Young people should take responsibility for themselves, not the state?

[Chattybum]

Quote from Jeremy Corbyn - "Think of the young people who are given the subliminal message to look after your own education and look after your own health forget about council housing, make your own way in the world. It’s depressing, it’s unnecessary and it’s all part of the contraction of the public realm and the public state."

I'm not a fan of JC and this statement perfectly sums up why. AIBU to ask why people like this idea without this turning into a bun fight?

@longwayoff so living in a house paid for by taxpayers makes a person an 'entitled, freeloading sponger'? Interesting.

@IWantADifferentName
I had a different impression of Corbyn words. It’s in my first post. I will briefly summarise.
He’s referring to the cuts in education to state schools for 5-18yr olds plus university tuition fees being the highest in Europe and second world wide only to the US. So...no danger of no safety net for education
He’s referring to the Brexit threat to the NHS being sold off- so danger of no safety net for health.

I saw it as defending the safety nets, not advocating free everything for everyone.
I can see your interpretation as well, but maybe we have to agree to disagree as only Corbyn knows exactly what he meant. We both can only guess.

Need should supersede greed. So yes, regarding those to whom I refer, I do.

@PlanDeRaccordement Yes, I can see how you took that way and very nicely put. Thank you for replying.

MintyMabel ok so maybe it's not for you, it's not necessarily for me either but what gives us the right to take choice from others away because it doesn't apply to us? Such a hateful and jealous perspective.

Where did I suggest taking choice away from anyone? On the contrary, we need to be giving people the opportunity to make real choices, not be forced in to the least worst option and pretending it’s a choice.

Thank you @chattybum I can see the other impressions too because Corbyn has said some very strange and worrying things. It’s hard to know where is his mind really.

*And please stop with the "choice" bullshit.

It is rarely an actual choice*

@MintyMabel that is what you said. Who exactly are you talking about with this statement then?

I think it's great and access to free education and free health care is one of the things that is best about this country. I also think University Education should still be free to encourage people from all backgrounds to go.

We shouldn't all have to have different 'impressions' of what Corbyn means. He should make it clear and easy to understand, rather than trying to obfuscate everything in the hope he appeals to more people

also think University Education should still be free to encourage people from all backgrounds to go.

There has been an increase in the number of people from poorer backgrounds going to uni since the introduction of fees. The was the loans are structured means only those who can later afford it, will fully pay for their education. This is a much fairer system than the one where poorer families taxes were used to pay for uni for the wealthy.

I also think University Education should still be free to encourage people from all backgrounds to go
Whereas I think the money should be spent on reducing social inequality and properly funding education so background becomes less of a barrier rather than throwing millions at student loans for crap courses and crap universities just so people can pay themselves on the back about helping the poor kids get a degree (and conveniently keeping unemployment stats down).

Maybe I'm cynical but the current system means that access to the top universities is still very socially unrepresentative, the top jobs often feed from the best universities (to crudely oversimplify) and people can make money from student loans safe in the knowledge that someone with CDD at A level at low ranking uni is unlikely to really get to a point where they'd be challenging the status quo.

Obviously I'm oversimplifying here.

It would surely be much better to improve education for all and then subsidise the brightest to go to university.

Lola, I agree. The current system is still very divisive. More students from poorer backgrounds might be obtaining degrees, but the value of them is very much determined by the university they attend and 'ostentatiousness' of that university. University education overall has been devalued by the current system, with most degrees being pretty worthless and many students would be better off seeking a different career path at eighteen.

I agree, spend it on schools which every child will benefit from.

What @PlanDeRaccordement said.

We pay tax, the State sorts out education and health. That’s the most efficient and cost-effective way to do it.

Boris Johnson wants to give tax cuts to his rich supporters, but that’ll shrink his budget. So he has to find areas to squeeze and education and health sectors will suffer, as those are the sectors that BJ’s supporters don’t need.

I think that IS depressing. So does Corbyn.

Didn't Labour promise to do away with university fees last time - and scooped many votes from younger people. This is his scheme this time to get back those votes. Labour manifesto 2017 Labour believes education should
be free, and we will restore this
principle. 1o one should be put off
educating themselves for lack of
money or through fear of debt.
Anyone who believes what an MP says before an election is a bit naive imv and that applies to all 2/3/4/5 factions.

I get what you are saying OP, yes the young do need to take responsibility for their own education, every child in this land is entitled to a free education, if they choose not to make the best of it that is their problem not anyone else's. They also need to make choices regarding their health, there is more than enough education available on the dangers of drugs, drink, bad diet and sexual health, if they choose to take the path of say drugs, why should the tax payers have to spend many years housing and feeding them for free or paying for their methadone.
Yes of course everyone deserves a second chance but we shouldnt be paying for the third, fourth or tenth chance.

@PlanDeRaccordement
The over inflation of property prices caused by quantitative easing to make credit available to mortgage lenders in order to increase private ownership of homes is well known and documented in economics…. It’s not “magic”. It’s fact that when you make mortgages a commodity that is more easily available by quantitative easing (printing money digitally) that demand for the credit goes up because you have more buyers able to buy homes. The demand increase pushes up property prices which causes the hyper inflation of property values...

Thank you for this post. People are hung up on the wrong “supply and demand”. It’s the money. It’s always the money.

Overpriced housing is at the root of many of our problems. Unfortunately, once you've secured your own overpriced house, you tend to want it to stay that way.

I think you are right in some ways low especially about the education aspect.

Labour introduced tuition fees in the first place, people forget that fact often. Blair destroyed higher education in this country. There will never be enough graduate level jobs for all the graduates that are now churned out of University. DH is a Professor and his subject is a vocational well paid on graduation one. His subject is an investment. My dept though I’m now retired early was a social science subject. Towards the end of my career I felt guilty recruiting students because there were just too many of them. As our intake doubled the staff didn’t, facilities didn’t. It’s an absolute shambles.

I agree we don't support them enough and we should. Also I am not sure JC is entirely responsible for what Tony Blair introduced-they are poles apart politically. I'd say the same about Thatcher compared to Cameron.

Personally I don't think university should be for everyone, but I do think it should be subsidised for the brightest

The subsidies should be targeted at those doing useful degrees which will lead to a job of value to society. By opening university education to a very large percentage of the population, many doing ridiculous subjects, successive governments have devalued a degree and conned thousands into unnecessary debt. An example of a ridicul;ous subject is, in my opinion, golf course design, surely better learned on a golf course.

I suppose that depends on your definition of what is useful to society. Do we really need thousands of lawyers every year?

Only strictly communist societies housed all of their population, so yes, partially that statement is bizarre. Social security acts as a safety net for people who can't work for whatever reason.
Most young people should be able to look after themselves, that's the point of parenting - to make your children self-sustainable, productive and happy members of society.

Cool give up your pension then

I would read that as someone saying you need to pay into society not just look out for yourself.
Funny how people interpret things differently.