School closures due to crumbling concrete

[HoliHormonalTigerLillyTheSecond]

JFC you are kidding me?!

https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2023/aug/31/english-schools-told-to-close-buildings-made-with-crumble-risk-concrete]

And the denial of reality continues.

Not even shocked at this point.

@VikingVolva

"Also I think it is very wrong to make the next generation of pensioners significantly poorer"

+++

I don't disagree that it would be wrong but that doesn't address the point that the money is now simply not there anymore.

Government debt stands at £2.5 trillion. Let's put that into context. If you put a pound every second into a very large jam jar then it would take 11 days to get to a million and 32.5 years to get to a billion and 81,250 years to get to £2.5 trillion or stating in the 79000 BC or before the Stone Age and when humans first moved out of Africa.

A more modern example saw Greece become bankrupt as as a country starting in 2008 when its debt to GDP ratio was 127% - the UK currently stands at 105% (in 2000 it was 30%). The interest payments on this debt is now £117 billion (double that of 2021), it the 3rd largest item of Government spending and more than the education budget of £105 billion. The UK Gov is desperately trying to get its debt rating of AA (with a negative outlook). If it drops then interest payments will be considerably higher.

Please can you now see how much shit the UK is now in and that the money simply isn't there anymore.

UK is - depending on which index/source you look at - between the 5th and 18th richest nation in the world.

Robbing the next generation is a deeply unfair policy, and that will be the main effect of proposals to erode future pensions (abandoning the "locks" that prevent this happening) or simply to end them (for those who are not already reliant on them, or are so close to retirement age that they cannot reasonably make changes).

And the only argument in favour of impoverishing the u55 (ish) generations in this way appears to be "we must do something, this is something, we must do this"

What should we do then?

Tax the rich?

Chase the actual big criminals down - the tax avoiders and evaders?

Close the tax loopholes?

So a ‘full’ list has now been released - which supposedly includes all schools that are fully or partially closed.

But my sons school is not on that list, despite us getting a letter on Monday evening confirming they have identified RAAC in the gym, and that they would be closing the gym until further notice.

So I call BS on this list - they are being selective with the true numbers here and not including schools who have luckily remained open but at the cost of now no longer having full use of their premises/facilities.

@Rinoachicken where would I find the list. Government website?

The full list is on the Times website. I’ve not looked on a government website but assume it must be on there too.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bd7953ca-483b-11ee-9359-63e432ab6148?shareToken=7fb60b74ec214783c4b41009149887c0

There’s a link to the government list here: https://news.sky.com/story/full-list-of-schools-in-england-affected-by-unsafe-concrete-published-by-government-12952064

We are middle aged high tax payers.

If the government can't pay for basic school buildings for kids but still pander to wealthy pensioners then they can go screw themselves we can afford an accountant to vastly reduce our tax contributions but we don't at the moment because it's a social obligation. Be we could and this will tip ts over the edge. Apart from the general stuff, roads, bins, blah blah, at the moment we don't use NHS much (have private anyway), or any benefits, almost paid full steps each we can easily do the minimum what's that £80 a month?

Pissing off the income workers, a lot with kids, is not a good idea.

Raise VAT then everyone has to pay more everyone needs to buy something.

Ahh thanks for the list sadly Wales isn't on it.

@Piggywaspushed

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/there-are-no-signs-of-government-borrowing-shrinking-any-time-soon/

https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/12/uk-national-debt-will-continue-to-rise-over-next-five-years-says-imf

The Government now spends more on just debt interest payments than it does on the entire education budget.

Raising taxes on the wealthy has also always been a popular electoral message so long as the "rich or wealthy" are not them with a typical voter position as follows:

Voter: "I think the Government should spend more on [insert area where voter's selfish interest is - for example the retired want higher pensions, young families want more on education and everyone wants more on the NHS]
Question: OK how are we going to pay for it?
Voter : By increasing taxes on the rich
and cutting spending in other areas
Question: OK so who are the rich ?
Voter : Basically anyone earning about 30% more than me but most definitely not me.
Question: what areas would you cut spending on?
Voter: Basically any area that I don't benefit from for example the retired wouldn't spend any more on education and young families wouldn't spend anymore on the retired.

Currently the top 1% of income earners pay 30% of all income tax revenues, 48% of income earners don't pay any income tax because they don't earn enough. So to make any significant increases in income tax revenue the level of tax rises required on the top 1% would simply be unworkable. Current levels of taxation are at their highest for 70 years.

In short the old popular policies of borrowing to invest or taxing the rich are broken and are no longer an option (see the Spectator article).

There is a very good quote from Alexander Fraser Tytler in 1799 which is neatly summarises our current position:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy"

Say it with me:

I do not understand the economics but am going to waffle on regardless because "reasons".

This is why the UK is broke.

There are far too many people in it who seem to have precisely zero understanding of basic public finance.

Once again: the UK is broke.

Try to digest that before any more pie in the sky thinking.

Income is already taxed far too high and its actively descouraging work.

Specially around the £50k to £60k band, as well as the £100k to £125k band.

Marginal tax rates of over 60% are absurd.

The UKs tax structure needs to be overhauled.

We all make our own choices. There is no money left now to cushion poor decision-making like staying in a building that can be a critical risk to life if not repaired

Then they need to make provision for disabled tenants. IF this building is RAAC (though its funny how they were safe enough for us all to LOCK DOWN IN) DH would need to move somewhere where he could keep and charge his mobility scooter and somewhere with a lift that doesnt keep breaking down. So not some run down hotel or druggie hostel.

And im assming people on this thread would be putting their money where their mouths are and keeping their kids out of dangerous school biuldings.

And the poor decision making was done by the people who built these places. Not the tenants who have no choice but to live in them. Oh and funny how Georgia Goulds decant of tenants didnt last isnt it. Almost as if it was one giant publicity stunt. That was my point There will be another one.

Nobody stated that disabled people would get their benefits removed.

There is pretty much universal agreement that diasabled people and poorer pensioners (those on pension credit) are the ones that should be covered.

Its the pensioners not on pension credit (the bulk of the group) that should not get free universal benefits. We simply cannot afford to do this anymore as the kids in school come first now.

@TheThinkingGoblin there are a lot of pensioners who don't receive pension credit (because they worked all their life and therefore entitled to full pension) that are poor because they are only living on state pension so I don't agree that they should have the other things they receive from the government removed. Potentially yes the richest but it should not be removed from everyone other than those receiving pension credit.

@TheThinkingGoblin also suggesting children come first is ageism, all vulnerable people, the elderly and children have a right to assistance it's not a hierarchy

Sorry, but its not ageism.

And I highly suggest you stop that nonsense here.

When kids are in a building that is a threat to life, that spending (to fix it) takes priority over universal benefits for non-poor pensioners.

Full stop.

Nobody stated that disabled people would get their benefits removed

Pure obfuscation and sailing close to gaslighting. 1dayatatime sugessted that housing BENEFIT should be removed and a lot of pensioners are disabled. And housing benefit is not paid to rich pensioners Its paid to poorer ones.

Except on this thread it was HOUSING BENEFIT that was suggested to be stopped. Which is not paid to non poor pensioners.

You’d have to show that it would be cheaper to remove a universal benefit and pay to set up and administer means-testing than it would be to keep giving it to everyone.

It doesn’t always save money.

Pension benefits should rise with advancing age and frailty. The flat rate basic at 66 or 67, especially now it's over £200 pw.

We (both 67) are still taxpayers, and can afford to pay for the odd prescription, while DH who needs more meds, would go back to having a pre-payment certificate (£108 pa for unlimited use). We don't need free bus passes (and haven't taken them up) because we'd still rather drive around our (very rural) area. Nor would we freeze if the warm home payment was withdrawn. The free TV license is only for the very elderly now, like my DM -- who absolutely is in need of all the help.

@TheThinkingGoblin

Your not responding with any facts.

Pensioners receiving state pension are not necessarily "non-poor". Basic state pension is just £203.85 a week.

Failure to maintain school buildings isn't the responsibility of pensioners.

To suggest taking away from the elderly under a blanket criteria of receiving a couple of hundred a week because they must all be rich is absolutely discriminatory and blatant ageism.

You see unable to process how public finances actually work.

Also, its well off pensioners who will be making off like bandits in terms of money over the next year. Working folks will be worse off, as will children.

So no, you don't get to ignore economic reality.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/06/uk-workers-will-be-worse-off-in-2024-than-in-2019-thinktank-warns