This is not even getting to the “survive vs. thrive” conversation, and how we can easily provide more than the bare minimum to survive in this country.
We can’t even get everyone to agree that everyone deserves enough to at least survive.
3 Likes
If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population
2 Likes
IDK, providing lunch in school does not seem to far from providing text books in school and pretty sure we don’t means test text books.
As whisky points out, it also removes the whole bureaucracy of means testing, and takes away the stigma and complexity of actually jumping through the hoops.
5 Likes
No, but they do seem to be going away in general.
2 Likes
I still do not see where Nick says poverty only exists because people won’t work. The “poor” encompasses many more people. But I believe this segment is significantly large enough to discuss. Any government assistance should have both short-term and long-term goals. The long-term goal (for this subgroup) should be to incentivize as many as possibly to decrease their reliance on government benefits. There would be a balance of help and tough love. How much of each is debatable.
I think we’re pretty good at the tough part. The love needs a lot of work.
5 Likes
I don’t like cliffs, either. But i think externally imposed cliffs (if you earn this much we’ll take away what you have) are much more destructive than optional cliffs (you have to earn a lot before it’s worth upgrading from free housing to market-rate housing.) This lets people save for a new guitar to earn more busking, or to work part time for some luxuries while focusing on training for a new field, or to save enough to launch a small business, without worrying about where they will sleep next week. I think it would encourage people to improve their lot by giving them the resources to do that, rather than punishing people who aren’t doing exactly the things that the government thinks will get them off welfare fastest.
1 Like
I am really confused why you can’t follow the clear path of disdain that Nick has for those he does not think try hard enough
Original quote:
And his response when he was asked to clarify those comments:
Not sure how you think he was going somewhere else with this path of reasoning.
That being said, i don’t think we are going to agree and I don’t think we need to.
I have stated my perspective pretty clearly.
Depends… this is not universally true. Mostly agree with the rest of your post.
No, is not universally true. I’ve even seen extremely bad “subway buskers” who promise to stop assaulting your ears if you give them money. (That’s illegal, but it happens.) It was just an easy example.
There are a lot of low-overhead “art” things that people do, often just for the enjoyment of their friends, and sometimes also for wages or tips, like juggling, performing magic shows at children’s birthday parties, singing or playing instruments, knitting scarves, cooking nice food, cutting hair, painting nails, giving massages,… that don’t always show up in the measured economy, but do contribute towards making the world a nicer place for other people. I’m sure some people would do absolutely nothing productive if they didn’t need to, but my guess is that most people would produce work of value, incented by a combination of wanting money to buy nicer things, wanting the appreciation of their friends and family, and just wanting to feel valuable.
Thanks for expanding on that. I would argue that the current situation in the UK can be described as legitimately corrosive (in the societal sense).
I have lived in many countries, and in every society that I grew up in it was mostly understood by all in the community that “the needs of the next generation” outweighed “the needs of the old”.
Older folks understood this as well. Of course families would care for the older people in the family but they understood that smaller children took priority if it came down to choosing.
I honestly do not see that in the UK. We have a mass of exceptionally entitled older folks who see themselves with needs above even smaller children. Its been absolutely shocking to me to see this shift over the last ten or so years.
The demographics here are actually skewing even older, so my expectation is that something will have to give. I don’t see a “healthy” trajectory for the UK if this continues, which is why I have been keeping my options open to work abroad. Better to leave for a healthier country with more stable long-term prospects.
1 Like
It can be difficult to leave for some folks. My daughter wants to leave. She is totally disgusted with the Tories and the direction the country is going but her partner is English and very wedded to the UK. It would mean him leaving his siblings, parents and aunts and uncles. I remind my daughter that that was she did when she left Canada over 15 years ago…..
But where to go? Someone who has lived in and loved London will find most cities to be lacking in the arts scene. Much of the shine has gone off of moving to the US in recent years so they have dropped NYC from their list. Paris maybe?
If they moved back to Canada it would be to Toronto or Montreal rather than here to Vancouver. Vancouver is a small town in their eyes but I enjoy it here.
Thats a tough one. On one hand, moving is obviously a decision that should optimally be made by the couple in concert, but it does seem that the status quo favours the partner in the UK.
I tend to see this a bit differently though as for me moving around internationally is not a problem. My wife is the same, and she has no issue with leaving if need be. We have talked about this and we have narrowed it down to Switzerland, Netherlands, and Austria. They are not as cosmopolitan as London but they are family-friendly with higher quality of life vs UK currently.
For a couple? It depends if they speak another language. I assume your daughter can speak French? (hence Paris)
Most Brits tend to be monoglots so that limits their options for moving abroad. Netherlands is a decent enough choice as pretty much everybody speaks English, and job-wise its not too bad either.
I mentor kids from time to time at work, and I always try to be honest with them about their future options (I get asked this a lot these days). I encourage them to gain a few years of experience in London as we still have world class companies and institutions, so gaining some initial experience here is very beneficial for their careers.
After that, I tell them that emigrating is likely the better long-term option if they are under 30 (also because commonwealth countries now do have age restrictions for some visas and for immigration via points systems).
Many of us are waiting to see what happens in the next election (2025). If the Tories are not wiped from power, I see the start of a large brain drain from the UK.
1 Like
RN
(you scrooge!)
No I’m not saying that I’m just saying like you get quite a bit in the US now, but we are advocating here for just giving people more than shelter food and healthcare. I’m not sure there is more that people deserve that don’t participate in the production.
These would be a step up from what people currently get in the US.
2 Likes
If I thought I was coming at you, I would apologize. However I was expressing how it struck me, not claiming you were wrong. It seems clear your experiences have made you view it differently.
I don’t think means testing public support is wrong or mean-spirited. I am in agreement about cliffs in benefit structures as something to avoid. However, plenty of reporting about SNAP benefits neglect the more linear benefit structure when implying they must be insufficient because the average benefit is low. They may be insufficient, but a low average amount isn’t proof.
With respect to school lunch programs, they can be run in a manner that doesn’t stigmatize students. Our lunchroom has all students key their account number, no cash purchases. Parents fill the account with deposits and/or subsidies go in. And while it is commonly accepted that families don’t buy textbooks at school, they are expected to buy food outside of school. The textbooks aren’t the parents’ choice, and are directly related to schooling.
What percentage of benefit programs are spent on eligibility testing?
1 Like
In the small towns im familair with, the kids always know who has has subsidized lunch tickets.
3 Likes
Your view seems really out of date.
Kids will absolutely mock kids who they see as receiving subsidised lunches. There is a huge stigma attached to this issue, and I do think you need further research on this matter (kids will internalise the shame of this over time).
By making it universal, you avoid this problem completely. Its also not expensive to provide those lunches.
I really don’t get the obsession about lunches from the conservatively-minded people. Its the same over here in the UK and it is honestly bizarre.
Case Study from the UK
Boris was essentially shamed by a footballer in order for him to sign off on lunches for low income kids at school.
2 Likes
Great concept. Poor execution. Pretty much always. I’m willing to bet at this point in US history this costs more than providing flat benefit amounts of pretty much anything.
(I got super ranty after this so decided to delete, but think this is worth keeping).
1 Like