to wonder if people expect the government to solve all their problems?

[LadyHarmby]

Just listening to the news, interviewing people in the street.

No government can change the fact that some people are rich and some are not. Or that wars in other countries and/or pandemics will affect the price of things.

Inappropriate content on social media. Unsafe cladding on blocks of flats put there by private developers. Being housed outside of your area by the council. Zero hours contracts. All issues that the government seem to be expected to sort out? Is it reasonable?

BTW I’m a Labour voter so this is not about the Tories, more government in general.

What most people in this thread don't seem to realise is that everything in our social and economic context is shaped by government in some way, either through active intervention or a choice not to intervene - this in itself is an intervention.

If people are poorer it's because the government made an active choice to make them poorer over years of austerity. Now they ask that the government chooses to reverse that and, what, suddenly it's not the government's business any more?

People are happy to pay taxes if those taxes are actually going towards improving society. The magic money tree seems to function perfectly well when it comes to government corruption and fraud - why not improving society?

@Badbadbunny but that's an argument for doing nothing and allowing unfair treatment of workers to exist 'because the alternative would be worse'. That isn't good enough. If a piece of legislation causes employers to misbehave en masse, then further legislation is needed to ensure that they can't. Unforeseen consequences happen, but when they do they need to be dealt with and not ignored.

but the whole 'don't have kids if you can't afford them' doesn't take into account the fact that we are in a low pay, high cost (housing) economy, therefore it is very difficult for many people to save. It's extremely easy to fall into a situation where you need benefits when previously you haven't - all it takes is one accident, one cancer diagnosis and you're there

We are in a world where it was always expensive to have kids though. I know a couple living in London who had no health problems and had 5 kids in the last 18 years-the house prices were already mad then and neither parent had great jobs and had no property when they conceived the 1st kid.

They constantly sponge off family and they moan to me about the cost of everything etc yet I think why did you have 5 kids when you knew you couldn't afford them? Many cases of this there was no health problem with either parent.

If they'd had 1 or 2 kids I'd maybe be more empathy- but 5? Their own fault.

@voiceofmarion the problem is that you are extrapolating your personal experience to the general population. Yes, there will always be people who do not plan and are not very responsible. But provision must be made for people who do everything right, plan ahead and save and then are felled by circumstances. I would rather that 100 feckless families got money than that one family who fell into hardship through no fault of their own should go without - especially since the sums involved are so small as to be dwarfed by the amount of cash this government has thrown away through its own incompetence.

I couldn’t say it better

Agreed

So when it comes to cladding or zero hours contracts or whatever, while these are big issues to the people they affect, shouldn’t there an understanding that the government simply can’t solve everything? It’s just not possible so they have to pick and choose.
How effectively they do that and whether you agree with they choose is a separate political issue.

This is exactly it! Everyone thinks their particular issue is the most important and that money should be thrown at the issue to fix it. However, there is not an unlimited amount of money available, it all has to be allocated - and unfortunately some issues are going to get less money than they need. I don't see people putting up their hands to pay double rates of tax to increase the pot of available money!

I'm not talking about the UK government btw - this applies to governments all around the world. Of course they get things wrong, sometimes very wrong, but I get tired of people thinking that their issue is more important than anyone else's and wanting "them" to do something about it. Especially when it is something which is partly an issue because of their lifestyle choice.

I agree, but for the last 20+ years, the fake self employment problem has been brushed aside, as has zero hour contracts. Whatever colour of government, these issues have been ignored, whilst new/improved employment rights have been introduced, which makes a mockery of it really.

Spot on.

Most of the things that you have mentioned are heavily affected by government/public policy. Who do you think is responsible for housing policy and regulation, public health/regulation of the media (i.e. dangerous messages on social media) and the passing and enforcing of laws relating to employment protection? Do you really think that the government shouldn't have a role in any of this? That it's something the free market should sort out or individuals should agree between themselves? Do you really think this would be a good way to run he country?

Do you think that the government are not/ shouldn't be responsible for regulating the economy to ensure that people have the resources they need? That economic interventions or lack thereof have no affect on how much money the rich have compared to the poor?

You say you aren't a Tory but from your question I would assume you were very much small state, minimal, minimal intervention - that's if I was being nice. If I wasn't being nice I would judge you as a conservative reactionary.

the problem is that you are extrapolating your personal experience to the general population. Yes, there will always be people who do not plan and are not very responsible. But provision must be made for people who do everything right, plan ahead and save and then are felled by circumstances

ofcourse provision must be made for those felled by circumstances but I've known plenty of families who didn't do 'the right thing', had kids and then bitched that the governmemt didn't help them enough.

That's the point of the thread-people blaming the govt for situations they got themselves into. Many single mums and those on benefits with kids that I know are akin to the family of 5 I pointed out. They never did 3rd level, never had a big career or steady source of cash but still had multiple kids. They then struggle to feed the kids etc but if people have limited incomes and don't know that kids are expensive before having them then how can they blame the govt?