lewis

His judgement of the Kwarteng mini budget

mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2022/09/

His most recent post on the U-turn

mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2022/10/

And you can even look at his blog about 'Going for Growth', written on Truss's apparent economic policy before the mini budget

mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2022/09/going-for-growth.html

Then you can make up your minds as to whether the Journalist, Colville, or the Oxford professor of economics (emeritus), Wren Lewis, is correct.

thought you would be interested in this story from The Times

There’s no turning back now. Like it or not, Truss and Kwarteng must see this through

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/72cf8d76-40e9-11ed-bf78-197f09550dd1?shareToken=001016d910572d10ca495e6f46e7fed3

I'm thinking of those in power right now, fair point it's not "all".

undines

I cannot see there can ever be true 'equality' of everything. We can try hard for equality of opportunity, but that can be difficult. However, we can surely have a 'bottom line' Liveable minimum wage and access to healthcare and education is a starter. And surely we should at least be holding 'equality' up as something to aim for, even if its true essence is unattainable and hard to define. We can't map everything out, but we can at least be kind. I'm not surprised that the Tories don't give a s* - that's been obvious and it's something of a relief to have it articulated. Nauseating, though. I think that truth, when set out without frills, will be too much for the majority of voters. We all like to kid ourselves we're philanthropists, even if we aren't. A spiritual awakening is what's needed - but how to bring that about? Most so-called Christians do not appear to have read the Sermon on the Mount. (This is not to say I am a Christian, I'm not - just to be clear about that! - and there are other forms of spirituality that do not depend on organised religion)

That started so well undines until we got to I'm not surprised that the Tories don't give a s* - that's been obvious and it's something of a relief to have it articulated.

I hope you don't think I was saying that about Conservatives. The problem is you are now putting them into a "not equal to" group.

I have a further comment, concerning the desirability of helping others, not expecting everyone to work etc. and it is this. The anthropologist Jean Liedloff worked with the Yequana Indians for years. They have a very happy, 'equal' society. If someone does not want to bother to build a hut, the community do it for him, smiling and chatting among themselves. Usually what happens is that the lazybones gets up and wants to be part of the job. Judging and punishing people for differences in behaviour doesn't create a pleasant society, kindness and good humour go a lot further. And I would also say that we can't HELP judging others, whether for their culture, ethnic origin or whatever, because we are human. But we CAN help how we act on it.
And...banging on now...if we disappear up our own posteriors arguing about what we mean by 'equal' we will never get anywhere! (Maybe that would be convenient...)
And...more banging on ...our political system favours narcissists and psychopaths who have no empathy. They are prepared to trample on everyone to get to the top
Those who are empathic, compassionate and have a conscience will always, inevitably, be left behind. How can it be otherwise?

"I cannot see there can ever be true 'equality' of everything. We can try hard for equality of opportunity, but that can be difficult. However, we can surely have a 'bottom line' Liveable minimum wage and access to healthcare and education is a starter. And surely we should at least be holding 'equality' up as something to aim for, even if its true essence is unattainable and hard to define. We can't map everything out, but we can at least be kind. I'm not surprised that the Tories don't give a s* - that's been obvious and it's something of a relief to have it articulated. "

I think that's a good summary.

Because I believe that some sorts of policy and leaderships promote kindness and compassion, or more likely to tend that way. Ie the aim of equality and a decent care system as a key moral value of governance.

And we have the opposite now, and it promotes division, accusations to those who can't manage to fend for themselves as the Un-deserving, "I'm all right Jack/Jill" and so on and its very, very sad as well as wrong, wrong, wrong.

I cannot see there can ever be true 'equality' of everything. We can try hard for equality of opportunity, but that can be difficult. However, we can surely have a 'bottom line' Liveable minimum wage and access to healthcare and education is a starter. And surely we should at least be holding 'equality' up as something to aim for, even if its true essence is unattainable and hard to define. We can't map everything out, but we can at least be kind. I'm not surprised that the Tories don't give a s* - that's been obvious and it's something of a relief to have it articulated. Nauseating, though. I think that truth, when set out without frills, will be too much for the majority of voters. We all like to kid ourselves we're philanthropists, even if we aren't. A spiritual awakening is what's needed - but how to bring that about? Most so-called Christians do not appear to have read the Sermon on the Mount. (This is not to say I am a Christian, I'm not - just to be clear about that! - and there are other forms of spirituality that do not depend on organised religion)

Lizzie44

Yes, there are those who do not believe in equality, consider it irrelevant and can muster academic arguments to support their views. But those who think otherwise must and will continue to make their voices heard (as Mrs Thatcher discovered when she tried to impose a flat-rate poll tax on everyone whether lord or labourer).

Well, you are right Lizzie. There are certainly some academics and those who follow them who don't believe we are all equal.

However, I was suggesting that there are, in the general population, those who think "others" do not work hard enough, "others" do not make the 'correct' decisions, and some do not "share our culture". That, they feel, makes these people less equal.

I endeavour not to be someone who thinks this way. However, I can only do that by thinking those who hold such a view are equal too. They are, and they are entitled to their opinion, just as I am entitled to try and persuade them to change it.

Grantanow

I doubt Cuba is an equal society. It has a privileged elite. Castro had his own private factory for his cigars. No society is fully equal but we should strive for it even though it will always be work in progress, never achieved. The Tories will wreck what remains of the welfare state if they are not stopped.

But the current set up of the welfare state may not be the only way to provide equality of medical care for all.

Remember, I am not saying there are only that we should be open to the fact that there may be.

I'm no economist, or would even ponder to study it,as its divided into different theories add a pinch of psychology and philosophy too! Listening to a panel of 'experts' on radio 4 yesterday, it was pointed out that the rich ,tend to hoard their money,the poorer tend to spend it. The neoliberal experiment has been given a good run, it ended in 2008.Its the same old, same old, Why do the rich want to be rich? they are already rich! there needs a great reset of human values,which comes from within, not imposed from the state ,etc,will it ever happen?!

Yes, there are those who do not believe in equality, consider it irrelevant and can muster academic arguments to support their views. But those who think otherwise must and will continue to make their voices heard (as Mrs Thatcher discovered when she tried to impose a flat-rate poll tax on everyone whether lord or labourer).

Yes!

I doubt Cuba is an equal society. It has a privileged elite. Castro had his own private factory for his cigars. No society is fully equal but we should strive for it even though it will always be work in progress, never achieved. The Tories will wreck what remains of the welfare state if they are not stopped.

“I have to accept that. What I would now like to know is, "how big is that group?”

What is said in public these days is vastly different from private opinions, this is no more apparent than in politics

MaizieD

^I don't think we need to agree on what "Everyone being born equal" means Maizie. At this point, I would like to know what proportion of the country would agree with the statement and, more to the point, how many don't.^

It's no good having a majority agreeing with the statement and then finding out that their understandings of 'equality' vary wildly.

That's exactly what happens in the Labour Party, Maizie. We are talking about a grouping and where the government is concerned, a party.

Katie59

I had thought it was tacitly agreed that we vote believing that we are all morally equal. You seem to be someone who doesn't agree. I wonder how many would agree with you. Probably more than I would have guessed.

We are all born equal for sure, its what happens in the first 20 yrs that matters, the decisions your parents make, the decisions you make, that will define your life. Being born poor does not stop you working hard at school and going to university, being born dyslexic does not stop you excelling in practical skills.

There are plenty that know exactly what rights they have but do not acknowledge any responsibility to contribute, they are able bodied but lazy and don’t care. I have much more respect for the migrants who have risked their life to travel thousand of miles to do the work that locals won’t cross the road for. That I just can’t justify, having spent 40yrs nursing, raising a family along they way paid taxes, others contribute nothing.

I know the virtue signalers on Gransnet won’t agree with me but that’s their problem not mine

I don't think attacking those who don't share your view helps Katie.

I thought those who called others out for "being too PC" and "virtue signalers" fundamentally agreed with equality but had not understood that society dealt with this differently now.

That view was not the truth; it was very arrogant of me to make that assumption. I should have accepted that those people clearly gave their opinion; they don't agree we are all equal.

The truth is that a cohort exists, in this country, who do not believe in equality. These people have all sorts of reasons why they believe some are not equal to others; they put people in groups that fall outside that belief.

I have to accept that. What I would now like to know is, "how big is that group?"

MaizieD

To get back to the 'Common Ground' programme.

Lilico refers to Trussonomics as an 'experiment'. But it isn't an experiment. Historically it's been a feature of many countries. We only have to look at the 19thC in the UK when our manufacturing (and Empire) was making us one of the richest country in the world. The market was completely unfettered. The result? A very wealthy middle class, an 'upper class' still benefitting from their large to enormous property holdings (though gradually declining over the course of the century) and a working population steeped in poverty and deprivation. Improvements to their conditions were fought for in Parliament against the prevailing laissez faire, free market majority and were gained at a snail's pace. In fact, the fight is still ongoing.

Yes. Thatcher began the process in more modern times, but even she understood just how much the U.K. voter would tolerate.

I think her plan was to bring about change to a free market was to go much more slowly. It didn’t work and she was got rid of, but her idea was never rejected by some - now largely focused in Tufton Street, and has been planned for decades. Their first real success was Brexit. Now they have an ideologue as PM, they will not give up lightly.

I don't think we need to agree on what "Everyone being born equal" means Maizie. At this point, I would like to know what proportion of the country would agree with the statement and, more to the point, how many don't.

It's no good having a majority agreeing with the statement and then finding out that their understandings of 'equality' vary wildly.

To get back to the 'Common Ground' programme.

Lilico refers to Trussonomics as an 'experiment'. But it isn't an experiment. Historically it's been a feature of many countries. We only have to look at the 19thC in the UK when our manufacturing (and Empire) was making us one of the richest country in the world. The market was completely unfettered. The result? A very wealthy middle class, an 'upper class' still benefitting from their large to enormous property holdings (though gradually declining over the course of the century) and a working population steeped in poverty and deprivation. Improvements to their conditions were fought for in Parliament against the prevailing laissez faire, free market majority and were gained at a snail's pace. In fact, the fight is still ongoing.

katie59

Yes I can see where you are coming from, but that scenario of working hard and achieving whilst true in some circumstances does not take account of those born disabled, or suffer mental illness or have suffered severe childhood trauma, or severe poverty. All these and many more circumstances will affect your life choices and outcomes. These are what Truss’s ideology cannot ever address because she is focused on the belief that the individual is best placed to know what is best without the interference of the state. And we know that it simply isn’t true.

We are all born equal for sure,

I don't even agree with that, Katie59. The only birth 'equality' I can see is that if you lined up 100 newborn babies wearing exactly the same babygro you wouldn't be able to tell the circumstances they were born into, or even what sex they were, but the 'equality' stops there (and if thee were some nonwhite babies among them 'inequality' might be immediately apparent, given that there's plenty of evidence of racial inequality in our country). Inequality starts at birth (or even beforehand) because it is highly dependent on the economic and physical circumstances of the family into which they are born.

I don't think we need to agree on what "Everyone being born equal" means Maizie. At this point, I would like to know what proportion of the country would agree with the statement and, more to the point, how many don't.

The nuances in what that statement means to individuals have given us our right, left and centre parties. Not believing gives us the far-right and far-left.

If we stick to pointing out that "This government does not believe in equality", it gives individuals a chance to decide whether they agree with the government (however they interpret "equality") or not. I would guess that the two of us who have commented on being shocked at this will not be the only ones.