Fed up with the current state we are in

[SanctusInDistress]

Am I right to be upset over the current state of things and that the future looks bleak?

nhs- don’t get me started

jobs - where on earth are jobs? Barely anything there and when there are they are looking for somebody who has done that exact job in an equal organisation.

bills - spiralling

food - at this rate we will be either back to the middle ages foraging for postage, or eating cheap nasty ultra processed stuff all of the time.

working conditions - there are two camps; the quiet quitters with chúpatz to get away with it, and the workhorses being worked to death.

brexit - I’ve yet to hear of a tangible benefit (apart from blue passports).

politics - everybody has run out of ideas. They don’t know what else to come up with.

poverty in work - spiralling

house prices (in SE where I live) - where are people finding the money to pay these prices?????

going out - impossible. Theatre tickets, cinema, meals out. It’s just become too expensive except for rare rare treats.

everything is at a standstill, waiting for this election so that something can happen again (or not) to jolt the economy for ordinary folks like us back into action.

am I just being unreasonable with being fed up?

BIossomtoes
So you think losing all the freedoms and advantages of being in the EU is worth retaining the £? What’s the point when that £ is worth less every week?

You've picked the wrong week;

8 March 2024
The pound rose to a seven-month high against the US dollar, extending a rally that’s seen the British currency outperform all of its major peers this year.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-08/pound-extends-its-peer-beating-rally-to-a-seven-month-high

I don't want to see any child in poverty no matter what circumstances their parents have faced or what decisions they have made but what is very difficult is that now the cost of living versus benefits is such that people who work are often not better off in either money or quality of life.

Only today on a mumsnet thread (but repeated often) I have read about a couple both in full time work concerned they can't afford a child because they can't afford childcare on top of rent/mortgage bills. The suggestion that they should look on the benefit calculators to see if they will be better off working part time (and so not paying so much childcare and receiving benefit money to top up) was made and the poster said they will look into it. I doubt they will be worse off and might be better off. They would certainly have a nicer work/life balance.

There are frequently threads on here by single parents that are running themselves ragged working full time and doing all the parenting/keeping their home. They post because they can't believe how much money they will get if they choose to go part time and want to check it is right. And it is. And to be clear I don't anyone including single parents to get less but the fact remains people can be better off in cash and quality of life working less.

I don't have the solution because there isn't the cash to top up two person households with both people working full time - and I don't want to take money off households that can't work as much or at all as they also need to cover everything - but while working longer hours does not improve your life compared to working shorter hours then productivity will be an issue.

I'm not usually motivated to do overtime as I'm in a job that is not a lot more than minimum wage and by the time I pay tax, national insurance, student loan and increased pension (which can be pushed into a higher % on my entire earnings by earning a little more) I can be not far off 50% deduction on overtime. The small amount that gives me is not worth the extra stresses on me and my family. I'd rather tighten our belts/stop buying a chippy tea or whatever. It is easy to think a 20% tax payer gets 20% deductions but that is nonsense. At least if someone earning £100-200 an hour pays 50% deduction they are still earning a lot per hour. At £12 an hour to start with not so much.

I meant in the sense that it buys less every week.

Very happy for you. But seriously. Where is the money? I really would like to know.

It's so crap

But what depressing is at least with Blair we had hope for change. I can't see what can be changed

We need social change and a govt that will plan for the long term future and govt won't want that. The rich get richer

We need a war type cabinet that stay stable long term with a mixed background that can plan roads nhs schools police etc
And listen to those actually doing the jobs. Not the pen pushing managers.

And of course climate change.

Christ No wonder our youngsters are anxious. What a joke.

Don’t worry all of our problems will be solved once we can put 10 asylum seekers on a plane to Rwanda, at a cost of about £40million per head.

A lot of post 18 year old would fail

Maybe a basic competency test for everyone. When you have people who said they wouldn't vote for Jeremy Corbyn because (for example) he said he was going to get rid of food banks and they needed theirs...then you have to wonder at the calibre of voters.

Before Brexit workers from the EU were net contributors to our economy.
We flushed that down the toilet with Brexit.

It’s awful. I’m fortunate to own my home with no mortgage and have some disposable income but the state of the country is so depressing that even trying to do nice things is disappointing. Shops are closed, even nice places are understaffed.

The huge inequality and poverty in society is driving anti social behaviour which is making everyday life miserable. BBC Breakfast always talking about it but they seem to think more police is the answer. The causes need to be addressed not the consequences. So frustrating.

Small boats ! small boats !

Mob rule ! Mob rule !

That's the media not the voters.

This is such tired thinking. There is a reason why averages are used when we talk about net contribution to the public purse. 'On average' EU migrants are net contributors to the economy. That is true. It's also being economical with the truth. If you strip out the French bankers earning mega bucks, that average looks very, very different. Some are* big net contributors, but others aren't *and many are net beneficiaries. If British workers earning low wages aren't contributing to the public purse by dint of not earning enough, what makes you think that their EU counterparts, doing the same jobs, are? We're a low skilled, low wage economy and we've taken in many more at the lower end than we have at the top. I'm not saying those workers aren't valued, it's not all down to economic contribution, but please have a think before parroting the net contributors rubbish.

I don’t think it is entirely. Some of the talking heads who gave their views in 2019 made me despair. I found myself thinking “How can you possibly think that?” Particularly the numerous ones who voted Conservative because they thought Johnson was funny.

Rather than have voter competency tests, I'd rather see some way of getting a vote from everyone. Universal suffrage should be universal.

Alternatively, if we don't want to force people to vote, then the only way to win, is to win a true majority. You want to be an MP in a seat with 100,000 voters ? Fine. You get 50,001 votes. If you can't we divvy the second and third choices up until you do. (Sound familiar ?)

The current system basically adds around 30% to the winners stash for free. And that is causing problems.

That's very nice of you to say, and despite some scattered xenophobia, I find the UK very welcoming ,and the people mostly wonderful. I have lived in other countries too, so I know of what I speak. I don't question my decision as there are really so many things I love about the UK- I grew up reading British authors, watching British TV and listening to British music- so I feel completely at home here. However, I can see that we will all be turning on each other very soon, and there is a move to tar all immigrants as drains.

Despite my earlier posts which sound a bit angry- sorry- I really do value the welfare state and am happy to pay high taxes if they are used for the right purpose. I think if I leave it will be to get medical care, as my DH has a genetic medical condition. Also possibly to be with my mum in her old age. Or if we both lose our jobs, and can't get others. Or if my DC decide to go elsewhere. Not for any other reason.

Are you ok?

Are you ok?

Jane is miffed she can no longer move freely to the UK and likes to moan about it that's all.

*@hairbearbunches

This is such tired thinking. There is a reason why averages are used when we talk about net contribution to the public purse. 'On average' EU migrants are net contributors to the economy. That is true. It's also being economical with the truth. If you strip out the French bankers earning mega bucks, that average looks very, very different. Some are big net contributors, but others aren't and many are net beneficiaries.

Averages are used in the claim that EU migrants are net contributors, because the claim is specifically a debunking of the claim that, overall or on average they are a drain (eg "the NHS can't survive because of all the immigrants using it").

You are now pointing out the shocking fact that, while this point about the overall impact of EU immigration is indeed true (ie, the claim it debunks - that immigrants are responsible for our declining level of public services - is complete bullshit despite having successfully led the British public into the most brutal act of economic self-destruction in recent memory), it wouldn't be true if you discounted all the highest earners from the population concerned.

Well, yes, that's how averages work. If you take away all the high numbers, you get a lower average.

But those millionaire French bankers are part of the population of "EU immigrants" included in the claim. And their taxes help to pay for hospital beds, schools and everything else. It's not like their taxes somehow "don't count" because they're millionaires. So this begs the question: SO WHAT?

[There's also the question of whether your claim - that outwith a very small number of high earning french bankers EU immigration would turn from a net contributor to a net drain on the public purse - is even true or not. I don't know. You're welcome of provide stats/evidence, although it might not be worth the bother since as I say it doesn't actually affect the overall argument.]

But those millionaire French bankers are part of the population of "EU immigrants" included in the claim. And their taxes help to pay for hospital beds, schools and everything else.
I think the point was that multimillionaire bankers and car washers immigrate due to different reasons, and it is unlikely that for the first category the freedom of movement was a decision factor at all - multimillionaires rarely struggle obtaining visas to countries they want to bring their millions to.
Also, it is quite weird to group such a large and heterogeneous group of people together to make an economic argument. It is highly possible that "women", as a whole, are net recipients of public funds rather than contributors. Let's deport all of them.

multimillionaires rarely struggle obtaining visas to countries they want to bring their millions to.

Well currently in the UK they don't even need to do that as non-doms. Ask Mrs Sunak.

And while I may appear to be a little behind the times, I will await the outcome of exactly how the nominatively challenged chancellor has actually implemented his scheme. I suspect the exclusions may make it as useful as swiss cheese.

Actually, I own a nursery and can confirm that the agencies who supply temporary staff are now filled with young African men who have just arrived in the UK. I won’t have them at my nursery. Sorry if that makes me racist, but I need to know that my staff have been properly vetted.

Can’t speak for other nurseries however.

Oh, and in case anyone thinks this is nonsense, that the agencies do thorough background checks and that your kids aren’t being looked after by unvetted migrants who have just stepped off a boat, think again. The agencies apparently don’t have to do overseas police checks.

I am pretty sure that Mrs Sunak and other people like her are still native contributors to the balance, even if they pay tax only on UK-domiciled income.
And it always puzzled me why British people feel like they are morally entitled to taxes on her share in fully passive income from the family's Indian business that employs Indian workers and operates in the Indian economic environment.